Ryzen 3 2200g vs ryzen 5 2400g: AMD Ryzen 3 2200G vs 5 2400G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G vs AMD Ryzen 5 2400G: What is the difference?

55points

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

48points

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

Comparison winner

vs

64 facts in comparison

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

Why is AMD Ryzen 3 2200G better than AMD Ryzen 5 2400G?

  • 5.95% higher PassMark result (single)?
    2049vs1934
  • Has FMA4?

Why is AMD Ryzen 5 2400G better than AMD Ryzen 3 2200G?

  • 4 more CPU threads?
    8vs4
  • 950MHz faster GPU clock speed?
    1250MHzvs300MHz
  • 40.02% higher PassMark result?
    9377vs6697
  • 0.2GHz higher turbo clock speed?
    3.9GHzvs3.7GHz
  • Uses multithreading?
  • 3 more GPU execution units?
    11vs8

Which are the most popular comparisons?

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

Intel Core i5-7400

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD Athlon 200GE

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3400G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD A10-9700

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD A8-7600

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD Athlon Gold 3150U

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 2400GE

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

Intel Pentium Silver N5000

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

Intel Core i5-7600

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

Intel Core i5-4570

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

vs

Intel Core i7-4790K

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

vs

AMD A12-9800

Price comparison

User reviews

Overall Rating

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

6 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

8. 5/10

6 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

2 User reviews

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

8.5/10

2 User reviews

Features

Value for money

9.3/10

6 votes

10.0/10

1 votes

Gaming

8.0/10

6 votes

7.5/10

2 votes

Performance

8.0/10

6 votes

7.0/10

2 votes

Reliability

8.3/10

6 votes

9.0/10

2 votes

Energy efficiency

8.5/10

6 votes

9.0/10

2 votes

Performance

1.CPU speed

4 x 3.5GHz

4 x 3.6GHz

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

3.7GHz

3.9GHz

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 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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

1MB/core

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

Memory

1.RAM speed

2993MHz

2933MHz

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

2.maximum memory bandwidth

43.7GB/s

43.71GB/s

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 3 2200G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

7.Supports ECC memory

✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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 3 2200G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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 3 2200G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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 5 2400G)

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 5 2400G)

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 5 2400G)

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 5 2400G)

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

7.Blender (bmw27) result

680seconds

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

2339.7seconds

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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 5 2400G)

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 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3.Has AVX

✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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 3 2200G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

7.Has MMX

✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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

8.Has TrustZone

✖AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

✖AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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 3 2200G)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

Price comparison

Cancel

Which are the best CPUs?

Ryzen 3 2200G/ Ryzen 5 2400G review: triple-A gaming without a graphics card?

AMD loves to provide PC users with a great $99 CPU, and with the Ryzen 3 2200G, it’s delivered a genuine classic. Traditional wisdom suggests that when constructing a gaming PC, you need to purchase both CPU and GPU, but the Red Team’s latest offering delivers an all-in-one package — a quad-core Ryzen CPU, paired with Radeon RX Vega graphics. You’ll need to be realistic with quality settings and resolutions — you’ve got just over 1.1 teraflops of compute to play with — but this entry-level processor can indeed run most triple-A PC titles, and we had a lot of fun proving that.

In addition to the keenly-priced 2200G, there’s also an accompanying, more powerful, somewhat pricier Ryzen 5 2400G — and this brace of APUs are actually the first we can thoroughly recommend owing to their integration into AMD’s all-encompassing AM4 platform. As good as they may have been for their time, previous generation APUs have required their own motherboards, limiting upgrade potential. However, if you need more power, there’s nothing stopping you retaining your board and RAM and upgrading to a higher-end Ryzen chip, paired with either an Nvidia or AMD graphics card.

Certainly in terms of the APUs though, there is the sense that only one of the two offerings gives truly exceptional value. The Ryzen 3 2200G offers a quad-core set-up with a 3.5GHz base clock, boosting to 3.7GHz, while the companion Ryzen 5 2400G features higher clocks and SMT support — AMD’s version of hyper-threading, effectively. In terms of graphics, the 2200G has eight Vega compute units active at a reduced 1100MHz compared to the 2400G’s full 11 at 1240MHz. Game performance improvements seems to vary from between seven percent to around 20 per cent though — perhaps not enough to justify the 2400G’s massive $70 premium.

CPU-side though, the 2400G’s SMT support definitely helps a good deal and the overall impression we take away from the two Ryzen releases is that the 2200G really is the budget gamer’s friend, while the 2400G — as similar as it is — is possibly geared more towards users who do a lot more with their systems than gaming alone. By extension, another key point that separates the two new Ryzens concerns competition.

At $99 (around £90 in the UK), the 2200G is cheaper than Intel’s 3.6GHz quad-core Core i3 8100, and offers an integrated graphics solution that is — at the very least — twice as powerful as Intel’s. We had no problem booting and running any game on the 2200G, something that couldn’t be said for the i3’s poor UHD 630 graphics core. However, the 2400G’s $170 pricing (approximately £150 in the UK) brings it closer into line with the cost of the i3 and a discrete GPU, especially once more expensive RAM is factored into the equation. The i3 happily runs on bargain basement DDR4 — an APU demands more in order to get best performance.

Benchmarks are all well and good, but getting the most out of the Ryzen APUs is all about settings management. Do it right and you get some great results, as Rich demonstrates here.

Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
CPU Cores/Threads 4/4 4/8
Base/Boost Clock 3.5GHz/3.7GHz 3.6GHz/3.9GHz
GPU Compute Units 8 11
Peak GPU Clock 1100MHz 1240MHz
Price £90/$99 £150/$169
Purchase Buy from Amazon Buy from Amazon

Building an APU-based budget system should — in theory — save you a lot of money, as you don’t need to buy a GPU. However, to get the most from the integrated graphics, fast RAM is a must — something that’s a particular problem in the here and now because DDR4 is so expensive. AMD sampled the press with GSkill FlareX modules, rated at 3200MHz with ultra-low CL14 latency. It’s superb RAM, but a poor match for a $99 budget processor, but having looked at the UK market right now, pricing seems to be split into two categories: 2400MHz and slower memory costs about £20 less than any faster alternative. And in that faster camp, 3000MHz modules often seem to cost around the same as 2666MHz offerings. Our advice? Get the fastest sticks you can, target 3000MHz as the minimum and ensure the modules you choose are fully Ryzen compatible (some DDR4 isn’t).

Moving onto actual performance, we’ve got some benchmarks on this page with 1080p resolution and medium settings as the target. However, some of the numbers are clearly rather low. It’s worth stressing that these benchmarks — like all others — are all about judging relative performance as opposed to quantifying a gameplay experience. The numbers we’ve put together establish a baseline of how games run at stock speeds, then you can see how much of a hit to frame-rate there is by using cheaper, slower memory. After that, it’s all about how much you gain by overclocking. Yes, similar to every Ryzen, the 2200G can be pushed harder. In theory, the CPU can hit around 3.9GHz (depending on the quality of your particular sample), while the GPU can go as high as 1600MHz — a massive 45 per cent increase over stock clocks.

For our overclocking testing, we left the CPU alone and ran the GPU at 1500MHz, 100MHz lower than its theoretical max. This keeps thermals manageable to the point where our 2200G-based system was solid and stable on all of our gameplay tests using the supplied Wraith Stealth cooler. What’s instantly clear is that the 2200G is a true overclocking gem, though gameplay frame-rates don’t rise entirely in line with frequency boosts — the amount of available DDR4 memory bandwidth plays a big role in just how much extra performance you’re going to get. Interestingly, the same OC profile on the more expensive 2400G required a meatier cooler — we used AMD’s Wraith Spire (bundled with the Ryzen 5 1600) which did the job. We can’t help but think that with the 2400G’s big price premium, perhaps AMD might have supplied its better cooler.

The numbers here suggest that the Ryzen 3 2200G is best suited for 900p gaming at reasonable settings, with only Grand Theft Auto 5 handing in reasonable results above 30fps. Overclocking takes us closer to the 30fps target, but really, it’s all about tailoring the experience to the GPU power available. Sometimes that requires dropping resolution (in-game resolution scalers are very useful) and adjusting settings to suit. The best use for these benches is in judging relative performance. Using cheap 2400MHz DDR4 instead of fast modules sees gaming performance drop from six per cent to 14 per cent, depending on the game. Overclocking produces excellent results — anything from 19 to 28 per cent — but again, fast memory really makes a difference here. The 2200G overclocked beyond 2400G stock performance and even managed to eat into a lot of the 2400G’s lead when it too is overclocked.

Only in Far Cry Primal and The Witcher 3 do we see Vega integrated graphics on the higher-end 2400G compete with a discrete Nvidia GT 1030 GPU.

Stock vs Nvidia GT 1030 Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen 5 2400G/GT 1030
DDR4 Bandwidth 2400MHz 3200MHz 3200MHz 3200MHz
AC Unity/Medium/FXAA 15.7 16.3 19.8 21.6
Crysis 3/Medium/FXAA 28.8 33.7 36.2 47.3
Far Cry Primal/Normal/SMAA 22.9 24.3 29.9 30.1
Grand Theft Auto 5/High/FXAA 35.6 41.1 45.9 60.0
Rise of the Tomb Raider/Medium/SMAA 20.6 23.9 27.3 29.4
The Witcher 3/Medium/Post-AA 18. 8 21.1 25.8 25.5

Gaming with the Ryzen 3 2200G is a lot of fun if you’re into tweaking settings. Actually playing games rather than benchmarking them reveals that the 2200G can do a great job, and emphasises just how scalable most modern games are. In the video above, you’ll see our efforts here, and it’s a fascinating reminder that PC gaming isn’t all about high and ultra settings — you can still get good results by picking and choosing your battles. We ran the 2200G overclocked, but pared back memory bandwidth to 3000MHz at CL16 latency — specs that slash the cost of your memory kit significantly compared to the pricey GSkill FlareX AMD provided for review.

