4750G: AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G Benchmarks

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G Discrete GPU Gaming Benchmarks — Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G Review: Renoir Ushers in a New Era for 7nm Desktop APUs

All test results marked with «PBO» reflect configurations tested with AMD’s auto-overclocking Precision Boost Overdrive feature. For overclocking, we tuned our memory to DDR4-3600 for most Intel and AMD platforms, but we used DDR4-3466 for the Ryzen 5 3400G, and DDR4-4000 in coupled mode for the Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G.

The TLDR

Image 1 of 2

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

In the chart above, we plot gaming performance using average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99th percentile frame times. Bear in mind that we tested with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti at 1920×1080 to alleviate graphics-imposed bottlenecks. Differences between our test subjects shrink at higher resolutions.

AMD certainly didn’t design Renoir with a focus on complementing a discrete GPU — the idea here is to use the integrated RX Vega graphics for gaming. Of course, curious enthusiasts want to know if Renoir’s monolithic die design imparts an advantage over standard Ryzen 3000 chips when paired with a discrete GPU. 

The answer is no. The four-core eight-thread Ryzen 3 3300X comes with half the number of cores and threads as the 4750G, but its healthier dollop of 16MB of L3 cache outweighs the 4750G’s 8MB, and that pays off when gaming with a discrete graphics card. The 4750G’s relatively slim allotment of L3 cache definitely leads to less performance in latency-sensitive workloads. AMD is balancing its precious die area with the need for a large Vega graphics unit, which obviously requires some trade-offs. AMD probably chose to sacrifice some L3 cache capacity, and in light of the intended use case, the 8MB of capacity is probably right-sized for gaming with the iGPU.  

The Ryzen 3 3300X doesn’t have integrated graphics, but that helps keep pricing down for builds with a discrete GPU. You can find the 3300X for around $120, which makes it impossible to recommend the $309 4750G for gaming with a discrete graphics card.  

Intel still holds its gaming performance crown, albeit by a small margin when compared to the Ryzen 3000 models, in this price bracket. In terms of average frame rates across the breadth of our test suite, the Core i7-10700F is 18.18% faster than the 4650G. The delta shrinks to 12% after tuning the Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G, but it’s still significantly slower than the 10700. The less-expensive $263 Core i5-10600K is the go-to chip for gamers chasing the highest frame rates possible on a budget, and it lives up that billing in these tests, too. Just don’t try to have a meaningful gaming experience on its lackluster integrated graphics. 

The 4750G provides an impressive 28% increase in average frame rates over the Ryzen 5 3400G at stock settings, and a similarly impressive delta after overclocking. The extra cores, not to mention higher clock rates, provide a clear advantage over the previous-gen model. 

We’ll skip commenting on the individual real-world game tests below because the results are fairly redundant, but they are there for your perusal. The overall takeaway is clear, but unsurprising: The Renoir chips are designed for gaming on integrated graphics, and that’s what they excel at. They also put up a much better show in the application tests on the following page.

VRMark, 3DMark, Stockfish and Civilization VI on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 5

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Synthetic gaming benchmarks often aren’t generally indicative of real-world performance, but the 3DMark DX11 and DX12 tests are interesting because they measure the amount of raw computational horsepower exposed to the game engine. For now, most of today’s game engines don’t scale as linearly with additional compute resources, but these tests help us gauge how games could exploit processing resources as the engines become more sophisticated.

As expected, the DX11 and DX12 tests put the threaded power of the 4750G’s eight cores on full display as it puts on a convincing show in these very scalable workloads. We also see the same trend in the Stockfish AI engine, which is also designed extract the utmost in parallelism from multi-core designs. Renoir’s extra threads pay off here as they deliver massive performance gains over the Ryzen 5 3400G, but the Core i7-10700F is within competitive range in these tests.

Performance isn’t quite as great when we flip over to the workloads that prize per-core performance and/or lots of cache. VRMark and Civilization VI both prefer high clock rates and lots of L3 cache, pushing the Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G back down the rankings. 

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation loves cores and threads, but clock rates also play a role. 

Dawn of War III on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

The Warhammer 40,000 benchmark responds well to threading, but it’s clear that clock speed and IPC also matter.

Far Cry 5 on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Final Fantasy XV on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

We run this test with the standard quality preset to sidestep the impact of a bug that causes the game engine to render off-screen objects with the higher-resolution setting. 

Grand Theft Auto V on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Hitman 2 on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Project Cars 2 on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Although Project CARS 2 is purportedly optimized for threading, clock rates obviously affect this title’s frame rates.  

World of Tanks enCore on AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Image 1 of 3

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel and AMD Processor Benchmark Hierarchy

MORE: All CPUs Content

Current page:
AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G Discrete GPU Gaming Benchmarks

Prev Page AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G Integrated Vega Graphics Gaming Benchmarks

Next Page AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G Application Benchmarks

Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G vs AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G: What is the difference?

51points

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

55points

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

64 facts in comparison

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

Why is AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G better than AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G?

  • 64GB larger maximum memory amount?
    128GBvs64GB

Why is AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G better than AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G?

  • 5. 56% faster CPU speed?
    8 x 3.8GHzvs8 x 3.6GHz
  • 21.34% higher PassMark result?
    24974vs20581
  • 8MB bigger L3 cache?
    16MBvs8MB
  • 23.83% higher PassMark result (single)?
    3346vs2702
  • 1MB/core more L3 cache per core?
    2MB/corevs1MB/core

Which are the most popular comparisons?

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5700GE

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

Intel Core i5-1145G7

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

Intel Core i5-12500H

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

Intel Core i3-12100

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 5650G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 4650GE

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

Intel Core i3-10105

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

Intel Core i5-11400H

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

AMD Ryzen 7 4700G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

Intel Core i5-12500T

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

vs

Intel Core i5-11400

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

vs

Intel Core i9-11900

Price comparison

Cheap alternatives

User reviews

Overall Rating

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

10. 0/10

1 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

1 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

10.0/10

1 User reviews

Features

Value for money

8.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Gaming

10.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Performance

10.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Reliability

10.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Energy efficiency

10.0/10

1 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Performance

1.CPU speed

8 x 3.6GHz

8 x 3.8GHz

The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.

2.CPU threads

More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.

3.turbo clock speed

4.4GHz

4.6GHz

When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

4.Has an unlocked multiplier

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.

5.L2 cache

A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

6.L3 cache

A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

7.L1 cache

A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

8. L2 core

0.5MB/core

0.5MB/core

More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

9.L3 core

1MB/core

2MB/core

More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Memory

1.RAM speed

3200MHz

3200MHz

It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.

2.maximum memory bandwidth

47.68GB/s

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.

3.DDR memory version

DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.

4.memory channels

More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.

5.maximum memory amount

The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.

6.bus transfer rate

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

7.Supports ECC memory

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

8.eMMC version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.

9.bus speed

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

Benchmarks

1.PassMark result

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.

2.PassMark result (single)

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.

3.Geekbench 5 result (multi)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

4.Cinebench R20 (multi) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

5.Cinebench R20 (single) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

6.Geekbench 5 result (single)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

7.Blender (bmw27) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

8.Blender (classroom) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

9.performance per watt

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.

Features

1.uses multithreading

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.

2.Has AES

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3.Has AVX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.

4.SSE version

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

5.Has F16C

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

6.bits executed at a time

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.

7.Has MMX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

8.Has TrustZone

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G

A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).

9.front-end width

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G)

The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better

Price comparison

Cancel

Which are the best CPUs?

Desktop AMD Ryzen 4750G, 4650G and 4350G

There are two very important levels of graphics performance in modern systems to consider – one is if the graphics system is sufficient for seamless use, and the second is such that it meets a substantial standard for gaming. On one side we use integrated graphics, which take advantage of a unified processor to simplify the system, and on the other we look to a range of options, such as smartphones, consoles, and discrete graphics options. Somewhere in there we have a middle ground – can an integrated option have enough thermal headroom and graphics power to worthwhile for gaming? This is the pitch of AMD’s Ryzen 4000 based APUs, which combine Zen 2 CPU cores with fast Vega 8 graphics. With a 65W headroom, it should surpass anything that mobile processors have to offer, but is it enough to replace the low-end discrete graphics market?

When a CPU meets GPU

AMD is the company of the accelerated processing unit, or APU. The company introduced the term in 2011 when it started combining its x86 CPU cores and some form of graphics accelerator into the same piece of silicon. This combined processor, built for the laptop and desktop market , was designed to remove the need for a completely separate graphics card in a system, simplifying the design and bringing down overall cost for anyone that simply needed a graphics output for simple tasks. At the time, these solutions were very much for the low-end market.

Combining a CPU and a GPU on the same piece of silicon has a variety of tradeoffs involved. The key benefit is reducing that bill of materials, but there are also advantages in the latency of communication between the CPU cores and the GPU acceleration as the data does not need to go off the chip. There can also be benefits in power control, with a system being able to manipulate how much power goes to each in a simpler way.

But there are a number of downsides. The total power consumption of the system now gets condensed into one thing, rather than split across two. This makes the one APU a central hotspot for cooling support. Also, adding in graphics will make the single CPU die size larger, making it more difficult to yield compared to two separate pieces of silicon. It can also be complex if both CPU and GPU have to be made on the same manufacturing process, depending on the initial design for those architectures. There is also the memory problem – graphics loves memory bandwidth, and CPU memory controllers are slow by comparison; while a GPU might love 300 GB/s from some GDDR memory, a CPU with two channels of DDR4-3200 will only have 51.2 GB/s. Also, that memory bank needs to be shared between CPU and GPU, making it all the more complex.

For ultra-mobile laptops, the tradeoff in having a single combined APU is worth it, as it also means there can be a bigger battery and reducing the number of items inside the shell helps with aesthetics and thermals. Also, ultra-mobile laptop users are not often demanding super graphics performance for 4K gaming, and so something that provides ‘enough’ performance, at a suitably low power, is often preferred.

The higher the performance that a combined CPU+GPU piece of silicon, this arguably also reduces the market for graphics by taking away options at the low-end. If a simple APU can perform graphics duties of a $100 graphics card, then there is arguably no need for $100 graphics cards any more. We can compare what each GPU vendor has launched in the last few years for the ‘entry gaming market’ to confirm that the market below $100 is now for APUs and simple ‘must-have-a-screen’ cards for the pre-built market:

Entry Gaming Market
AnandTech Year Model MSRP
AMD GPUs
300 Series 2015 R7 360 (2 GB) $109
400 Series 2016 RX 460 (2 GB) $109
500 Series 2017 RX 550 (2 GB) $79
RX Vega Series 2017 RX Vega 56 (8 GB) $399
5000 Series 2019 RX 5500XT (4 GB) $169
6000 Series 2020 RX 6800 (16 GB) $579
NVIDIA GPUs
700 Series 2014 GTX 750 (1 GB) $119
900 Series 2015 GTX 950 (2 GB) $159
1000 Series 2016 GTX 1050 (2 GB) $109
1600 Series 2019 GTX 1650 (4 GB) $149
2000 Series 2019 RTX 2060 (6 GB) $300
3000 Series 2020 RTX 3060 Ti (8 GB) $399

Perhaps surprisingly over the last couple of years, despite at one point AMD promoting its RX 480 card as a possible $200 gaming card, both companies are veering heavily towards the high-end gaming market, leaving the budget range for OEMs, and arguably also the mid-range as well. Both AMD and NVIDIA with the latest releases start at a relatively hefty $399 MSRP, which is a world away from the $200 suggested low-end price for the AMD RX 480 at launch. Part of this is driven by new gaming features like Ray Tracing, the fact that leading edge graphics tend to launch at the high-end first, as that is where the biggest return on investment is, and with the rise of high resolution gaming, 8 GB of video memory seems to be the new minimum, if not more, which drives up the total cost.

So if APUs are there to bridge the gap, then we’re at a bit of a quandary. Intel has leading edge integrated graphics solutions with its latest Xe-LP Tiger Lake processors, however these are for mobile use only. In that market segment, a good performing chip has a better financial return than the same silicon used in a desktop socketable processor, and with Intel looking to drive mobile volume it is putting all that silicon for mobile use right now.

This means that the only company taking socketed desktop graphics seriously right now is AMD, who is starting to use its mobile-first Renoir silicon for desktop processors. This involves moving the TDP from 15W/45W up to 65W, and putting it in an AM4 socket package, similar to what AMD has done with its previous APU silicon. But now we get onto a specific issue with AMD’s Ryzen 4000 desktop APUs.

Ryzen 4000 Desktop APUs: Not for General Sale

That’s correct – the Ryzen 4000 desktop APUs from AMD are not available at retail. While AMD announced twelve different model numbers for the latest generation, varying in core count, graphics count, and power, the company has decided not to create special retail packaging and offer them for general consumption.

What AMD has done here is enable these products for two specific markets. Companies like HP, Dell and Lenovo can order these processors from AMD and put them into pre-built systems for consumers like you and I, or they can order the Ryzen PRO versions and build commercial systems with extra management features for corporate management.

By enabling these processors only in pre-built and commercial systems, this allows AMD to have a tighter control on its stock of processors. These companies purchase processors on the scale of tens of thousands, so if a big OEM like HP wants to create a series of pre-built computers, they can put the order in with AMD and AMD will give HP a delivery date. If a product is sold on the open market, then AMD has to work with distribution channels dealing with a scale of tens of units, rather than thousands, making the operation more complex with stock potentially either sitting idle, or not being available if they cannot manufacture enough.

By keeping this hardware as OEM only, AMD can adjust its silicon between desktop and mobile as required with much tighter controls. This is important for a company if the same product in one market (e.g. this silicon in mobile) is worth more than the other, as it focuses the silicon in the mobile market while also meeting contractual demands on the desktop side. Reports of AMD needing more 7nm wafers from TSMC could also play into this, as AMD would rather use those wafers for higher margin products.

So given all this, why test these processors at all? Well the truth is end-users can actually buy them. But it is not as easy as putting an order in at Amazon.

AMD calls its retail product line as PIBs, or ‘product in box’. These parts have a consumer warranty attached, fancy packaging to draw you in, and usually a cooler depending on the product. The other type, which it sells to HP and Dell, is more for business-to-business (B2B) sales, and these processors are called ‘tray’ or ‘OEM’ products. Here AMD just sells the CPU with a basic B2B warranty, no packaging, no cooler. If you are an OEM like Dell, you don’t want to be opening 10000 packages to build 10000 systems, so these processors just come in a tray and that is that.

Retailers that sell CPUs to general consumers will almost certainly carry PIBs. But some retailers, especially those that also make their own pre-built systems, will sell the tray versions as well.

These are sold as CPU only, in a protective case, without a cooler, and often only a limited warranty solely with the retailer (usually 1 year). Stock of these OEM processors is often very transient day-to-day, and some of the bigger retailers will often include third-party sales of these processors as well. It should be noted that direct-to-consumer sales of OEM-style processors tends to be more prevalent in Eastern Europe and Russia than in North America, from personal experience.

Ultimately this is how we sourced these APUs for this review.

How We Acquired the 65 W Ryzen 4000 (Pro) APUs

AMD was not sampling Ryzen 4000 APUs for review, and so we had to scour the internet for a system builder that was also selling the individual hardware. The other alternative was to buy three distinct pre-built systems, but we found a UK retailer that was prepared to sell the processors on their own direct to consumers. Actually we had to fudge it a little bit. Time for a story.

I found a retailer that listed all three processors as ‘awaiting stock’, and all three had dates about a week apart from each other. I could not pre-order them, but I could add them to my basket. I had to wait for stock to arrive before putting in an order. As the first one was enabled on the website, I put in the order for the Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G, and it arrived next day. As soon as I made the order, I put the next one in my basket. One down, two to go, and the other two were expected to arrive over the next two weeks. I kept checking the website daily to ensure that the ETA was consistent – I even emailed the company to confirm the dates. When the second processor was expected to go into stock, I loaded up my basket to see the Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G was no longer there.

I moved on over to the product page, where it was listed as in stock, but the add-to-basket button had been disabled. I was somewhat confused as to what was going on – perhaps AMD had asked them to stop selling the hardware direct to consumers, and to only use it for pre-built systems? I have no idea as to the real reason, but what comes next was an interesting element of trickery.

I went through the website source code to see how items were added to the basket, and noticed that each ‘add-to-basket’ button had an ID related to the stock item. I found the stock item for the Ryzen 3, and adjusted the add-to-basket button of the Threadripper 3990X to point to the Ryzen 3. After a few tries where it didn’t seem to work, it finally did! I had a Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G in my basket. I put in the order, no issues there, and off it went. It arrived next day, and the stock count listed on the website went down by one. The add-to-basket button was still disabled, and I wondered if the retailer had just suspected that I had one in my basket all along and just went along with it.

So a week later the Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G was expected to be in stock. Again, I was checking it daily to see the ETA slowly count down. The day when the stock was supposed to arrive, the whole product page had vanished. All the product pages for the Ryzen 4000 APUs had vanished. What in the world was going on?

I decided to put my previous plan into action a second time – could I modify the add-to-basket product ID to point to the Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G to get it in the basket? Then here was a second problem – I didn’t know the ID for the processor. The basket ID for each product was different to the URL ID, so I had to do some guess work based on the previous two IDs that I had used for the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 3. It wasn’t as straight forward as the products being sequential, and as mentioned before, trying to get the button to work properly was a bit hit-and-miss.

It took about 10 minutes, and I added a wide variety of processors to my basket, but I did finally get the 4750G in there. It was listed as in stock, for next day delivery. I clicked purchase, handed over my details, and it arrived the next day. There was no questioning from the retailer as to how I put in an order. Clearly a sale is a sale, right?