Destiny 2 at 1080p runs at around 30fps with a mixture of low, high and medium quality settings, and it’s a remarkable experience for such a lowly processor. Set the resolution scaler to 50 per cent (this actually quarters overall resolution to 540p) and you even get a decent level of consistency at the 60fps mark. It’s a bit blurry, and to be honest, we preferred playing with the game’s 30fps cap in place — but the bottom line is that 60fps offers that precision response you don’t get from console, and it’s great to see that delivered via a budget PC processor.

Another varying range of low, medium and high settings paired with a 75 per cent resolution scale locks Overwatch to 60fps, but most gratifying of all is the Titanfall 2 experience. Again, an a la carte approach to settings management is required, but paired with Respawn’s excellent temporal anti-aliasing and dynamic scaling, the locked 60fps performance level makes for a remarkably satisfying experience. If only all games could be made this way.

Rise of the Tomb Raider is a somewhat demanding game, but the 2200G just about carries it off with tweaked medium settings at 900p. It’s interesting to note here that CPU utilisation — even at 30fps — can max in this title’s most taxing areas. We strongly suspect it’s a factor of memory bandwidth being shared between CPU and GPU. Plugging in a Titan X Pascal and disabling the internal GPU effectively saw frame-rates double in the same challenging areas, even with quality settings ramped up to the max (where more complex scenes can incur a heavier CPU hit).

Overclocking produces some remarkable results: the 2200G at 1500MHz can sneak ahead of the Vega 11 graphics in the 2400G. Of course, the more expensive chip can be overclocked too but there’s not much extra gaming performance for the price premium.

Overclocking Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen 5 2400G
GPU Clock 1100MHz 1500MHz 1240MHz 1500MHz
AC Unity/Medium/FXAA 16.3 20.7 19.8 22.9
Crysis 3/Medium/FXAA 33.7 38.4 36.2 39.8
Far Cry Primal/Normal/SMAA 24. 3 31.0 29.9 33.9
Grand Theft Auto 5/High/FXAA 41.1 49.1 45.9 52.0
Rise of the Tomb Raider/Medium/SMAA 23.9 28.9 27.3 31.4
The Witcher 3/Medium/Post-AA 21.1 25.6 25.8 27.6

Beyond that, the most taxing of games may struggle, and the very nature of the APU set-up may cause issues for some titles. Crysis 3 at 900p on medium settings is a case in point. Remarkably, environments heavy on detail can cause frame-rates to drop under 10fps. However, spin around on the spot to look at a geometrically less complex area, and we’re up to 40fps. It’s situations like this that divide the 2200G from entry-level discrete GPUs, like Nvidia’s GT 1030. In some scenarios, the overclocked 2200G could keep pace with Nvidia’s £65/$80 entry-level dGPU, but titles with a particular liking for memory bandwidth, or where CPU and GPU compete too hard for that limited bandwidth will see a discrete GPU move ahead significantly.

It’s an observation that takes us onto our final range of tests: CPU performance with the APUs combined with a separate graphics card. Pricing-wise, the Ryzen 3 2200G effectively replaces the non-APU Ryzen 3 1200, while the Ryzen 5 2400G supersedes the Ryzen 5 1400X. Cinebench scores suggest that the more expensive APU can match Intel’s Core i3 8100 in single-threaded tasks, while trouncing it with multi-threading, while the 2200G is just a touch slower all-round (though overclocking brings it back into contention). However, equally, Ryzen has demonstrated a certain weakness in gaming in prior tests — a weakness it only overcomes by throwing more cores and more threads at the competition, as we saw when the excellent Ryzen 5 1600 beat out the Core i5 7600K.

To judge relative performance with a separate GPU, we overclocked a Titan X Pascal and ran games at 1080p resolution in order to ensure that we were CPU-limited in our testing as much as possible. Settings were kept as close to maxed as possible, ensuring that the most challenging game simulations were in play with the most draw-calls. The results are in line with expectations. Games like Far Cry Primal, which thrive on single-thread performance, see Intel pull ahead clock-for-clock, while the SMT support on the 2400G gives AMD a keen advantage over Intel in titles with heavily multi-threaded engines like Crysis 3 and Rise of the Tomb Raider.

SMT is a big deal for Ryzen. Without it, frame-rates suffer significantly: there’s a 28 per cent loss in performance in Crysis 3 going from 2400G to 2200G that can’t be explained by the cheaper chip’s slightly lower clocks. This is matched by a straight 20 per cent loss in Rise of the Tomb Raider and 24 per cent in The Witcher 3. Meanwhile, the i3 8100 dukes it out with the more expensive 2400G. Far Cry aside, it’s slower overall, but if you don’t need integrated graphics, it’s offering most of the 2400G’s performance at a much lower price point.

This shot from our Rise of the Tomb Raider CPU test sums up our thoughts, really. The Ryzen 5 2400G is better than Intel’s i3 8100 in threaded engines, but the 2200G falls short — mostly owing to its lack of SMT support.

CPU Performance Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G Core i3 8100
DDR4 Bandwidth 3200MHz 3200MHz 2400MHz
Cinebench R15 Single-Core 123 157 157
Cinebench R15 Multi-Core 580 837 609
AC Unity/Ultra High 100.3 109.2 107.3
Crysis 3/Very High 71.5 97.5 99.0
Far Cry Primal/Ultra 92.8 91.8 102.8
Rise of the Tomb Raider/Very High 65.6 82.0 77.1
The Witcher 3/Ultra 72.0 94.2 87.4

While the Ryzen 3 2200G doesn’t have the CPU horsepower to best Intel’s more expensive Core i3 8100 in gaming with a discrete GPU, it does have an integrated graphics solution that can actually play modern triple-A titles — and in this area, Intel simply cannot compete. Yes, with APU-based gaming, you need to tweak settings significantly and accept sub-1080p resolutions in many cases, but the results stand up and can look impressive. As an all-in-one entry level PC gaming solution, there’s nothing available out there at this price-point that’s capable of delivering the quality of those results. It’s a lovely package overall.

Paired with a separate graphics card, the 2200G holds up fairly well, but really, the Core i3 8100 is only a little more expensive, and can be run with much cheaper memory, cancelling out the 2200G’s price advantage. However, the fact that Intel still hasn’t been able to launch a budget board for its locked Coffee Lake processors gives AMD an undoubted edge at the time of writing, as does its policy of allowing overclocking — something Intel does not allow on parts like the 8100. We found that boosting GPU frequencies alone on the 2200G went a long way in improving performance and making more challenging titles viable.

The Ryzen 5 2400G is a more complex, less appealing proposition. The impact of its additional GPU power varies somewhat from title to title, and the faster CPU component does little to improve its ability to play games when paired with its integrated graphics solution (it’s a different story with a dedicated card, however). While the 2400G undoubtedly delivers a substantial boost in productivity tasks, in the here and now, it looks somewhat overpriced, especially if gaming is the focus. In an ideal world, the Ryzen 5 2400G would drop to £130/$150 and we’d see a new 2300G with SMT and Vega 8 graphics at £115/$130. The Ryzen 3 2200G can stay where it is: the pricing is excellent and the product is AMD at its best — it’s a real winner.

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G vs Ryzen 3 2200G: performance comparison

VS

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

We compared two 4-core desktop CPUs: the 3.6 GHz AMD Ryzen 5 2400G against the 3.5 GHz Ryzen 3 2200G. 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 5 2400G

51

Ryzen 3 2200G

49

Performance

Measure performance when all cores are involved

Ryzen 5 2400G

23

Ryzen 3 2200G

19

Power Efficiency

The efficiency score of electricity consumption

Ryzen 5 2400G

45

Ryzen 3 2200G

45

NanoReview Final Score

Generic CPU rating

Ryzen 5 2400G

43

Ryzen 3 2200G

40

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 2200G and 2400G

Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

  • 5% higher Turbo Boost frequency (3.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz)

Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs in benchmarks

Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+8%

1024

Ryzen 3 2200G

945

Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+35%

4840

Ryzen 3 2200G

3590

Passmark CPU (Single-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+5%

2174

Ryzen 3 2200G

2076

Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+29%

8757

Ryzen 3 2200G

6787

Geekbench 5 (Single-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+1%

923

Ryzen 3 2200G

913

Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)

Ryzen 5 2400G
+16%

3597

Ryzen 3 2200G

3094

▶️ 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 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G

General

Vendor AMD AMD
Released February 12, 2018 February 12, 2018
Type Desktop Desktop
instruction set x86-64 x86-64
Codename Raven Ridge Raven Ridge
Socket AM4 AM4
Integrated GPU Radeon RX Vega 11 Radeon Vega 8

Performance

Cores 4 4
Threads 8 4
Base Frequency 3. 6 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency 3.9 GHz 3.7 GHz
Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 36x 35x
L1 Cache 128K (per core) 128K (per core)
L2 Cache 512K (per core) 512K (per core)
L3 Cache 4MB (shared) 4MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier Yes Yes
Transistors 4.9 billions 4.9 billions
Fabrication process 14 nm 14 nm
TDP 65 W 65 W
Max. temperature 95°C 95°C
Integrated Graphics Radeon RX Vega 11 Radeon Vega 8
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 300 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 1250 MHz 1100 MHz
Shading Units 704 512
TMUs 44 32
ROPs 8 8
Execution Units 11 8
TGP 65 W 65 W
Max. Resolution 3840×2160 — 60 Hz 3840×2160 — 60 Hz

iGPU FLOPS

Ryzen 5 2400G

1.746 TFLOPS

Ryzen 3 2200G

1.13 TFLOPS

Memory support

Memory types DDR4-2933 DDR4-2933
Memory Size 64 GB 64 GB
Max. Memory Channels 2 2
Max. Memory Bandwidth 43.71 GB/s 43.71 GB/s
ECC Support Yes Yes
Official site AMD Ryzen 5 2400G official page AMD Ryzen 3 2200G official page
PCI Express Version 3.0 3.0
PCI Express Lanes 12 12

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors

Ryzen 5 2400G

19 (76%)

Ryzen 3 2200G

6 (24%)

Total votes: 25

Сompetitors

1.
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G vs AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

2.
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G vs AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

3.
AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G vs AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

So which CPU will you choose: AMD Ryzen 3 2200G or Ryzen 5 2400G?