Now I’m not expecting users to go out and have to work out how their retailer’s website works in order to buy these APUs. The hardware has been out long enough now that there are a number of third-party sellers on leading etailers offering these APUs at a variety of prices. These sellers seem to be focused in the Hong Kong region, which means warranty might be an issue, and shipping import taxes might be a part of bringing it into your country. Some of the sellers have dodgy ratings too. But they are out there, in larger numbers than before.

The AMD Desktop Ryzen 4000 Offerings

As mentioned, AMD launched twelve desktop Ryzen 4000 processors in the family. These were split into six for Ryzen PRO and six not-for-Pro, and in each of those six, three were for 65W and three were for 35W. In each set of three was a Ryzen 7, a Ryzen 5, and a Ryzen 3. AMD is covering all the bases with these parts.

AMD Ryzen 4000G Series APUs
AnandTech Core /
Thread
Base
Freq
Turbo
Freq
GPU
CUs
GPU
Freq
PCIe
*
TDP
Ryzen 4000G
Ryzen 7 4700G 8 / 16 3600 4400 8 2100 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 7 4700GE 8 / 16 3100 4300 8 2000 16+4+4 35 W
Ryzen 5 4600G 6 / 12 3700 4200 7 1900 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 5 4600GE 6 / 12 3300 4200 7 1900 16+4+4 35 W
Ryzen 3 4300G 4 / 8 3800 4000 6 1700 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 3 4300GE 4 / 8 3500 4000 6 1700 16+4+4 35 W
Ryzen Pro 4000G
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G 8 / 16 3600 4400 8 2100 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750GE 8 / 16 3100 4300 8 2000 16+4+4 35 W
Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G 6 / 12 3700 4200 7 1900 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 5 Pro 4650GE 6 / 12 3300 4200 7 1900 16+4+4 35 W
Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G 4 / 8 3800 4000 6 1700 16+4+4 65 W
Ryzen 3 Pro 4350GE 4 / 8 3500 4000 6 1700 16+4+4 35 W
*PCIe lanes on the SoC are listed in GFX+Chipset+Storage

The top of the line is the Ryzen 7 4700G, with eight Zen 2 cores, sixteen threads, and Vega 8 graphics. This processor has a base frequency of 3.6 GHz, a turbo frequency of 4.4 GHz, and a peak graphics frequency of 2100 MHz. This is a substantial graphics frequency jump over the previous generation halo desktop APU, which ran Vega 11 graphics only at 1450 MHz. AMD puts this down to both the advantages of 7nm, but also physical design optimizations of the Vega graphics, providing a better gen-on-gen improvement than expected, which also enables a smaller graphics package which is better fed by the Zen 2 cores.

At the lower end is the Ryzen 3 4300G, with four cores and eight threads, with a base of 3.8 GHz and a turbo of 4.0 GHz, which should mean that performance is very consistent. This part has six compute units for graphics, running at 1700 MHz.

Every 4000G processor at 65 W has a GE counterpart at 35 W, which for the most part reduces the base frequency and TDP only. The exception is the Ryzen 7, where 100 MHz is lost on turbo and 100 MHz is lost on graphics. All the Ryzen non-Pro hardware has a Pro version equivalent.

All of the processors support DDR4-3200 memory, and have 16x PCIe 3.0 lanes for graphics, 4x PCIe 3.0 lanes for storage, and 4x PCIe 3.0 lanes to connect to the chipset. These are PCIe 3.0 connections primarily on the basis of power – this is the same silicon that goes into 15 W mobile processors, and the power draw of PCIe 4.0 would have been too high, so AMD only enabled these processors with a PCIe 3.0 controller.

For this review, we sourced all three of the Ryzen Pro 65 W processors.

Desktop Discrete Graphics vs Integrated Graphics

Due to the difficulty in obtaining these processors, I would assume that anyone obtaining them will be using the integrated graphics in order to get the most out of their purchase. These processors still have 16x PCIe 3.0 lanes for graphics, which means we could stick in a discrete GPU if we wanted. As part of this review, we will test both, if only to see where a Renoir APU would fit if it had access to a full-blown directly connected discrete graphics card.

It is worth noting that AMD has made a big fuss recently with its Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 CPUs, stating that having 32 MB of L3 cache available for each core as being a big improvement to discrete graphics. This is double that of the Zen 2-based Ryzen 4000 CPUs, which enable each core to have access to 16 MB of L3 cache. These Renoir APUs are hamstrung using the same dimension: each Zen 2 CPU core only has access to 4 MB of L3 cache. By contrast, the Renoir APUs are monolithic; the CPUs rely on a chiplet design, which adds latency. This was an AMD design choice, so it will be interesting to see how this works out for performance.

The benchmark results are over the next few pages.

Test Setup and #CPUOverload Benchmarks
Desktop AMD Ryzen 4000 ReviewTest Setup and #CPUOverload BenchmarksPower ConsumptionIntegrated GraphicsDiscrete GraphicsCPU Benchmarks: Real WorldCPU Benchmarks: SyntheticConclusion: New Paradigms Needed

Tweet

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G vs Ryzen 5 5600G: performance comparison

VS

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

We compared two desktop CPUs: the 3. 6 GHz AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G with 8-cores against the 3.9 GHz Ryzen 5 5600G with 6-cores. On this page, you’ll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

  1. Review
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Specs
  5. Comments

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors

Single-Core Performance

Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

66

Ryzen 5 5600G

78

Performance

Measure performance when all cores are involved

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

56

Ryzen 5 5600G

52

Power Efficiency

The efficiency score of electricity consumption

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

66

Ryzen 5 5600G

69

NanoReview Final Score

Generic CPU rating

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

63

Ryzen 5 5600G

66

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 5600G and 4750G

Advantages of AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

  • Has 2 more physical cores

Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

  • Has 8 MB larger L3 cache size
  • Unlocked multiplier
  • Supports up to 128 GB DDR4-3200 RAM
  • Newer — released 9-months later
  • 26% faster in a single-core Geekbench v5 test — 1493 vs 1189 points

Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs in benchmarks

Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1322

Ryzen 5 5600G
+14%

1501

Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G
+16%

13002

Ryzen 5 5600G

11241

Passmark CPU (Single-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

2721

Ryzen 5 5600G
+17%

3189

Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G
+4%

20575

Ryzen 5 5600G

19877

Geekbench 5 (Single-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1198

Ryzen 5 5600G
+25%

1501

Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G
+2%

7767

Ryzen 5 5600G

7591

▶️ Submit your Cinebench R23 result

By purchasing through links on this site, we may receive a commission from Amazon. This does not affect our assessment methodology.

Specifications

Full technical specification of AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G and Ryzen 5 5600G

General

Vendor AMD AMD
Released July 21, 2020 April 13, 2021
Type Desktop Desktop
instruction set x86-64 x86-64
Codename Zen 2 Cezanne
Socket AM4 AM4
Integrated GPU Radeon Vega 8 Radeon RX Vega 7

Performance

Cores 8 6
Threads 16 12
Base Frequency 3. 6 GHz 3.9 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency 4.4 GHz 4.4 GHz
Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 36x 39x
L1 Cache 96K (per core) 64K (per core)
L2 Cache 512K (per core) 512K (per core)
L3 Cache 8MB (shared) 16MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier No Yes
Transistors 4.9 billions 10.7 billions
Fabrication process 7 nm 7 nm
TDP 45-65 W 45-65 W
Max. temperature 95°C 95°C
Integrated Graphics Radeon Vega 8 Radeon RX Vega 7
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 300 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 2100 MHz 1900 MHz
Shading Units 512 448
TMUs 32 28
ROPs 8 7
Execution Units 8
TGP 65 W 10-45 W
Max. Resolution 3840×2160 — 60 Hz

iGPU FLOPS

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1.13 TFLOPS

Ryzen 5 5600G

1.108 TFLOPS

Memory support

Memory types DDR4-3200 DDR4-3200
Memory Size 64 GB 128 GB
Max. Memory Channels 2 2
Max. Memory Bandwidth 43.71 GB/s
ECC Support Yes No
Official site AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G official page AMD Ryzen 5 5600G official page
PCI Express Version 3.0 3.0
PCI Express Lanes 12 24

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

44 (26. 7%)

Ryzen 5 5600G

121 (73.3%)

Total votes: 165

ompetitors

1.
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G and Ryzen 7 5700G

2.
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G and Core i5 12400F

3.
Ryzen 5 5600G and Ryzen 5 3600

4.
Ryzen 5 5600G and Ryzen 5 5500U

5.
Ryzen 5 5600G and Core i5 12400

6.
Ryzen 5 5600G and Core i5 10400F

7.
Ryzen 5 5600G and Core i3 12100

So which CPU will you choose: AMD Ryzen 5 5600G or Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G?

Name

Message

Promotion

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G [in 3 benchmarks]


AMD
Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G

Buy

  • Interface
  • Core clock speed
  • Max video memory
  • Memory type
  • Memory clock speed
  • Maximum resolution

Summary

AMD started AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G sales 21 July 2020. This is Renoir architecture desktop processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, and is based on 7 nm manufacturing technology, with a max turbo frequency of 4400 MHz and an unlocked multiplier.

Compatibility-wise, this is
AMD Socket AM4
processor with a TDP of 65 Watt and a maximum temperature of 95 °C. It supports DDR4-3200 memory.

It provides poor benchmark performance at


20.40%

of a leader’s which is AMD EPYC 7h22.


Ryzen 7
PRO 4750G

vs


EPYC
7h22

General info


Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and pricing.

Place in performance rating 306
Value for money 20. 36
Market segment Desktop processor
Series AMD Ryzen 7
Architecture codename Renoir (2020−2022)
Release date 21 July 2020 (2 years ago)
Current price $602 of 14999 (Xeon Platinum 9282)

Value for money

To get the index we compare the characteristics of the processors and their cost, taking into account the cost of other processors.

  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Technical specs


Basic microprocessor parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters can generally indicate CPU performance, but to be more precise you have to review its test results.

Physical cores 8 (Octa-Core)
Threads 16
Base clock speed 3.6 GHz of 4.7 (FX-9590)
Boost clock speed 4.4 GHz of 5.8 (Core i9-13900K)
L1 cache 64K (per core) of 1536 (EPYC Embedded 3401)
L2 cache 512K (per core) of 12288 (Core 2 Quad Q9550)
L3 cache 8 MB of 32 (Ryzen Threadripper 1998)
Chip lithography 7 nm of 5 (Apple M1)
Die size 156 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase) 95 °C of 105 (Core i7-5950HQ)
Number of transistors 9800 Million of 57000 (Apple M1 Max)
64 bit support +
Windows 11 compatibility +
Unlocked multiplier +

Compatibility


Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G compatibility with other computer components and devices: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one.

Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration 1 of 8 (Opteron 842)
Socket AM4
Thermal design power (TDP) 65 Watt of 400 (Xeon Platinum 9282)

Technologies and extensions


Technological capabilities and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G. You’ll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI +
AVX +

Virtualization technologies


Supported virtual machine optimization technologies. Some are specific to Intel only, some to AMD.

AMD-V +

Memory specs


Types, maximum amount and channel number of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G’s memory controller. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequency may be supported.

Supported memory types DDR4-3200 of 5200 (Ryzen 5 7600X)
Maximum memory size 128 GB of 786 (Xeon E5-2670 v3)
Maximum memory bandwidth 51.196 GB/s of 281.6 (Xeon Platinum 9221)

Graphics specifications


General parameters of GPU integrated into Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G.

Integrated graphics card AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

Peripherals


Specifications and connection types of supported peripherals.

PCIe version 4.0 of 5 (Core i9-12900K)

Benchmark performance


Single-core and multi-core benchmark results of Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G. Overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Overall score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.


Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
20.40

  • Passmark
  • GeekBench 5 Single-Core
  • GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%


Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
20570

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 37%


Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
1202

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 37%


Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
7776


Relative perfomance


Overall Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G performance compared to nearest competitors among desktop CPUs.



Intel Core i5-12600
102.99


Intel Core i7-12700TE
100.69


Intel Core i9-10900F
100.54


AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
100


AMD Ryzen 7 4700GE
99.26


Intel Core i5-12500
98.73


Intel Core i9-10900
98.68

Intel equivalent


We believe that the nearest equivalent to Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G from Intel is Core i9-10900F, which is faster by 1% and higher by 3 positions in our rating.


Core i9
10900F


Compare


Here are some closest Intel rivals to Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G:


Intel Core i5-12600
102. 99


Intel Core i7-12700TE
100.69


Intel Core i9-10900F
100.54


AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
100


Intel Core i5-12500
98.73


Intel Core i9-10900
98.68


Intel Core i7-11700
97.6

Similar processors

Here is our recommendation of several processors that are more or less close in performance to the one reviewed.


Core i9
10900F


Compare


Core i7
12700TE


Compare


Ryzen 7
4700GE


Compare


Core i5
12500


Compare


Core i9
10900


Compare


Ryzen 7
4700G


Compare

Recommended graphics cards

These graphics cards are most commonly used with Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G according to our statistics.


Radeon RX
Vega 8

20.3%


Radeon
Graphics

7.4%


Radeon RX
Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000)

6.8%


GeForce GTX
1650

4%


Radeon RX
Vega 7

3.7%


GeForce GTX
1050 Ti

3.7%


Radeon RX
Vega 11

2.6%


GeForce RTX
3090

2. 2%


Radeon R7
Graphics

2.2%


GeForce RTX
2060

2%

User rating


Here is the rating given to the reviewed processor by our users. Let others know your opinion by rating it yourself.


Questions and comments


Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.


Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G — AMD

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G is a 64-bit octa-core high-end performance x86 desktop microprocessor introduced by AMD in mid-2020. Fabricated on a TSMC 7-nanometer process and based on AMD’s Zen 2 microarchitecture, the PRO 4750G operates at a base frequency of 3. 6 GHz with a TDP of 65 W and a boost frequency of up to 4.4 GHz. This APU supports a configurable TDP-down of 45 W, up to 128 GiB of dual-channel DDR4-3200 memory, and integrates a Radeon Vega 8 GPU operating at up to 2.1 GHz.

Compared to its mainstream counterparts, the PRO 4750G includes a set of enterprise-oriented features such as Memory Guard, image stability, software stability, and manageability support.

Contents

  • 1 Cache
  • 2 Memory controller
  • 3 Expansions
  • 4 Graphics
  • 5 Features
  • 6 Die
  • 7 References
Main article: Zen 2 § Cache

[Edit/Modify Cache Info]

Cache Organization

Cache is a hardware component containing a relatively small and extremely fast memory designed to speed up the performance of a CPU by preparing ahead of time the data it needs to read from a relatively slower medium such as main memory.

The organization and amount of cache can have a large impact on the performance, power consumption, die size, and consequently cost of the IC.

Cache is specified by its size, number of sets, associativity, block size, sub-block size, and fetch and write-back policies.

Note: All units are in kibibytes and mebibytes.

L1$ 512 KiB

0.5 MiB
524,288 B
4.882812e-4 GiB

L1I$ 256 KiB

0.25 MiB
262,144 B
2.441406e-4 GiB

8×32 KiB 8-way set associative  
L1D$ 256 KiB

0.25 MiB
262,144 B
2.441406e-4 GiB

8×32 KiB 8-way set associative write-back

L2$ 4 MiB

4,096 KiB
4,194,304 B
0.00391 GiB

    8×512 KiB 8-way set associative write-back

L3$ 8 MiB

8,192 KiB
8,388,608 B
0. 00781 GiB

    2×4 MiB 16-way set associative write-back

Memory controller[edit]

[Edit/Modify Memory Info]

Integrated Memory Controller

Max Type DDR4-3200
Max Mem 128 GiB
Controllers 2
Channels 2
Max Bandwidth 47.68 GiB/s

82.963 GB/s
48,824.32 MiB/s
0.0466 TiB/s
0.0512 TB/s

Bandwidth

Single 23.84 GiB/s

Double 47.68 GiB/s

Expansions[edit]

In addition to the x4 lanes that are reserved for the chipset, the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G has x16 for a discrete graphics processor and x4 for storage (NVMe or 2 ports SATA Express).

[Edit/Modify Expansions Info]

Expansion Options

PCIe Revision: 3.0
Max Lanes: 20
Configuration: 1×16+x4, 2×8+x4, x8x4x4+x4

Graphics[edit]

[Edit/Modify IGP Info]

Integrated Graphics Information

GPU Radeon Vega 8
Designer AMD
Execution Units 8 Max Displays 4
Unified Shaders 512
Burst Frequency 2,100 MHz

2.1 GHz
2,100,000 KHz

Output DP, HDMI

Max Resolution
DP 4K @60 Hz

Standards
DirectX 12
DP 1. 4
HDMI 2.1
[Edit] Zen 2 with Radeon Vega Hardware Accelerated Video Capabilities
Codec Encode Decode
VP9 8bpc/10bpc 1080p240
4K 60 FPS
MPEG-2 (H.262) 8b 1080p240
4K 60 FPS
1080p480
4K 120 FPS
HEVC (H.265) 8bpc/10bpc 1080p240
4K 60 FPS
1080p240
4K 60 FPS

Features[edit]

[Edit/Modify Supported Features]

Supported x86 Extensions & Processor Features

MMX MMX Extension
EMMX Extended MMX Extension
SSE Streaming SIMD Extensions
SSE2 Streaming SIMD Extensions 2
SSE3 Streaming SIMD Extensions 3
SSSE3 Supplemental SSE3
SSE4. 1 Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.1
SSE4.2 Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.2
SSE4a Streaming SIMD Extensions 4a
AVX Advanced Vector Extensions
AVX2 Advanced Vector Extensions 2
ABM Advanced Bit Manipulation
BMI1 Bit Manipulation Instruction Set 1
BMI2 Bit Manipulation Instruction Set 2
FMA3 3-Operand Fused-Multiply-Add
AES AES Encryption Instructions
RdRand Hardware RNG
SHA SHA Extensions
ADX Multi-Precision Add-Carry
CLMUL Carry-less Multiplication Extension
F16C 16-bit Floating Point Conversion
x86-16 16-bit x86
x86-32 32-bit x86
x86-64 64-bit x86
Real Real Mode
Protected Protected Mode
SMM System Management Mode
FPU Integrated x87 FPU
NX No-eXecute
SMT Simultaneous Multithreading
AMD-Vi AMD-Vi (I/O MMU virtualization)
AMD-V AMD Virtualization
TSME Transparent SME
SenseMI SenseMI Technology
Main article: Zen 2 § Die

Renoir microprocessors are fabricated on TSMC’s 7-nanometer process. This SoC integrates 9.8 billion transistors on a single 156 mm² monolithic die which includes both the Zen 2 CPU cores along with the Vega GPU and various other additional components.