Name

Message

Promotion

Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G — Valorant with RX 570 Benchmarks 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K Comparison

RX 570 with

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

Valorant

RX 570 with

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G


Ryzen 3 2200G
Ryzen 5 2400G

Multi-Thread Performance

7434 Pts

9273 Pts

Single-Thread Performance

1854 Pts

1926 Pts

Valorant

Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G in Valorant using RX 570 — CPU Performance comparison at Ultra, High, Medium, and Low Quality Settings with 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K resolutions

Ryzen 3 2200G
Ryzen 5 2400G


Ultra Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

96. 9 FPS

1080p

99.6 FPS

1440p

79.3 FPS

1440p

81.4 FPS

2160p

68.9 FPS

2160p

70.8 FPS

w1440p

79.3 FPS

w1440p

81.4 FPS

High Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

153.4 FPS

1080p

157.0 FPS

1440p

129.5 FPS

1440p

132.4 FPS

2160p

115.0 FPS

2160p

117.7 FPS

w1440p

129.5 FPS

w1440p

132.4 FPS

Medium Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

210. 0 FPS

1080p

214.5 FPS

1440p

179.8 FPS

1440p

183.5 FPS

2160p

161.1 FPS

2160p

164.5 FPS

w1440p

179.8 FPS

w1440p

183.5 FPS

Low Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

323.1 FPS

1080p

329.3 FPS

1440p

280.3 FPS

1440p

285.6 FPS

2160p

253.2 FPS

2160p

258.3 FPS

w1440p

280.3 FPS

w1440p

285.6 FPS

Ryzen 3 2200G
    Ryzen 5 2400G
    • The Ryzen 5 2400G has more threads. Larger programs are divided into threads (small sections) so that the processor can execute them simultaneously to get faster execution.
    • For some games, a cpu with a higher clock speed, or in a technical name IPC (Instructions per clock), has better results than other CPU’s with higher core count and lower core speed.
    • The Ryzen 5 2400G has a higher turbo clock boost. Turbo Boost is a CPU feature that will run CPU clock speed faster than its base clock, if certain conditions are present. It will enable older software that runs on fewer cores, to perform better on newer hardware. Since games are software too, it is also applicable to them.

    Compare Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G specifications

    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Architecture
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    Codename Raven Ridge Raven Ridge
    Generation Ryzen 3
    (Zen (Raven Ridge))
    Ryzen 5
    (Zen (Raven Ridge))
    Market Desktop Desktop
    Memory Support DDR4 DDR4
    Part# YD2200C5M4MFB YD2400C5M4MFB
    Production Status Active Active
    Released Feb 2018 Feb 2018
    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Cache
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    Cache L1 128K (per core) 128K (per core)
    Cache L2 512K (per core) 512K (per core)
    Cache L3 4MB (shared) 4MB (shared)
    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Cores
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    # of Cores 4 4
    # of Threads 4 8
    Integrated Graphics Radeon Vega 8 Radeon RX Vega 11
    SMP # CPUs 1 1
    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Features
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    MMX
    SSE
    SSE2
    SSE3
    SSSE3
    SSE4A
    SSE4. 1
    SSE4.2
    AES
    AVX
    AVX2
    BMI1
    BMI2
    SHA
    F16C
    FMA3
    AMD64
    EVP
    AMD-V
    SMAP
    SMEP
    Precision Boost
    MMX
    SSE
    SSE2
    SSE3
    SSSE3
    SSE4A
    SSE4.1
    SSE4.2
    AES
    AVX
    AVX2
    BMI1
    BMI2
    SHA
    F16C
    FMA3
    AMD64
    EVP
    AMD-V
    SMAP
    SMEP
    SMT
    Precision Boost
    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Performance
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    Base Clock 100 MHz 100 MHz
    Frequency 3.5 GHz 3.6 GHz
    Multiplier 35.0x 36.0x
    Multiplier Unlocked No No
    TDP 65 W 65 W
    Turbo Clock up to 3.7 GHz up to 3.9 GHz
    Voltage variable variable
    Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G Physical
    Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 5 2400G
    Die Size 210 mm² 210 mm²
    Foundry GlobalFoundries GlobalFoundries
    Package µOPGA-1331 µOPGA-1331
    Process Size 14 nm 14 nm
    Socket AMD Socket AM4 AMD Socket AM4
    Transistors 4950 million 4950 million
    tCaseMax unknown unknown

    Share Your Comments 0

    Compare Ryzen 3 2200G vs Ryzen 5 2400G in more games

    Elden Ring

    2022

    God of War

    2022

    Overwatch 2

    2022

    Forza Horizon 5

    2021

    Halo Infinite

    2021

    Battlefield 2042

    2021

    Assassin’s Creed Valhalla

    2020

    Microsoft Flight Simulator

    2020

    Valorant

    2020

    Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War

    2020

    Death Stranding

    2020

    Marvel’s Avengers

    2020

    Godfall

    2020

    Cyberpunk 2077

    2020

    Apex Legends

    2019

    Anthem

    2019

    Far Cry New Dawn

    2019

    Resident Evil 2

    2019

    Metro Exodus

    2019

    World War Z

    2019

    Gears of War 5

    2019

    F1 2019

    2019

    GreedFall

    2019

    Borderlands 3

    2019

    Call of Duty Modern Warfare

    2019

    Red Dead Redemption 2

    2019

    Need For Speed: Heat

    2019

    Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

    2018

    Battlefield V

    2018

    Call of Duty: Black Ops 4

    2018

    Final Fantasy XV

    2018

    Shadow of the Tomb Raider

    2018

    Forza Horizon 4

    2018

    Fallout 76

    2018

    Hitman 2

    2018

    Just Cause 4

    2018

    Monster Hunter: World

    2018

    Strange Brigade

    2018

    Assassin’s Creed Origins

    2017

    Dawn of War III

    2017

    Ghost Recon Wildlands

    2017

    Destiny 2

    2017

    PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds

    2017

    Fortnite Battle Royale

    2017

    Need For Speed: Payback

    2017

    For Honor

    2017

    Project CARS 2

    2017

    Forza Motorsport 7

    2017

    Ashes of the Singularity

    2016

    Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation

    2016

    Battlefield 1

    2016

    Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

    2016

    Doom

    2016

    F1 2016

    2016

    Hitman

    2016

    Rise of the Tomb Raider

    2016

    The Division

    2016

    Total War: Warhammer

    2016

    Overwatch

    2016

    Dishonored 2

    2016

    DiRT Rally

    2015

    Grand Theft Auto V

    2015

    The Witcher 3

    2015

    Rocket League

    2015

    Need For Speed

    2015

    Project CARS

    2015

    Rainbow Six Siege

    2015

    Battlefield 4

    2013

    Crysis 3

    2013

    Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

    2012

    League of Legends

    2009

    Minecraft

    2009

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G Core Frequency Scaling: An Analysis

    by Gavin Bonshoron June 20, 2018 10:05 AM EST

    • Posted in
    • CPUs
    • AMD
    • Zen
    • APU
    • Vega
    • Ryzen
    • Ryzen 5
    • Ryzen 3
    • Scaling
    • CPU Frequency
    • Ryzen 3 2200G
    • Ryzen 5 2400G

    29 Comments
    |

    29 Comments

    AMD Ryzen APU Core Frequency ScalingCPU PerformanceIntegrated Graphics PerformanceIntegrated Graphics Performance, ContDiscrete Graphics PerformanceDiscrete Graphics Performance, ContConclusions

    When AMD launched their first generation Ryzen-based APUs with a Zen cores and Vega graphics, both of the new parts entered the market at two very different budget-focused price points.  The Ryzen 3 2200G, sitting at $99 for a quad-core CPU with Vega graphics was an amazing feat, and Ryzen 5 2400G coming in at $169 became the new integrated graphics champion. In our run of performance analysis articles, the question being asked today are relatively simple ones: ‘how well do the new AMD Ryzen 2000 series APUs scale with core frequency’? We tested our APUs for standard benchmark performance, discrete gaming performance, and integrated graphics performance.

    Core Frequency Scaling on The Ryzen 2000 Series

    The perception when overclocking a CPU, or any other component for that matter, is that the increase in clock speed will directly correlate into better performance. The theory is pretty simple on paper, but the translation between the increase of clock rate and increase in performance can be a somewhat different story depending on the rest of the system or how the program is computed.