  • 7-nanometer process (N7)
  • 9,800,000,000 transistors
  • 156 mm² die size

References[edit]

  • «AMD Ryzen™ 7 PRO 4750G». AMD.com. Retrieved May 2021.

Facts about «Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G — AMD»

RDF feed

Has subobject

«Has subobject» is a predefined property representing a container construct and is provided by Semantic MediaWiki.

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G — AMD#pcie +
base frequency 3,600 MHz (3.6 GHz, 3,600,000 kHz) +
clock multiplier 36 +
core count 8 +
core family 23 +
core model 96 +
core name Renoir +
core stepping A1 +
designer AMD +
die area 156 mm² (0. 242 in², 1.56 cm², 156,000,000 µm²) +
family Ryzen 7 +
first launched July 21, 2020 +
full page name amd/ryzen 7/pro 4750g +
has advanced vector extensions true +
has advanced vector extensions 2 true +
has amd amd-v technology true +
has amd amd-vi technology true +
has amd sensemi technology true +
has amd transparent secure memory encryption technology true +
has ecc memory support false +
has feature Advanced Vector Extensions +, Advanced Vector Extensions 2 +, Advanced Encryption Standard Instruction Set Extension + and SenseMI Technology +
has locked clock multiplier true +
has simultaneous multithreading true +
has x86 advanced encryption standard instruction set extension true +
instance of microprocessor +
integrated gpu Radeon Vega 8 +
integrated gpu designer AMD +
integrated gpu execution units 8 +
integrated gpu max frequency 2,100 MHz (2. 1 GHz, 2,100,000 KHz) +
isa x86-64 +
isa family x86 +
l1$ size 0.5 MiB (512 KiB, 524,288 B, 4.882812e-4 GiB) +
l1d$ description 8-way set associative +
l1d$ size 0.25 MiB (256 KiB, 262,144 B, 2.441406e-4 GiB) +
l1i$ description 8-way set associative +
l1i$ size 0.25 MiB (256 KiB, 262,144 B, 2.441406e-4 GiB) +
l2$ description 8-way set associative +
l2$ size 4 MiB (4,096 KiB, 4,194,304 B, 0.00391 GiB) +
l3$ description 16-way set associative +
l3$ size 8 MiB (8,192 KiB, 8,388,608 B, 0.00781 GiB) +
ldate July 21, 2020 +
manufacturer TSMC +
market segment Desktop +
max case temperature 368.15 K (95 °C, 203 °F, 662. 67 °R) +
max cpu count 1 +
max memory 131,072 MiB (134,217,728 KiB, 137,438,953,472 B, 128 GiB, 0.125 TiB) +
max memory bandwidth 47.68 GiB/s (82.963 GB/s, 48,824.32 MiB/s, 0.0466 TiB/s, 0.0512 TB/s) +
max memory channels 2 +
microarchitecture Zen 2 +
min case temperature 273.15 K (0 °C, 32 °F, 491.67 °R) +
model number PRO 4750G +
name Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G +
package µOPGA-1331 +
part number 100-000000145 +
process 7 nm (0.007 μm, 7.0e-6 mm) +
series 4000 +
smp max ways 1 +
socket Socket AM4 +
supported memory type DDR4-3200 +
tdp 65 W (65,000 mW, 0.0872 hp, 0.065 kW) +
tdp down 45 W (45,000 mW, 0. 0603 hp, 0.045 kW) +
technology CMOS +
thread count 16 +
transistor count 9,800,000,000 +
turbo frequency 4,400 MHz (4.4 GHz, 4,400,000 kHz) +
word size 64 bit (8 octets, 16 nibbles) +

Testing AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G, Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G and Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G integrated graphics processors (APUs) versus non-GPU counterparts and Intel

processors The past year was quite rich in processor innovations. Including large ones: we saw both a new platform from Intel and a new AMD microarchitecture. It’s just so different: AMD remains committed to the same AM4, having radically improved it in three years, but with partial compatibility between solutions of different times, while Intel already has a third platform for 14-nanometer Core in its assortment, which has not changed qualitatively for five years . However, in practice, it’s not the “manufacturability” that is more important, but what comes out of it in terms of consumer characteristics — and they have improved, so the LGA1200 looks better than the “second version” LGA1151 in any case. As for AMD Zen3, here the release of new processors was accompanied by a slight increase in official prices, and the real ones are still much higher and theirs — so the devices turned out to be very successful, but it’s not easy to buy them in reality (and in general — a little expensive). But these problems will be solved over time, so you can prepare for updating the counters ahead of time.

Against this background, everyone somehow forgot that last year the list of new AMD products was limited not only to «pure» processors — APUs (i.e. solutions with integrated graphics) were also updated, having already received up to eight cores of the Zen2 microarchitecture . Given that only four-core models were previously available, and even the original Zen or Zen +, in the first half of the year, many were waiting for them. As the moment of the announcement and “leakage” to the masses of technical characteristics approached, the enthusiasm of some began to dry up. And finally he was «finished off» by the company’s decision not to release new items in the retail segment — officially they are shipped exclusively to large computer manufacturers. In fact, it is they who are most interested in — at the moment, 2/3 of desktop computers are not equipped with discrete video cards, but for the most part they are just ready-made and are bought. Naturally, AMD is interested in this direction due to its mass character — but in order to master it, it is precisely with large assemblers that you need to work. Retail is a little different. Yes, and sales of the Ryzen 3000 in the retail segment have been breaking all records for the last year, so there was nothing much to improve here. Unlike.

In general, the situation is understandable — but still uncomfortable. It is interesting to know how new devices work. But… do not take the whole computer for testing. More precisely, at least three computers — after all, the new Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 have appeared. Fortunately, their Pro-segment counterparts have also come out, which are not very easy to buy, but possible. What is the difference? A blocked multiplier — which does not interfere with the study of performance in normal mode. And not for the first time already by the lack of the ability to adjust the heat pack: if the «civilian» models allow you to flexibly change it in the range of 45-65 W, then the Pro-modifications have two hard-coded options — 35 and 65 W (which is why there were six of them, and not three). This is already worse, although not important — the «basic» mode of the usual 4x00G and Pro 4x50G is at least the same. Therefore, we simply bought the last three in the store. Now let’s get to know her in more detail.

Test participants

AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G
Kernel name Renoir Renoir Renoir
Production technology 7 nm 7 nm 7 nm
Core frequency, GHz 3.8/4.0 3.7/4.2 3.6/4.4
Number of cores/threads 4/8 6/12 8/16
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 128/128 192/192 256/256
L2 cache, KB 4×512 6×512 8×512
L3 cache, MiB 4 8 8
RAM 2×DDR4-3200 2×DDR4-3200 2×DDR4-3200
TDP, W 65 65 65
Integrated GPU Radeon Radeon Radeon

The technical specifications show why some stopped waiting for these models even before they were actually released. With the first lines, everything is fine — typical Zen2. Moreover, on monolithic crystals, i.e. unlike the chiplet composition, the memory controller is integrated here, which has a positive effect on its delays. But the cache memory and PCIe lines were not significantly reported here. Especially the first — if most processors based on Zen2 and Zen3 have from 4 MB L3 per core (in the popular Ryzen 5 3600/3600X/5600X even more than five), then there is no 2 MB. More precisely, Ryzen 3 and Ryzen 7 generally have exactly 1 MB per core. In the «old» APUs it was similar — but the processors of that time were also limited to a smaller number of L3s. Also, the PCIe controller was, in fact, inherited from its predecessors — still only PCIe 3.0, not 4.0 — which AMD has chosen as one of the key advantages of its platform. New APUs are much more difficult to promote.

By the way, from the point of view of IGP — the company now calls it simply Radeon, not Radeon Vega, and bashfully removed the number of execution units in the depths of the documentation. Why? And everything is simple — Vega 8 of the old desktop Ryzen 3 is 8 blocks of 64 GPUs each, i.e. 512 in total, and Ryzen 5 had Vega 11 — which means 11 blocks or 704 GPUs. What about new models? 6, 7 or 8 blocks similar in the first approximation, i.e. The GPU of the new Ryzen 7 is only equal to the GPU of the old Ryzen 3. In fact, not everything is so scary. There are nuances that we will consider in detail when we get acquainted with graphics performance. Today’s same testing will be carried out with a discrete video card — to put all the subjects on an equal footing and evaluate their processor performance.

AMD Ryzen 3 3100 AMD Ryzen 5 3600 AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Kernel name Matisse Matisse Matisse
Production technology 7/12 nm 7/12 nm 7/12 nm
Core frequency, GHz 3. 6/3.9 3.6/4.2 3.6/4.4
Number of cores/threads 4/8 6/12 8/16
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 128/128 192/192 256/256
L2 cache, KB 4×512 6×512 8×512
L3 cache, MiB 16 32 32
RAM 2×DDR4-3200 2×DDR4-3200 2×DDR4-3200
TDP, W 65 65 65
Integrated GPU no no no

Which first of all needs to be compared with pure processors on Zen2. This set is based on model numbers and TDP of 65 watts. With one exception — we took the Ryzen 3 3100, not the 3300X, since in the second the same 16 MB L3 belong to one CCX, fortunately, the cores are «from the same». The 4350G is more similar to the 3100, only it is also quantitatively «offended», so comparing it with the 3300X is absolutely cruel.

AMD Ryzen 5 3400G AMD Ryzen 5 2600 AMD Ryzen 7 2700
Kernel name Picasso Pinnacle Ridge Pinnacle Ridge
Production technology 12 nm 12 nm 12 nm
Core frequency, GHz 3.7/4.2 3.4/3.9 3.2/4.1
Number of cores/threads 4/8 6/12 8/16
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 256/128 384/192 512/256
L2 cache, KB 4×512 6×512 8×512
L3 cache, MiB 4 16 16
RAM 2×DDR4-2933 2×DDR4-2933 2×DDR4-2933
TDP, W 65 65 65
Integrated GPU Radeon RX Vega 11 no no

And you need to compare the new models with their predecessors, but a direct comparison is possible only between the old Ryzen 5 and the new Ryzen 3 — there are no other intersections in the APU lines. Therefore, for the sake of interest, we will “add” them with the help of the Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 2700. The models that are still popular are due to relatively low prices. Only now the output of the APU of the 4000 line allows you to save in a slightly different way — on a video card. And, when possible, head-to-head / core-to-core comparisons are useful.

Intel Core i7-7700K Intel Core i5-10600K Intel Core i7-10700K
Kernel name Kaby Lake Comet Lake Comet Lake
Production technology 14 nm 14 nm 14 nm
Core frequency, GHz 4.2/4.5 4.1/4.8 3.8/5.1
Number of cores/threads 4/8 6/12 8/16
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 128/128 192/192 256/256
L2 cache, KB 4×256 6×256 8×256
L3 cache, MiB 8 12 16
RAM 2×DDR4-2400 2×DDR4-2933 2×DDR4-2933
TDP, W 91 125 125
Integrated GPU HD Graphics 630 UHD Graphics 630 UHD Graphics 630

It’s hard to compare with Intel processors. They also (with the exception of F-modifications) allow you to do without a discrete graphics card, and the GPU has not changed for a long time — so it is perfectly compatible with a huge amount of software. Even better than many discrete cards, «screw» which to non-toys sometimes with a large tambourine, hammer, chisel and some mother . However, in terms of functionality (even without touching the same toys), old age plays a bad joke with (U)HD Graphics: no built-in support for HDMI 2.0a, no encoding-decoding of the latest standards — nothing. AMD’s new «inserts» have this, but Intel does not. Therefore, in such conditions, it is difficult to compare directly. With discrete — also not quite simple. Moreover, we have not yet tested the new Core i3. As a result, a strong-willed decision was taken instead of the Core i7-7700K, to which the best modern Core i5-10600K and Core i7-10700K were added. Not because we consider these models to be direct competitors, but simply because some kind of benchmark is needed. So let’s take the one we already have in stock — since we tested it a long time ago.

Other environments traditional: AMD Radeon Vega 56 graphics card, SATA SSD and 16 GB DDR4 memory. The memory clock speed is the maximum according to the processor specification. Intel Multi-Core Enhance and AMD Precision Boost Overdrive technologies are disabled — for the latter, this is typical by default, but many motherboards strive to turn on the former quietly. Here, along with the memory frequency, they already affect performance, and their use is made more specific by the requirements for the board and chipset, but in normal mode there are no problems. Yes, and in itself, the inclusion of MCE, but without overclocking, increases the performance of the Core i9-10900K by only 3% with an increase in power consumption by 5% — as we have already seen. Therefore, in our opinion, such technologies still have no practical meaning. Another thing is manual overclocking, but here everything is individual. And it depends on both technique and personal luck.

Test Method

Methodology for testing computer systems of the 2020 sample

The testing methodology is described in detail in a separate article, and the results of all tests are available in a separate table in Microsoft Excel format. Directly in the articles, we use the processed results: normalized with respect to the reference system (Intel Core i5-9600K with 16 GB of memory, an AMD Radeon Vega 56 video card and a SATA SSD — in today’s article it is directly involved) and grouped by computer application areas. Accordingly, all diagrams related to applications have dimensionless scores — so more is always better. And starting from this year, we are finally transferring game tests to an optional status (the reasons for which are discussed in detail in the description of the test methodology), so that only specialized materials will be available for them. In the main lineup there are only a couple of «processor-dependent» games in low resolution and medium quality — synthetic, of course, but conditions close to reality for testing processors are not suitable, since nothing depends on them in such conditions.

iXBT Application Benchmark 2020

The main thing here and below is that the new APUs are significantly faster than older processors and Zen/Zen+ based APUs, since the advantage of the Zen2 microarchitecture is obvious from the outset. In addition, earlier APUs «ended» on four dual-threaded cores — with which they are now just starting. But these devices lose to their closest relatives based on the same microarchitecture — first of all, the low “cache-to-weight ratio” affects. In any case, this is especially noticeable in the younger model: after all, only 4 MB of L3, and even divided into two CCX, is bad. Competing with predecessors does not interfere too much — there was the same capacity, albeit in one piece, but the changes inside the cores are very great. But even the «penny» Ryzen 3 3100 is already faster — because it’s not 2×2, but 2×8. The rest of their counterparts lag behind weaker. But they are lagging behind. Therefore, perhaps the company does not try to draw too much attention to them. It is clear that from a practical point of view, in some cases, the 4000th line is still radically better than the 3000th: since don’t need the PCIe plug, so you can easily make a very compact system. Or just inexpensive — for example, 4650G costs a little cheaper than 3600, but you still have to add at least a GeForce GT1030 or Radeon RX 550 to the latter, which cost a third of such a processor (old video cards are cheaper — but it is incorrect to compare integrated GPUs of the new series with them and non-game features ). It’s like that. But to give an extra reason for claims on the part of all kinds of enthusiasts — oh well …

From a technical point of view, it would be better, of course, not to “cut” the cache of the younger model — as you can see, in some tasks 8 MB is no less enough than 32 MB, so the monolithic design and other features of Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 The 4000th line can generally be brought forward. But in fact, AMD had nowhere to go — the cache defect somehow needs to be disposed of. So it’s good that only Ryzen 3 suffered. Moreover, as we saw above, sometimes 8 MB is still too small for at least parity, so the presence of such a volume would not have saved the situation radically.

And sometimes the difference in the capacity of caches does not interfere at all. And it doesn’t help, of course — but there is an approximate equality in each pair. There is also a radical advantage over the old solutions. There is also some lag behind Intel processors in the first approximation, but this is a general architectural (and optimization) point.

Alas, but a very «cash-loving» group, which has long been clear. Therefore, here new APUs lose 15% -20% to processors of the same architecture and become slower than Intel solutions (formally, since in practice you still need to take into account prices). On the other hand, they are no less radically ahead of the old APUs and processors of the company. And in general, the level of performance is, let’s say, good — since even Athlon and Pentium «feels like» these applications have been coping well for a long time, a further increase in performance begins to have exclusively philosophical significance.

Unfortunately, the FineReader’s «love» for a large cache memory capacity was noticed long ago — so even here there is no parity with pure processors. Here, the “old” Ryzen 3/5 APUs with their counterparts had it — only you can now forget about this level. Moreover, the «analogues» then met only in the budget segment. And Ryzen 7 4700G / 4750G can compete almost on equal terms with both modern Ryzen 7 and Core i7. The latter is the most important: earlier, a compact but powerful system without a discrete graphics card could only be assembled on Intel processors, and now this bastion has fallen. Moreover, given the different functionality of the built-in GPUs, at the moment they have not only caught up, but also overtaken. The release of Rocket Lake desktops with the new graphics core may make the comparison less clear — however, they are expected closer to spring, and 4000-series APUs have been available (albeit limited) since last summer.

The total mayhem in these applications was predictable in advance. But, by the way, we note that there is a difference between Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 of the 2000 and 4000 lines — but in the 3000 family it can be considered almost absent. Just a fee for an external memory controller, which has to be compensated by «super-large» L3, so the speed starts to depend more on their capacity than on processor cores. Monolithic models do not need to “compensate” for anything — but they still lose. 2000 due to qualitative differences, 4000 due to quantitative differences.