    As a result, a 25% increase in clock speed only really correlates to a 25% jump in performance for the most simple programs, as there are many other limiting factors to consider such as bottlenecks on graphics, memory performance, or stalls in the compute pipeline.

    Buy AMD Ryzen 5 2400G on Amazon.com

    In our testing for this article, we aim to go through and evaluate the differences and performance scaling at different frequencies on our APUs.

    AMD Ryzen 2000-Series APUs
      Ryzen 5 2400G
    with Vega 11
    Ryzen 3 2200G
    with Vega 8
    CPU Cores/Threads 4 / 8 4 / 4
    Base CPU Frequency 3.6 GHz 3.5 GHz
    Turbo CPU Frequency 3.9 GHz 3.7 GHz
    TDP @ Base Frequency 65 W 65 W
    Configurable TDP 46-65 W 46-65 W
    L2 Cache 512 KB/core 512 KB/core
    L3 Cache 4 MB 4 MB
    Graphics Vega 11 Vega 8
    Compute Units 11 CUs 8 CUs
    Streaming Processors 704 SPs 512 SPs
    Base GPU Frequency 1250 MHz 1100 MHz
    DRAM Support DDR4-2933
    Dual Channel
    DDR4-2933
    Dual Channel
    OPN PIB YD2400C4FBBOX YD2200C5FBBOX
    OPN Tray YD2400C5M4MFB YD2200C4M4MFB
    Price $169 $99
    Bundled Cooler AMD Wraith Stealth AMD Wraith Stealth

    Our previous articles covering the APU performance include a pure overclock analysis, as well as a detailed guide in delidding the processor for extra performance. We have a future article planned on memory performance.

    After delidding the processor, for better thermal performance

    For the testing, we took each of our APUs from 3.5 GHz to 4.0 GHz on the core frequency in 100 MHz jumps and performed our testing suite throughout. This correlates to a 14.3% performance jump overall, and matches the frequencies we saw in our overclocking articles. At each point we will compare to see if the performance uplift is even loosely correlated to CPU speed.

    Test Bed Setup

    As per our testing policy, we take a premium category motherboard suitable for the socket, and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory. With this test setup, we are using the BIOS to set the CPU core frequency using the provided straps on the MSI B350I Pro AC motherboard. The memory is set to the maximum supported frequency of DDR4-2933 with CAS latency timings of 18-18-18 within the BIOS to provide consistency throughout the different frequencies tested.

    Test Setup
    Processors AMD Ryzen 3 2200G AMD Ryzen 5 2400G
    Motherboard MSI B350I Pro AC
    Cooling Thermaltake Floe Riing RGB 360
    Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower Grand 1200 W Gold PSU
    Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V
    DDR4-3600 17-18-18
    2×8 GB
    1.35 V
    Integrated GPU Vega 8
    1100 MHz
    Vega 11
    1250 MHz
    Discrete GPU ASUS GTX 1060 Strix
    1620 MHz Base, 1847 MHz Boost
    Hard Drive Crucial MX300 1 TB
    Case Open Test Bed
    Operating System Windows 10 Pro

    We must thank the following companies for kindly providing hardware for our multiple test beds.

    Thank you to Crucial for providing us with MX300 SSDs. Crucial stepped up to the plate as our benchmark list grows larger with newer benchmarks and titles, and the 1TB MX300 units are strong performers. Based on Marvell’s 88SS1074 controller and using Micron’s 384Gbit 32-layer 3D TLC NAND, these are 7mm high, 2.5-inch drives rated for 92K random read IOPS and 530/510 MB/s sequential read and write speeds.

    The 1TB models we are using here support TCG Opal 2.0 and IEEE-1667 (eDrive) encryption and have a 360TB rated endurance with a three-year warranty.

    Further Reading: AnandTech’s Crucial MX300 (750 GB) Review

    Buy AMD Ryzen 3 2200G on Amazon.com

    Recommended Reading

    • Marrying Vega and Zen: The AMD Ryzen APU Review

    • Overclocking The AMD Ryzen APUs: Guide and Results

    • Delidding The AMD Ryzen APUs: How To Guide and Results

    CPU Performance
    AMD Ryzen APU Core Frequency ScalingCPU PerformanceIntegrated Graphics PerformanceIntegrated Graphics Performance, ContDiscrete Graphics PerformanceDiscrete Graphics Performance, ContConclusions

    Tweet

    PRINT THIS ARTICLE

    Ryzen CPU + Vega Graphics on a Chip: AMD Ryzen 5 2400G & Ryzen 3 2200G Review

    Updating its entry-level and mid-range product lines, AMD’s new Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G APUs are set to replace the company’s Ryzen 5 1400 and Ryzen 3 1200, and may even invalidate the R3 1300X and R5 1500X to some extent. Besides the revised CPU, what makes these new entry level chips special is that they come with integrated Radeon Vega graphics. We saw that working quite well a few months back on laptops, but unlike portable systems, there are far less constraints on the desktop.

    Codenamed Raven Ridge, the new chips are based on the same 14nm process as the original Ryzen, although AMD is marketing these as «14nm+» process, akin to the strategy Intel has used recently. What this essentially means is that the manufacturing process has matured to the point where they can dial up the clock speeds a little more and this is exactly what AMD has done here.

    Along with a frequency boost, Raven Ridge chips have a single CCX module, which is to say that they are limited to four cores (see our original Ryzen review if you’re lost). There are pros and cons to this design, with the key advantage being that the latency penalty when moving data between CCX modules is eliminated, though based on our own testing that hasn’t seemed like a big issue. The advantage for AMD is that they get the same amount of cores in an area that’s half the size.

    AMD’s Raven Ridge APUs at a glance













      Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen 3 2200G
    Price $169 $99
    CPU Cores/Threads 4 / 8 4 / 4
    Graphics Vega 11 Vega 8
    Base CPU Frequency 3.6 GHz 3.5 GHz
    Turbo CPU Frequency 3.9 GHz 3.7 GHz
    L2 Cache 512 KB/core
    L3 Cache 4 MB
    GPU Cores 704 SPs @ 1250 MHz 512 SPs @ 1100 MHz
    Compute Units 11 CUs 8 CUs
    RAM Support DDR4-2933
    TDP 46-65 W

    The disadvantage, on the other hand, is that you get less CPU overall. With one CCX module, Raven Ridge’s L3 cache gets cut down from 16MB to 8MB, but AMD decided to halve it again and these chips come with only a 4MB cache. Comparatively, the Ryzen 5 1400 had an 8MB L3 cache and the 1500X packed 16MB, the 2400G and 2200G will offer just 4MB. Now that doesn’t sound too encouraging but AMD believes they’ve been able to offset that reduction with higher clock speeds.

    However, reduced latency for the cache and memory purportedly offsets that capacity deficit and this is actually a result of having less cache and overall AMD believes that this is a net positive improvement for productivity workloads and in particular games which are more sensitive to memory latency.

    There’s also been some corner-cutting to reduce production costs. Raven Ridge only packs x8 PCI Express lanes, not 16 like the first-generation Ryzen CPUs. AMD has made this sacrifice as it doesn’t think it will impact performance for mid-range discrete graphics cards, and it’s unlikely that those with an APU will be upgrading to a GTX 1080 Ti any time soon so this makes sense.

    AMD says this reduction in PCIe lanes helps contribute to a smaller and more efficient «uncore» as well. Uncore is a term first used by Intel to describe aspects of the CPU that are not within the core but are closely connected to it for maximum performance. Things such as the L3 cache and on-die memory controller, for example.

    AMD has also saved money by using a non-metallic TIM for the 2400G and 2200G. We’re not sure if the company is using the same toothpaste as Intel, but we’ll test load temperatures to get an idea. Regardless, this confirms what we already suspected: Intel has been cheaping out on thermal paste to save on production costs and now AMD has been doing the exact same thing for its most affordable CPUs, though at least the company is admitting it and it also makes more sense on these budget chips.

    Raven Ridge parts also feature support for dual-channel DDR4-2933 memory, which is an important feature for these APUs as memory performance is of utmost importance for integrated graphics. Like the mobile parts, the desktop Raven Ridge CPUs sport Precision Boost 2 technology, which is basically just a more aggressive version of what was featured in the original Ryzen processors.

    And of course, the most notable change is the inclusion of Vega graphics. Connected to the CPU via the Infinity Fabric is a Vega chip featuring 11 CUs for the 2400G and 8 CUs for the 2200G. Clock speed is the main advantage to using the Vega architecture over Polaris, as the integrated graphics on both of AMD’s new chips operate at over 1000MHz and can be pushed to 1.5GHz or higher.

    Additionally, both parts have a thermal design power of 65 watts, though they can be configured down to 45 watts.

    We’ll be testing Raven Ridge on a B350 motherboard with 16GB of DDR4-3200 memory. First we’ll check application performance before moving onto gaming (with and without a discrete graphics card) along with some memory scaling performance. We’ll also be touching on overclocking, power consumption and operating temperatures so let’s get to it.

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G vs AMD Ryzen 5 2400G: What is the difference?

    55 BALLLA

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    48 BALLLA

    AMD RYZEN 5 2400G

    Winter when comparing

    VS

    64 Facts compared to

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G 9000 9000 Is 2200G better than AMD Ryzen 5 2400G?

    • 5.95% higher PassMark score (single)?
      2049 vs 1934
    • Has FMA4?

    Why is AMD Ryzen 5 2400G better than AMD Ryzen 3 2200G?

    • 4 more CPU threads?
      8 vs 4
    • GPU frequency 950MHz higher?
      1250MHz vs 300MHz
    • 40.02% higher PassMark score?
      9377 vs 6697
    • 0.2GHz higher turbo clock speed?
      3.9GHz vs 3.7GHz
    • Multithreaded?
    • 3 more GPU execution units?
      11 vs 8

    Which comparisons are the most popular?

    AMD RYZEN 3 2200G

    VS

    Intel Core i5-7400

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    AMD RYZEN 3 3200G 9000 5 2400G

    vs

    AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    vs

    AMD Athlon 200ge

    AMD RYZEN 5 2400G

    VS

    AMD RYZEN 5 2400GE

    AMD RYZEN 3 2200G

    VS

    AMD 5 5600g

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400000 VS AMD Ryzen 5000 VS AMD

    AMD RYZEN 3 2200G

    VS

    AMD A10-9700

    AMD RYZEN 5 2400G

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 Pro 4650g

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    VS

    AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD 5 2400G

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 3600

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    VS

    AMD Athlon Gold 3150U

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    VS

    VS 9000

    Intel Pentium Silver N5000

    AMD RYZEN 5 2400G

    VS

    Intel Core i5-7600

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    VS

    Intel Core i5-4570

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400 VS0003

    Intel Core i7-4790k

    AMD RYZEN 3 2200G

    VS

    AMD A12-9800

    Clanses

    total 2200G

    8. 5 /10

    6 Reviews of users

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    2 Reviews of users

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    8.5 /10

    2 reviews of users

    Functions

    Price and quality ratio

    /10

    6 Votes

    10.0 /10

    1 VOTES

    8.0 /10 9000 9000 VOTES

    7.5 /10

    2 Votes

    performance

    8.0 /10

    6 Votes

    7.0204 /10

    2 Votes

    Reliability

    8.3 /10

    6 Votes

    /10

    2 Votes

    Energy Efficiency

    8.5 /10

    9000

    1.CPU speed

    4 x 3.5GHz

    4 x 3.6GHz

    CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second a 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.

    2nd processor thread

    More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.

    3.speed turbo clock

    3.7GHz

    3.9GHz

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

    4. Has an unlocked multiplier

    ✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier 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 cache results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

    8.core L2

    0.5MB/core

    0. 5MB/core

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

    9.core L3

    1MB/core

    1MB/core

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

    Memory

    1.RAM speed

    2993MHz

    2933MHz

    Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

    2.max memory bandwidth

    43.7GB/s

    43.71GB/s

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

    3. DDR version

    DDR (Dynamic Dynamic Random Access Memory Double Data Rate) 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.maximum memory capacity

    Maximum memory capacity (RAM).

    6.bus baud rate

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 3 2200G)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    7. Supports memory debug code

    ✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    Memory debug 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. (AMD Ryzen 3 2200G)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    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. (AMD Ryzen 3 2200G)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    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 multi-threading.

    2. PassMark result (single)

    This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.

    3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    4.Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    5.Cinebench R20 result (single core)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    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)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    7. Blender test result (bmw27)

    680seconds

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    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)

    2339.7seconds

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    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. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    Features

    1.uses multithreading

    ✖AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    processor into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.

    2. Has AES

    ✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

    3. Has AVX

    ✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    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 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    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. (AMD Ryzen 3 2200G)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

    NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.

    7. Has MMX

    ✔AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✔AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

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

    8.Has TrustZone

    ✖AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    ✖AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    Technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and video streaming through Digital Rights Management (DRM) .

    9.interface width

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 3 2200G)

    Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 2400G)

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

    Price comparison

    Cancel

    Which CPUs are better?

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G vs Ryzen 3 2200G:

    performance comparison

    VS

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    Which is better: AMD Ryzen 5 2400G at 3.6 GHz (with Turbo Core up to 3.9) or Ryzen 3 2200G at 3.5 GHz (with Turbo Core up to 3.7)? To find out, read our comparative testing of these 4-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 -flow performance

    Rating in tests using one kernel

    Ryzen 5 2400G

    51

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    Multi -flow performance

    Tests in benchmarks where all nuclei

    Ryzen 5,0004 are involved 23

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    19

    Energy efficiency

    Efficiency of energy consumption by chip

    Ryzen 5 2400G

    45

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    45

    NanoreView

    Final rating

    RYZEN 5 2400G

    9000

    9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 Ryzen 3 2200 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 Ryzen 3 2200 9000 9000

    Key differences

    What are the main differences between 2200G and 2400G

    Reasons to choose AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    • 5% higher frequency in Turbo Boost (3. 9GHz vs. 3.7 GHz)

    Benchmark tests

    Compare the results of processor tests in benchmarks

    Cinebench R23 (single core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +8%

    1024

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    945

    Cinebench R23 (multi-core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +35%

    4840

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    3590

    Passmark CPU (Single Core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +5%

    2174

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    2076

    Passmark CPU (multi-core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +29%

    8757

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    6787

    Geekbench 5 (Single Core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +1%

    923

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    913

    Geekbench 5 (multi-core)

    Ryzen 5 2400G
    +16%

    3597

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    3094

    ▶️ Add your score to Cinebench R23

    Specifications

    AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G full technical specifications list

    General information

    Manufacturer AMD AMD
    Release date February 12, 2018 February 12, 2018
    Type Desktop Desktop
    Instruction set architecture x86-64 x86-64
    Codename Raven Ridge Raven Ridge
    Socket AM4 AM4
    Integrated graphics Radeon RX Vega 11 Radeon Vega 8

    Performance

    Number of cores 4 4
    Number of threads 8 4
    Frequency 3. 6 GHz 3.5 GHz
    Max. frequency in Turbo Boost 3.9 GHz 3.7 GHz
    Bus frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
    Multiplier 36x 35x
    Level 1 cache 128KB (per core) 128KB (per core)
    Level 2 cache 512KB (per core) 512KB (per core)
    Level 3 cache 4MB (shared) 4MB (shared)
    Unlocked multiplier Yes Yes

    Power consumption

    Number of transistors 4.9 billion 4.9 billion
    Process 14 nanometers 14 nanometers
    Power consumption (TDP) 65 W 65 W
    Critical temperature 95°C 95°C
    Integrated graphics Radeon RX Vega 11 Radeon Vega 8
    GPU frequency 300 MHz 300 MHz
    Boost GPU frequency 1250 MHz 1100 MHz
    Shader blocks 704 512
    TMUs 44 ​​ 32
    ROPs 8 8
    Compute units 11 8
    TGP 65 W 65 W
    Max. resolution 3840×2160 — 60Hz 3840×2160 — 60Hz

    Igpu Flops

    Ryzen 5 2400G

    1.746 Teraflops

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    1.13 Teraflops

    Support for memory

    9000 9000

    DDR4-2933 DDR4-2933 Max. size 64 GB 64 GB Number of channels 2 2 Max. bandwidth 43.71 GB/s 43.71 GB/s ECC support Yes Yes

    Other

    website

    Official site AMD Ryzen 5 2400G website AMD Ryzen 3 2200G
    PCI Express version 3.0 3.0
    Max. PCI Express lanes 12 12

    Poll

    What processor do you think is the best?

    Ryzen 5 2400G

    19(76%)

    Ryzen 3 2200G

    6 (24%)

    Total votes: 25

    Competitors

    1.
    AMD Ryzen 5 5600G vs. AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

    2.
    AMD Ryzen 3 3200G vs. AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    3.
    AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G vs AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

    What will you choose: AMD Ryzen 3 2200G or Ryzen 5 2400G?

    Name

    Message

    Test and Review: AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G New Mass Market APUs

    While laptop buyers have been enjoying the benefits of Raven Ridge APUs on the Zen architecture for weeks now, desktop users have had to be patient. But today Intel got a new competitor. Moreover, the impact of new APUs on the market may be even stronger than in the case of previously released Ryzen processors. The fact is that thanks to the built-in GPU, the Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G processors are perfect for those users who need an inexpensive office or multimedia computer. And there were no serious alternatives to Intel. It will be interesting to see how well the two APUs perform in practice.

    Of course, the Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G processors are ranked below the Summit Ridge CPU, but it’s not easy to compare with Intel. If you look only at the specifications, then the competitors from the Coffee Lake line can be called the Core i3, but also the Core i5. And if you go back to the Kaby Lake generation, then Core i5 and Core i7 are the opponents here. According to the latest rumors, the as yet unconfirmed Core i5-8300H will be up against the Ryzen 5 2400G.

    Raven Ridge for socket AM4

    Technically, the Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G are pretty close relatives of the Raven Ridge Mobile APUs, which we tested as a Ryzen 5 2500U in an Acer Swift 3 laptop. Basically, we have a successor to the Bristol Ridge desktop APUs. AMD itself is pointing to the Zen 1.5 architecture due to changes from the Summit Ridge CPU. By the way, you can get acquainted with the details of the Zen architecture in our review of the Ryzen 7 1800X.

    AMD has moved away from the modular concept. The Zen architecture once again relies on classic full-fledged cores. Each core contains four integer blocks with 168 registers, two FPUs, and two Load/Store blocks. APUs are manufactured using the 14nm process technology. It also supports technologies that AMD has collected under the SenseMI brand. Namely, a more subtle change in the frequency of the CPU with Precision Boost 2, monitoring various parameters to improve efficiency (Pure Power) and preloading data (Smart Prefetch).

    The differences between Raven Ridge Mobile and Raven Ridge Desktop are not explained in detail, although they are. It is easier to highlight the differences between the desktop Summit Ridge and Raven Ridge. The L3 cache has been reduced in size: in the case of Ryzen 3, 8 MB are available, for Ryzen 3 2200G only 4 MB is left. Depending on the model, Ryzen 5 was equipped with 8 or 16 MB, with Ryzen 5 2400G we also get only 4 MB. But the L2 cache remained unchanged, at 512 KB per core.