4750G is clearly easier to fit into a limited heat pack — so it even overtook 3700X (although it still consumes far from 65 W in practice, but closer to 100 — almost like its older brother 3800X). The remaining two subjects from their «pure» counterparts just almost did not lag behind. The old Ryzen have convincingly overtaken, they look good against the background of the Core. In general, the ideal case. If it were always like this, one could think about the “abolition” of Ryzen 5 without graphics, for example, and not release Ryzen 3 on a new microarchitecture at all (maybe that’s why the company dragged on with them for so long). But so — not always.

On average, the new APUs are slightly slower than their closest relatives without graphics. Moreover, in terms of technology, they formally lag behind — no, you understand , there is no PCIe 4.0. Therefore, it is quite difficult to “promote” them to the retail market, as well as to position them as universal solutions. With the “old” APUs, this worked out — as a result of which the quad-core Ryzen 3 2300X and Ryzen 5 2500X became OEM models. And here the situation is reversed — even special Ryzen 3 had to be released. And this is good — because they are better suited for assembling a budget system with a discrete graphics card. In most computers, as already mentioned at the beginning, there is no graphics other than integrated graphics. But this is achieved mainly just through the sale of finished computers (fortunately, this segment is also many times larger than the retail trade in components, i.e. both “self-assembly” and computers from small firms). But there’s something new solutions available, so it’s all right.

Power consumption and energy efficiency

Comparison with older models may not be entirely correct, since we tested them on a «more economical» board, but it’s not important, but almost complete coincidence with processors of the same architecture («interval», of course — specific models may behave slightly differently, which is clearly seen in the example of Ryzen 5). In the same conditions. Well, and significantly lower power consumption than modern Intel processors for LGA1200 — too. Both are easily explained by the fact that at the moment AMD uses a more advanced technical process than Intel, and it is the same in the 3000th and 4000th lines.

But it is possible to «make» on the same technological base both a low-power processor and a high-performance one. From a practical point of view, the balance of these characteristics is important. Which at the moment Ryzen is doing much better. Since last year — to which we will not wait for a full-fledged response from Intel in the desktop segment very soon. With all the consequences.

Games

As already mentioned in the description of the methodology, it makes no sense to keep the «classic approach» to testing gaming performance — since video cards have long been determining not only it, but also significantly affect the cost of the system, you need to «dance» exclusively from them. And from the games themselves — too: in modern conditions, fixing a game set for a long time does not make sense, since literally everything can change with the next update. But we will carry out a brief test in (albeit) relatively synthetic conditions — using a couple of games in the «processor-dependent» mode.

As expected — the performance is radically higher than that of older AMD processors, but also noticeably lower than that of its closest relatives. Ryzen 3 only has parity — but simply because the 3100 itself is noticeably slower than, for example, the 3300X of the same line. So those who hoped for an increase in speed due to a monolithic design broke off badly — reducing the capacity of L3 turned out to be a decisive factor. On the other hand, for a gaming computer, it’s already a little strange to buy a processor with integrated graphics — you still need a discrete one. So it’s not as bad as we think. And if you buy an APU for the sake of saving for the first time, and then add a discrete one, it’s also unlikely to be a top one (otherwise the question of saving would not have arisen at the first stage), but one that “everything will run into”. There was simply nothing to promote here either.

Total

According to the results, a conspiracy theory is ready why AMD does not launch new APUs at retail: they turned out to be good, but is slightly worse than should be. And at first they didn’t want to do Ryzen 3 based on chiplets, then they had to — that’s why they appeared so late. But there is another version — production. Monolithic eight-core crystals according to the norms of 7 nm are quite expensive and are available from the company in limited quantities. So they are used where it is impossible to do without them at all — in laptops and ready-made compact systems. And retail buyers can get by.

On the whole, the result is the same. Processors are interesting, but buying them is more difficult than we would like. On the other hand, they are «interesting» in specific cases — when there is absolutely no desire to purchase a discrete video card. For retail, this is not such a frequent situation, so the Ryzen Pro of this family that fall into it is enough to solve the problem. If there is still a discrete video card, then it is better to turn your attention to something else. Simply because the prices in all APU / CPU pairs are comparable — but APUs do not have any advantage in them. Unless if you use the “integrashka” as a temporary solution, but … If its acquisition is precisely planned, it is better to go the other way than temporary savings and permanent restrictions. Now, if there is confidence that you can get by in principle, this is just the ideal situation. For which AMD had almost no solutions for some time — after all, the old Ryzen 3 and Ryzen 5 looked good in 2018, but that was a long time ago. And even then, the performance level turned out to be seriously limited: as has been noted more than once, Zen / Zen + allowed making Haswell-level cores, but not Skylake, and even could not be taken as in this segment either. The number of those choosing them only for the sake of more powerful graphics was also limited — this problem can be more effectively solved with the help of a lower discrete. In the new models, processor performance has increased significantly — this is a good average and even high level (within the mass segment, of course — Core i9 or, moreover, Ryzen 9 is a priori a different class). GPU functionality is not diminished compared to older models and is still head and shoulders above what Intel has to offer. As for the performance of the video core, we will get to know it in detail a little later.

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G [in 3 benchmarks]

AMD
Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G

  • Interface
  • Core clock
  • Video memory size
  • Memory type
  • Memory frequency
  • Maximum resolution

Description

AMD started AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G sales on July 21, 2020. This is a Renoir architecture desktop processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 8 cores and 16 threads and is manufactured using 7 nm process technology, the maximum frequency is 4400 MHz, the multiplier is unlocked.

In terms of compatibility, this is a socket processor
AMD socket AM4
with a TDP of 65W and a maximum temperature of 95°C. It supports DDR4-3200 memory.

It provides poor benchmark performance at

20.40%

from the leader, which is AMD EPYC 7h22.


Ryzen 7
PRO 4750G

or


EPYC
7h22

General information

Information about the type (desktop or laptop) and architecture of the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G, as well as launch time and cost at that time.

Performance ranking 306
Value for money 250477 602$ out of 14999 (Xeon Platinum 9282)

Price-quality ratio

  • 0
  • 50
  • 100

Features

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G quantitative parameters such as number of cores and threads, clock speeds, manufacturing process, cache size and multiplier lock status. They indirectly speak about the performance of the processor, but for an accurate assessment, you need to consider the results of the tests. + Free multiplier +

Compatibility

2222
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G compatibility with other computer components. Useful, for example, when choosing the configuration of a future computer or to upgrade an existing one.

Please note that the power consumption of some processors can significantly exceed their nominal TDP even without overclocking. Some may even double their claims if the motherboard allows you to adjust the power settings of the processor.

9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000
Technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G that accelerate virtual machines are listed.

AES-ni +
AVX +

AMD-V +

Memory support

Memory bandwidth 51.196 Gbps of 281.6 (Xeon Platinum 9221)

9002 —

Built-in video specifications
General parameters of the graphics card integrated into Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G.

GPU AMD Radeon RX Vega 8

Peripherals

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G supported peripherals and how to connect them.

Aviation PCI Express 4.0478 of 5 (Core i9-12900K)

Tests in benchmark

These are the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G non-gaming benchmark results. The overall score is set from 0 to 100, where 100 corresponds to the fastest processor at the moment.


Overall performance in tests

This is our overall performance rating. We regularly improve our algorithms, but if you find any inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in the comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
20.40

  • Passmark
  • GeekBench 5 Single-Core
  • GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widely used benchmark that consists of 8 different tests, including integer and floating point calculations, extended instruction tests, compression, encryption, and game physics calculations. Also includes a separate single-threaded test.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
20570

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application designed as CPU benchmarks that independently recreate certain real world tasks that can accurately measure performance. This version uses only one processor core.

Benchmark coverage: 37%

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
1202

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application designed as CPU benchmarks that independently recreate certain real world tasks that can accurately measure performance. This version uses all available processor cores.

Benchmark coverage: 37%

Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
7776


Relative capacity

Overall performance of the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G compared to its nearest competitor in desktop processors.


Intel Core i5-12600
102.99

Intel Core i7-12700TE
100.69

Intel Core i9-10900F
100.54

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
100

AMD Ryzen 7 4700GE
99.26

Intel Core i5-12500
98. 73

Intel Core i9-10900
98.68

Competitor from Intel

We believe that the nearest equivalent to Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G from Intel is Core i9-10900F, which is 1% faster on average and higher by 3 positions in our rating.


Core i9
10900F

Compare

Here are some of Intel’s closest competitors to the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G:

Intel Core i5-12600
102.99

Intel Core i7-12700TE
100.69

Intel Core i9-10900F
100.54

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
100

Intel Core i5-12500
98.73

Intel Core i9-10900
98.68

Intel Core i7-11700
97.6

Other processors

Here we recommend several processors that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one.