    Overview

    AMD Raven Ridge APU
    Model Cores
    Threads
    Base frequency /
    Boost
    L2 L3 GPU
    Ryzen 5 2400G 4/8 3.6/3.9 GHz 2MB 4MB Vega 11
    Ryzen 3 2200G 4/4 3.5/3.7 GHz 2MB 4MB Vega 8

    But we can draw parallels in terms of TDP, for both APUs we get 65 watts. The same goes for the number of cores and threads, socket. Another advantage of the APU is the official support for DDR4-2933 memory, in the case of Summit Ridge it was limited to DDR4-2666.

    The biggest difference from Summit Ridge is integrated graphics. AMD used its own Vega graphics, as with the Raven Ridge laptop APUs.

    Review AMD Raven Ridge GPU
    Model Compute Units Frequency Stream Processors
    Vega 8 8 1. 100 MHz 512
    Vega 11 11 1.250 MHz 704

    The Ryzen 3 2200G is a junior Raven Ridge desktop APU. The processor is equipped with four physical cores, but there is no SMT support, that is, four cores execute four threads in parallel. The L2 cache is 512 KB per core, which is 2 MB in total. L3 cache — 4 MB for all cores. The base frequency of the APU is 3.5 GHz, in Boost mode it increases to 3.7 GHz. The thermal package (TDP) is listed at 65 watts, but it can be reduced to 45 watts if needed. Vega 8 is responsible for the graphics with eight Compute Units, that is, we get 512 stream processors. The GPU operates at a frequency of 1.100 MHz, the GPU does not have dedicated memory.

    The Ryzen 5 2400G is only a step up. We get the same four cores, but thanks to SMT, the maximum number of threads running is eight. Also, a higher frequency indicates a higher CPU performance. The APU operates at a base frequency of 3.6 GHz, in Boost mode we get a frequency of up to 3.9 GHz. The GPU has also been beefed up, using Vega 11 with eleven CPU blocks. As a result, we get 704 stream processors, the AMD GPU frequency is set to 1.250 MHz. But the Ryzen 5 2400G runs at the same TDP. That is, 65 W remains the limit, if necessary, it can be reduced to 45 W.

    Test configuration

    Together with the new Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G APUs, AMD provided a Gigabyte GA-AB350N-Gaming WIFI motherboard in ITX format and 16 GB of DDR4-3200 memory (CL14-14-14-14- 34). We used a 750W Prime Ultra Titanium power supply.

    Windows 10 Pro (Build 1709) was installed on the system. AMD also provided Radeon Software 17.7 and graphics driver 17.4, plus version 1.2 of the Ryzen Master utility.

    All performance tests and power consumption measurements under load were performed at the «Max. performance» setting. To estimate idle power consumption, we used the balanced setting «Optimal performance». On the one hand, this allowed us to squeeze out the maximum performance in tests, as well as to estimate the peak power consumption. On the other hand, the system did not consume excess power when idle.

    We have run power consumption tests on the entire system, unless otherwise noted.

    All tests were performed with memory at the maximum official AMD frequency (DDR4-2933) and higher (DDR4-3200).

    Since we were using a completely new test system, some comparison tests had to be abandoned.

    <>Test and Review: AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G — New Mainstream APUs
    Benchmarks: Video and Audio Encoding

    Social Media
    Review Pages
    • Page 1: Benchmark and Review: AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G New Mass Market APUs
    • Page 2: Benchmarks: Video and Audio Encoding
    • Page 3: Benchmarks: 3D Rendering
    • 3 Page 4: Benchmarks: Data Compression and Encryption
    • Page 5: Benchmarks: Synthetic
    • Page 6: Benchmarks: Gaming
    • Page 7: Clock Speeds, Temperatures, Power Consumption
    • Page 8: Conclusion
    Tags

    AMD RYZEN RYZEN 5 2400G Ryzen 3 220G APU VEGA Zen Raven Raven Raven

    Comments (16)

    02/13/2018 16:29

    #7

    Dchekanov

    I am not with you. There is no engagement. There is independence. However, consider whatever you want.

    Quote — Reply

    Posts: 615

    Message dchekanov;29184
    There will be a separate test for games. While the firewood is raw and the AMD BIOS delays the gaming one. So the results are still raw. Everything is as usual.

    OK. I hope we will see only GPU overclocking in this test after replacing the thermal interface with ZhM? It makes no sense to drive the CPU because of the emphasis on 4 GHz (as other reviewers and owners found out).

    quote — reply

    02/15/2018 07:13

    #

    Registered: 01/28/2015
    Moscow
    Resident

    Posts: 615

    Message dchekanov;29186
    In general, do not expect miracles. Because of the total memory for games, the APU is not worth taking. In 1080, only on low settings something goes fine. So we are waiting for Core H, it will be more interesting.

    Core H will be of little interest to anyone because of the price. We recall your recent news about the NUC based on the Core H 8809, which costs under 1000 €, while the memory and drive must be purchased separately…

    quote — reply

    02/15/2018 07:23

    #10

    vorvort

    Registered: 01/28/2015
    Moscow
    Guest

    Posts: 615

    Message kachaev;29190
    Not a bit. At all. Positioning and price makes Core H inaccessible and uncompetitive in this price segment. Instead of Core H, it’s easier to take ryzen 1600/8400 and RX560/GTX1050Ti. And don’t sweat it.
    So 2200g and 2400G, like APUs, are much more interesting here. Breakthrough of the year — integration at the level of GT1030 (nominal) or RX550 (overclocking), with CPU performance that is not inferior to the competitor.
    I’m interested in something else — how can you, with such knowledge of the materiel and the level of brand engagement, keep the Russian page of hvdlux, which is quite biased in itself (see a selection of test programs for a review, etc. )? Engagement squared? As a result, the popularity of the resource is low. And no prospects…

    I would argue about bias, but the reviews have raised questions for many years due to the lack of screenshots of test monitoring or video, where there is a test stand and how the test itself was conducted.

    quote — reply

    02/15/2018 07:42

    #11

    The fact that AMD did not provide something there is its problem and nobody here is interested in it. On the same Anandtech, there are no problems with drivers and they have tested many games.

    quote — reply

    02/15/2018 08:45

    #12

    Message kachaev;29190
    Instead of Core H, it’s easier to take ryzen 1600/8400 and RX560/GTX1050Ti. And don’t sweat it. So 2200g and 2400G, like APUs, are much more interesting here. Breakthrough of the year — integration at the level of GT1030 (nominal) or RX550 (overclocking), with CPU performance that is not inferior to the competitor.

    Every gamer knows that today you need at least a GTX1050/Ti level card to play games. So for games, any adequate gamer will buy them.

    Quote — Reply

    Posts: 615

    Posted by Chipi;29214
    The fact that AMD didn’t provide something there is their problem and nobody cares here. On the same Anandtech, there are no problems with drivers and they have tested many games.

    On roovers, the reviewer said that AMD provided the platform for only 2 days. The PRO High Tech reviewer said the same thing. Otherwise, how idiotically AMD bosses are not
    call!
    Can you tell me nowhere on the Web that only the GPU was driven after replacing the thermal interface with ZhM? Interested in tests in games under this condition.

    quote — reply

    02/15/2018 02:58 PM

    #14

    kachaev

    Chipi’s message;29216
    Every gamer knows that today you need at least a GTX1050 / Titx1050 level card for games. So for games, any adequate gamer will buy them.

    Prywet, Chips. How is life young, sexual? How is your health?
    Again for all «adequate» you broadcast?

    quote — reply

    15.02.2018 17:34

    #15

    Message kachaev;29220
    Are you broadcasting for all «adequate» again?

    Only an inadequate will buy a misunderstanding of a level below the GTX1030 and will play on it. Everyone has had prots no worse than Ryzen for a long time. What’s the point of buying another one? It turns out that $200 buys an unnecessary CPU and an equally unnecessary GPU. It’s like chasing two hares and getting nowhere. Moreover, it’s not enough to buy only a percent here, you still need to back off for fast memory! Why is this nonsense needed if the GTX1050 is still twice as fast at a lower price and it comes out of the box with a faster set of memory?

    quote — reply

    2/16/2018 07:33

    #16

    vorvort

    Registered: 01/28/2015
    Moscow
    Guest

    Posts: 615

    Message Chipi;29222
    Only the inadequate will buy a misunderstanding of the level below the GTX1030 and will play on it. Everyone has had prots no worse than Ryzen for a long time. What’s the point of buying another one? It turns out that $200 buys an unnecessary CPU and an equally unnecessary GPU. It’s like chasing two hares and getting nowhere. Moreover, it’s not enough to buy only a percent here, you still need to back off for fast memory! Why is this nonsense needed if the GTX1050 is still twice as fast at a lower price and it comes out of the box with a faster set of memory?

    When upgrading, you will have to buy expensive memory anyway — both for Coffee and for Ryzen. And you incorrectly compare a subject with a game discrete card. Raven Ridge is an office solution or a base for a home media center, but not a game assembly for AAA projects. In MMORPG you can run comfortably on it, but not in AAA projects. For $169 he has no equal.

    quote — reply

    Log in to comment

    You might be interested in the following articles:
    • Best Intel and AMD Processor — Spring 2022

      2021/22 has been a very eventful year for processors. With the new Zen 3 architecture at the end of 2020, AMD was able to catch up with Intel, as well as take the lead in the number of cores in the high-end… [read more]

    • Test and review: Intel Core i9-12900K and Core i5-12600K -…

      Today, something that has been waiting for so long happened: Intel hit back at AMD, with which it is planned to overtake a competitor not only in single-threaded… [read more]

    • Test and review: Intel Core i5-12400 — fast and…

      A few days ago, Intel added 65W and 35W models to its earlier Alder Lake processors. Our test lab received a Core i5-12400 processor,… [read more]

    • Test and review: Intel Core i3-12100F — the best budget…

      Today we’re looking at a budget processor in the Intel Alder Lake line, namely the Core i3-12100F. If open multiplier K models are not required, then the Core i5-12400 in our tests … [read more]

    • Test and review: Intel Core i7-12700K is great.

      ..

      We’ve already tested the fastest and slowest K processor from the new Alder Lake lineup, today we’re rounding up the Core i7-12700K results. As we noted in the first… [read more]

    • Test and review: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D is a great upgrade…

      A little over a week ago, the first tests of the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, a processor with a 3D V-cache cache that is aimed at gamers, appeared on the Web. Meanwhile, the CPU began to appear in… [read more]

    AMD Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G (Raven Ridge) Integrated Graphics Processor (APU) Testing

    2017 Computer System Test Method

    A little less than a year ago, the first Ryzen family processors were presented to the general public, the processors of the Ryzen family, drastically changed the balance of power in the market. Initially, the company designed just one die, containing two «base elements» of the Zen architecture (CCX) with four dual-threaded processor cores and 8 MiB of L3 cache each. Representatives of the Ryzen 7 line were built on the basis of this crystal, where all its capabilities were used. Later, the company also released cheaper models of the Ryzen 5 family, where some of the processor cores and cache memory were turned off, but the crystals were the same. And they were also used in server solutions, as well as in the new HEDT platform — only in the amount of two or even four crystals per socket at the same time. In general, all the processors released by the summer were designed for powerful computers in the upper price segment, and even the simplest of them (Ryzen 5 1400) needed a discrete graphics card. And if you still buy a discrete video card, then it makes sense to buy is a good discrete video card — so that it can more or less cope with games. And a good discrete video card is expensive, and then there are miners … In a word, such solutions were good for top-end computers, but not for mass ones. And for laptops, strictly speaking, not really. But it would be difficult to expect the opposite — that one universal crystal is well suited for the entire market.

    Moreover, the second one was also expected — a little more complicated. It was planned to halve the power of the processor part in it, taking the vacant place with the graphics core, and powerful : for successful competition, you need to overtake rivals in some way, and there were solutions with “just graphics” on the market. And since the available integrated video accelerators were enough for most users, and problems arose only when trying to play, it was the games that were worth doing. Actually, this was the whole point of the “APU” class specially introduced by AMD. And just the processor part in the APU can be enough , especially since you have to compete with dual and quad-core Intel processors, so four cores (one CCX) may be enough. In any case, it will be much faster and more economical than the “old” 28nm APUs, but for successful competition today it was desirable to make the graphics part more powerful — and by and large it was even necessary: ​​the GCN architecture in APUs debuted back in 2014, and hasn’t changed much since then. At the beginning of 2017, AMD began to release information about the new Vega graphics architecture in parts, and it was decided to use it not only in discrete GPUs, but also in the integrated graphics of new APUs, which were originally planned for release in the second half of the year.

    However, apparently, the process turned out to be somewhat more complicated than planned, so that neither in the summer nor in the fall we saw new devices — even on paper. The budget Ryzen 3 companies eventually had to release everything on the same “older” crystal, leaving very little of it. The decision turned out to be strange, but relevant at that time, but with mass products, difficulties persisted. And, worst of all, the environment began to change. In particular, in early autumn, Intel released quad-core ultrabook processors of the Kaby Lake-R family, and in mid-autumn, desktop six-core Core i5 and Core i7 of the Coffee Lake family appeared, while Core i3 simultaneously became quad-core. Accordingly, it was no longer necessary to talk about the advantage or parity of the processor part of the still unreleased Ryzen APUs with the new Cores that have already appeared (with the exception of the CULV segment). As a result, the powerful graphics part of the new APUs once again turned from an additional one into a main competitive advantage. It only remained to bring it to mind, which was done by the end of the year, when the laptop Ryzen Mobile 5 2500U and Ryzen Mobile 7 2700U with a TDP of 15 W were announced. As expected, they overtook the Core U-series of the «seventh» generation, and lagged behind the «eighth» generation — the delay of several months turned out to be so critical. But in terms of integrated graphics performance, there is no comparison: not only Iris Plus has been left behind (which is still not in the «eighth» generation of Core — still), but also some models of discrete video cards.

    All the more interesting was the waiting for desktop APUs, finally over: since the beginning of this week, two models have started to go on sale, and at very «tasty» prices. The Ryzen 3 2200G looks especially cool, formally priced at $99 — it’s cheaper than any Core i3 with parity in the number of processor cores (both the 4/4 formula) and a more powerful GPU. But today we will not study market trends, but simply test newcomers and compare them with competitors.

    Test stand configuration

    Processor AMD Ryzen 3 2200G AMD Ryzen 5 2400G
    Core name Raven Ridge Raven Ridge
    Production technology 14 nm 14 nm
    Core frequency, GHz 3.5/3.7 3.6/3.9
    Number of cores/threads 4/4 4/8
    L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 256/128 256/128
    L2 cache, KB 4×512 4×512
    L3 cache, MiB 4 4
    RAM 2×DDR4-2933 2×DDR4-2933
    TDP, W 65 65
    GPU Vega 8 Vega 11
    MSRP at the time of announcement $99 $169

    So Ryzen APUs. Considering them as processors, one cannot fail to note a small step back: they have only one CCX (that is, no more than four cores), and it has also lost half of L3. In addition, the number of PCIe lanes available to a discrete video card has “halved”: like other APUs for AM4, there are only 8 of them, not 16. However, most computers (including desktops) today do without “discrete”, and especially you should not worry about connecting a video card in the case when we are dealing with processors with powerful integrated circuits, and the new APUs have them: RX Vega 11 and RX Vega 8 for older and younger models, respectively. Recall that, according to the current AMD naming system, the numbers mean the number of active execution units of the GCN architecture in the GPU. Discrete GPUs of this family are currently used in the Radeon RX Vega 64 and RX Vega 56 video cards — so, despite the same architecture, the quantitative characteristics of these solutions are, of course, different. In more familiar numbers, i. e., by the number of ALUs, everything is less clear: in Ryzen 3 there are 512 of them (as in the A12 family APUs), and in Ryzen 5 — already 704. For example, in the Radeon RX 550 discrete graphics card, the number of ALUs — also 512, and they operate at a frequency of 1100 MHz. Thus, the performance of the RX 550 is comparable to the Ryzen 3 2200G, and the Ryzen 5 2400G with its 704 ALUs at 1250 MHz can be faster. True, memory will most likely act as a limiter: in desktop systems, it runs at a frequency of 29 by default.93 MHz, while the same RX 550 has 7000 MHz. Moreover, a discrete video accelerator has its own memory, and in the case of an APU, you still have to share resources with processor cores. However, there is no real alternative to this option: a multi-chip assembly with HBM memory (as in Kaby Lake-G) is too expensive for mass production. On the other hand, “multimedia” (and not gaming) video cards still have about the same thing: say, the GeForce GT 1030 has a memory frequency of 6000 MHz, but a 64-bit bus, i. e. its memory bandwidth is comparable with those that have Ryzen APUs. This is where you need to get away from it.

    At the same time, it should be taken into account that AMD has slightly improved the peripheral capabilities of the new APUs: in particular, they no longer support 4 USB 3.1 Gen1 ports, but four Gen2, one Gen1 and another USB 2.0. In a compact system or in the same laptop, this may be enough even for a demanding user. True, for the full implementation of new features, appropriate boards are also needed. The company, in principle, announced an update to the AM4 platform and the appearance of 400-series chipsets this year, but there is no detailed information yet. Accordingly, for now, you will have to use new items in existing boards, which will not cause problems: you just need to update the BIOS. However, some features of the new «Ryzen with Radeon Vega Graphics» (such is their full title) will not be involved. For example, no boards for AM4 with HDMI 2.0 have been seen on sale yet. Previously, they were not needed, but now they will have to wait. We hope not for long.

    Processor Intel Core i5-7400 Intel Core i5-8400 Intel Core i7-5775C
    Core name Kaby Lake Coffee Lake Broadwell
    Production technology 14 nm 14 nm 14 nm
    Core frequency, GHz 3.0/3.5 2.8/4.0 3.3/3.7
    Number of cores/threads 4/4 6/6 4/8
    L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 128/128 192/192 128/128
    L2 cache, KB 4×256 6×256 4×256
    L3 cache (L4), MiB 6 9 6 (128)
    RAM 2×DDR4-2400 2×DDR4-2666 2×DDR3-1600
    TDP, W 65 65 65
    GPU HD Graphics 630 UHD Graphics 630 Iris Pro Graphics 6200
    Price

    Yandex. Market widget

    Yandex.Market 9 widget0003

    Yandex.Market widget

    In the meantime, let’s see how it works in comparison with other solutions — primarily with Intel processors. Unfortunately, we did not test the Core i3-8100 with integrated graphics, but now it was not at hand, but that’s okay — you can use the Core i5-7400, since these processors are very similar (i5-7400 is a little slower). At the same time, we can compare it with the Core i5-8400 under the same conditions. Yes, and the Core i7-5775C will come in handy — both for comparison with the i5-8400 (which we did, but only with a discrete video card), and as an example of the most powerful Intel processor in terms of GPU. It is clear, however, that this is a guest from a different price range.