Core i9
10900F

Compare


Core i7
12700TE

Compare


Ryzen 7
4700GE

Compare


Core i5
12500

Compare


Core i9
10900

Compare


Ryzen 7
4700G

Compare

Recommended graphics cards

According to our statistics, these cards are most often used with Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G:


Radeon RX
Vega 8

20. 3%


Radeon
Graphics

7.4%


Radeon RX
Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000)

6.8%


GeForce GTX
1650

4%


Radeon RX
Vega 7

3.7%


GeForce GTX
1050 Ti

3.7%


Radeon RX
Vega 11

2.6%


GeForce RTX
3090

2.2%


Radeon R7
Graphics

2.2%


GeForce RTX
2060

2%

User rating

Here you can see the evaluation of the processor by users, as well as put your own rating.


Tips and comments

Here you can ask a question about the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.


Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

51 points

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Why AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G is better than others?

  • CPU speed?
    8 x 3.6GHz vs 12.47GHz
  • RAM speed?
    3200MHz vs 2487.36MHz
  • CPU thread?
    16 vs 7.72
  • Semiconductors size?
    7nm vs 17.01nm
  • L2 cache?
    4MB vs 2.23MB
  • PassMark result?
    20581 vs 8616.84
  • Turbo clock speed?
    4.4GHz vs 3.83GHz
  • L1 cache?
    512KB vs 283. 47KB

Which comparisons are the most popular?

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

vs

Intel Core i5-1135G7

AMD RYZEN 3 3250U

VS

Intel Core i3-1115G4

AMD Ryzen 3 5300U

VS

Intel Core i3-1115g4

AMD Ryzen 7 3700U

VS 9000 INTEL CORE Core 2 Ryzen 7 3700U

VS

Intel Core i5-1135g7

AMD Ryzen 5 4600h

VS

Intel Core i5-10300H

Intel Core I3-1115G4

VS

Intel Core 2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core2102 Intel Core 5 3500U

VS

Intel Core i5-10210u 9000u

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

VS

Intel Core i3-1115G4

AMD Ryzen 7 5800h

VS

9000h 9000h 9000h 9000h 9114 AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Users reviews

General rating

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1 Reviews of Users

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

/10

1 reviews of users 9Ol000 Reliability

10. 0 /10

1 Votes

Energy efficiency

10.0 /10

1 VOTES

1. Sproops of the central processor

8 x 3.6GHz

CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second the processor can perform, considering all its cores (processors). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.

2.processor thread of execution

More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.

3.speed turbo clock

4.4GHz

When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

4.Unlocked multiplier

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Some processors come with unlocked multipliers and are easier to overclock, allowing for better performance in games and other applications.

5.L2 Cache

More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

6.L3 cache

More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

7.L1 cache

More L1 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

8.core L2

0.5MB/core

More data can be stored in L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

9.core L3

1MB/core

More data can be stored in L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

Memory

1.RAM speed

3200MHz

Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

2.max memory bandwidth

47.68GB/s

This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

3.DDR version

DDR (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory) is the most common type of RAM. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient.

4 memory channels

More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.

5.max memory

Maximum amount of memory (RAM).

6.bus baud rate

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device.

7. Supports memory troubleshooting code

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Memory troubleshooting code can detect and fix data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

8. eMMC version

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

A newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB.

9.bus frequency

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device

Geotagging

1. PassMark result

This benchmark measures CPU performance using multithreading.

2. PassMark result (single)

This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.

3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor. (Source: Primate Labs,2022)

4. Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.

5.Result Cinebench R20 (single core)

Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene.

6.Geekbench 5 result (single core)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform test that measures the single core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

7. Blender test result (bmw27)

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

8.Blender result (classroom)

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

9.performance per watt

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.

Features

1.uses multi-threading

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

known as streams. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.

2. Has AES

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3. Has AVX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.

4.Version SSE

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

5.Has F16C

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as image contrast adjustment or volume control.

6 bits transmitted at the same time

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.

7. Has MMX

✔AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting image contrast or adjusting volume.

8.With TrustZone

✖AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

The technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and digital rights management (DRM) video streaming.

9.interface width

Unknown. Help us offer a price.

The processor can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), which means that the processor performs better

Price comparison

Cancel

Which CPU is better?

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G vs Ryzen 7 5800X:

performance comparison

VS

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

Which is better: AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G at 3. 6 GHz (with Turbo Core up to 4.4) or Ryzen 7 5800X at 3.8 GHz (with Turbo Core up to 4.7)? To find out, read our comparative testing of these 8-core desktop processors in popular benchmarks, games and heavy applications.

  1. Overview
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Features
  5. Comments

Overview

Overview and comparison of the main metrics from NanoReview

Single-threaded performance

Single-core benchmark rating

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

66

Ryzen 7 5800X

85

Multi-threaded performance30002 Tests in benchmarks, where all nuclei are involved in all nuclei

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750g

56

Ryzen 7 5800x

73

Energy

Energy Effects Chip

9000 Ryzen 7 Pro 9000 9000 9000 Ry

64

NanoReview Rating

Final Processor Score

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

63

Ryzen 7 5800X

78

Key differences

What are the main differences between 5800X and 4750G
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

Reasons to choose AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

  • Has 24MB more L3 cache
  • Unlocked multiplier
  • Supports up to 128GB DDR4-3200
  • 37% faster in single core Geekbench v5 — 1626 and 1189 points
  • New PCI Express standard — 4. 0
  • 7% faster Turbo Boost frequency (4.7 GHz vs 4.4 GHz)
  • At 3.97 GB/s (9 %) higher maximum memory bandwidth

Benchmark tests

Compare the results of processor tests in benchmarks

Cinebench R23 (single core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1322

Ryzen 7 5800X
+21%

1606

Cinebench R23 (multi-core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

13002

Ryzen 7 5800X
+18%

15356

Passmark CPU (single core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

2721

Ryzen 7 5800X
+29%

3509

Passmark CPU (multi-core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

20575

Ryzen 7 5800X
+39%

28599

Geekbench 5 (single core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1198

Ryzen 7 5800X
+36%

1634

Geekbench 5 (multi-core)

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

7767

Ryzen 7 5800X
+37%

10622

▶️ Add your score to Cinebench R23

Specifications

AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G and Ryzen 7 5800X full technical specifications list

General information

Manufacturer AMD AMD
Release date July 21, 2020 October 8, 2020
Type Desktop Desktop
Instruction set architecture x86-64 x86-64
Codename Zen 2 Vermeer
Socket AM4 AM4
Integrated graphics Radeon Vega 8 No

Performance

Cores 8 8
Number of threads 16 16
Frequency 3. 6 GHz 3.8 GHz
Max. frequency in Turbo Boost 4.4 GHz 4.7 GHz
Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 36x 38x
Level 1 cache 96KB (per core) 64KB (per core)
Level 2 cache 512KB (per core) 512KB (per core)
Level 3 cache 8MB (shared) 32MB (shared)
Unlocked multiplier No Yes

Energy consumption

Number of transistors 4.9 billion
Process 7 nanometers 7 nanometers
Power consumption (TDP) 45-65W 105 W
Critical temperature 95°C 90°C
Integrated graphics Radeon Vega 8
GPU frequency 300 MHz
Boost GPU frequency 2100 MHz
Shader blocks 512
TMUs 32
ROPs 8
Computer units 8
TGP 65 W
Max. resolution 3840×2160 — 60Hz

iGPU FLOPS

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

1.13 teraflops

Ryzen 7 5800X

n/a

Memory support

Memory type DDR4-3200 DDR4-3200
Max. size 64 GB 128 GB
Number of channels 2 2
Max. bandwidth 43.71 GB/s 47.68 GB/s
ECC support Yes Yes

Other

website

Official site AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G website AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
PCI Express Version 3.0 4.0
Max. PCI Express lanes 12 20

Poll

What processor do you think is the best?

Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G

9 (29%)

Ryzen 7 5800X

22 (71%)

Total votes: 31

Competitors

1.
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G or Ryzen 7 5700G

2.
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G or Core i5 12400

3.
Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G or Core i5 12500

4.
Ryzen 7 5800X or Ryzen 7 5800H

5.
Ryzen 7 5800X or Ryzen 7 3700X

6.
Ryzen 7 5800X or Apple M1

7.
Ryzen 7 5800X or Core i5 12400F

8.
Ryzen 7 5800X or Ryzen 7 5700X

What will you choose: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X or Ryzen 7 Pro 4750G?

Name

Message

Russia, Ukraine, Belarus on NerdPart

Share

  • Features
  • videos

Specifications

Line AMD Ryzen 7
Processor socket (Socket) AM4
Compatible Motherboards Socket AM4
Number of cores 8 cores
Number of threads 16
Processor frequency 3600
L3 cache size 8192
Microarchitecture code name Renoir
Series Ryzen 4
Microarchitecture Zen 2
Graphic core name Radeon Graphics
Unlocked multiplier +
Process 7
Thermopack 65
Capacity 20678

Package and recommendations

Cooling kit Cooler included
Compatible cooling systems Coolers for AM4