    Processor AMD A10-9700 Intel Pentium G4620
    Core name Bristol Ridge Kaby Lake
    Production technology 28 nm 14 nm
    Core frequency, GHz 3. 5/3.8 3.7
    Number of cores/threads 2/4 2/4
    L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 192/64 64/64
    L2 cache, KB 2×1024 2×256
    L3 cache, MiB 3
    RAM 2×DDR4-2400 2×DDR4-2400
    TDP, W 65 51
    GPU Radeon R7 HD Graphics 630
    Price

    Yandex.Market widget

    Yandex.Market widget

    Another couple of Intel and AMD processors are participating «out of competition»: A10-9700 is an example of an old APU for AM4, and Pentium G4620 is an example of Pentium 🙂 In addition, the Pentium G4620 has almost the same video core (up to slightly different frequencies) as in both Core i5, which will allow you to evaluate how different processor parts affect gaming performance. It is clear that in this case it does not affect and cannot affect in any way — but we’ll just show it once again 🙂

    Processor AMD Ryzen 3 1300X AMD Ryzen 5 1400
    Core name Summit Ridge Summit Ridge
    Production technology 14 nm 14 nm
    Core frequency, GHz 3.5/3.7 3.2/3.4
    Number of cores/threads 4/4 4/8
    L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 256/128 256/128
    L2 cache, KB 4×512 4×512
    L3 cache, MiB 8 8
    RAM 2×DDR4-2667 2×DDR4-2667
    TDP, W 65 65
    Price

    Yandex.Market widget

    Yandex.Market widget

    It would also be difficult for us to do without the Ryzen 3 1300X (it has the same clock speeds as the Ryzen 3 2200G) and Ryzen 5 1400. True, they cannot be tested in the same form as the rest of the processors, since they have no integrated video. In this case, we simply took the results of this pair (and only!) obtained in a system with a GeForce GTX 1070 video card. Everything else in the tests was the same except for the memory frequencies: Intel processors were tested with the official supported frequency, and AMD processors with DDR4- 2933. However, for the new Ryzen, this is also just the standard frequency, and the old ones are already out of competition with us.

    Test methodology

    The methodology is described in detail in a separate article. Here we briefly recall that it is based on the following four pillars:

    • iXBT.com performance measurement method based on real applications of the 2017 sample
    • Methodology for Measuring Power Consumption in Processor Testing
    • Methodology for Monitoring Power, Temperature, and Processor Load During Testing
    • 2017 Sample Game Performance Measurement Methodology

    Detailed results for all tests are available as a complete results spreadsheet (in Microsoft Excel 97-2003 format). Directly in the articles, we use already processed data. This is especially true for application tests, where everything is normalized relative to the reference system (AMD FX-8350 with 16 GB of memory, GeForce GTX 1070 graphics card and Corsair Force LE 960 GB SSD) and grouped by computer application areas.

    iXBT Application Benchmark 2017

    On the example of a pair of Ryzen 3, where the frequencies are officially the same, we see that the «new» version (on one CCX and with half the L3) is slightly slower than the «old», but we are talking about some 5% , which can be neglected — 1300X is more expensive in itself, and cannot do without a video card. In a pair of Ryzen 5, these frequencies are different — in favor of the new model, so it is naturally faster. And comparable in performance to Core i7. But only with those designed for older platforms, such as LGA1150 or LGA1155, and operating at comparable clock speeds. In principle, for a processor cheaper than $200, this is a very good result. And the output of the “hundred-bucks” Ryzen 3 to the level of one-year-old Core i5 is also excellent — as we once again see the A10 at the end of its life, it has already ceased to catch up with the Pentium.

    These programs clearly imply that sometimes the «unity» of cache memory is more important than its capacity. However, this does not contradict everyday logic. As a result, however, more and more doubts begin to appear about the meaning of the existence of the Ryzen 3 1300X — after all, it is formally more expensive (which will be done even in a system with a discrete one), but sometimes not even faster than the new 2200G. In a pair of Ryzen 5 1400 / 2400G, the recommended prices are equal, but the second one is almost always faster due to higher frequencies — again, this is true even for a gaming system. In non-gaming, as a result, the quad-core Ryzen 3 and 5 generally lose their meaning of existence. However, we used to be of the opinion that «intelligent models» in the lineup start from 1600. But now there are no less intelligent, but cheaper processors of the family.

    This group of programs, however, is very «cash-loving», which allowed the Ryzen 3 1300X to look relatively good at least here. As far as it is applicable to quad-core processors without SMT, of course — after all, for working with video, it would be preferable to have more computational threads. And the cores too — since last year, all this has become more accessible to the average user. And the formula «4/8» already fits into $ 200 and without the need to purchase a discrete graphics card — this year’s achievement. Another question is that faster “6/6” appeared in the past, but here, after all, the GPUs are too different (which we will talk about in detail a little later).

    As we remember, one of the Photoshop filters greatly spoils the results of all processors without SMT, regardless of the number of physical cores, so here the Ryzen 5 1400 / 2400G continue to overtake the Core i5-8400. But, in general, in a head-on collision «core to core — thread to thread», the performance of AMD processors in the group is still somewhat lower than that of Intel solutions. On the other hand, for domestic use in the current generation, it is quite sufficient . It used to be much worse, which is clearly seen in the example of A10-9700. Ryzen is still a different level where you can stop.

    Once again, we see that, despite the «big leap» a year ago, Ryzen processors can consistently overtake Core only if there is a head start in the form of «extra» cores. Or, at worst, computation threads. For most of 2017, at a comparable price, this was done — it stopped in the fall. AMD’s price cuts compensated for the situation only for systems with discrete graphics cards, and today we are considering APUs. However, their release at least strengthened the company’s position — the 2400G itself costs less than a couple of months ago it was “recommended to take” for 1400, and you can save on a video card, and the performance is even higher. Yes, and when comparing the Ryzen 3 2200G with the 1200, it would be similar — the 1300X is slightly ahead, but it continues to be a noticeably (in this segment) more expensive solution.

    The reduced L3 pulls back, but its execution in the form of a single block is a little forward. In general, the new solutions are no worse than the old ones, at least. And that the version of WinRar used is still not too favorable to Ryzen — we have long known. Let’s see what will change in the new ones. But, again, in any case, earlier APUs for this platform worked two times slower, and were not much cheaper. So this is a step forward.

    In this group, too, we cannot yet speak of direct competition with the modern family of Core processors, although the difference is not so great. As for the range of AMD itself, the new APUs are no worse than the old processors and much better than the old APUs (in both cases, the prices are quite comparable). Which is enough.

    And the overall result is similar to the private ones: 2200G is a complete replacement for 1200, and 2400G is 1400. The user gets the graphics for free. In this regard, the Ryzen 3 1300X and Ryzen 5 1500X are also starting to look strange — you will have to pay more for them, without getting almost anything in return (already). Theoretically, they can work a little better with a discrete video card, since they support a «full» PCIe x16, and two «discrete» ones can already somehow serve — in practice, we see no reason to consider something lower than Ryzen 5 1600 for such applications: surcharge against the background of the cost of the video card is insignificant. Now, if the G-series did not overclock, such an approach could be understood: like the Black Edition at one time with a kind of surcharge. However, in practice, new models can also be overclocked, and to the same level as the old ones. In principle, this can also be useful for intercompany competition: since the overclocked Ryzen 3 2200G has a chance to catch up with the Core i3-8100. The Ryzen 5 2400G is more difficult — however, at least the level of not the oldest Core i7 can be achieved. In principle, even in normal mode, the processor is a little faster on average than the Core i7-3770K — for a device priced under $200, this is a good result. Which would be generally excellent if the Core i5-8400 did not already appear on sale, which will not be able to catch up even during overclocking — even if the buyer does not care about power consumption. By the way, about the last one.

    Power Consumption and Energy Efficiency

    As you can see, the power consumption of Ryzen APUs is still higher than current Cores, but much lower than AMD’s early «pure» processors. True, the full power consumption also implies the power supply of the video card through the PCIe slot (recall: we took the test results of Ryzen 3 1300X and Ryzen 5 1400 with a discrete video card), but in a real system it will not be possible to get rid of the video card in their case, so «everything is — honest. And yet, just in case, let’s look at the net consumption through the EPS12V connector, which formally serves only the processor.

    Here it is already difficult to talk about the victory of the Ryzen 5 2400G over its predecessor, since it also needs to “feed” the GPU with something. But the Ryzen 3 2200G is still doing well — apparently, we once got a not very successful copy of the Ryzen 3 1300X. But there are also interesting general trends. Firstly, consumption has decreased at minimum load — this is very good, since modern desktop processors spend a lot of time in this mode (and some other significant part even in idle time, but it is not at all interesting to “measure” it). Secondly, the addition of a couple of cores in Intel processors was not painless: if the younger quad-core Core i5s could be de facto classified as an energy-efficient family (we ourselves experienced that the actual power consumption of the Core i5-6400 was lower than that of the Core i5- 6600T; performance, however, also turned out to be lower), then this does not apply to six-core machines. In any case, this is how things are for the first wave, which, apparently, is the reason for the release of niche (i.e., desktop) processors of this family earlier than the more popular laptop ones. However, their wait is also almost over.

    In general, the energy efficiency of the new processors is slightly higher than that of the old ones, but this is quite expected, since we tested the old processors together with a discrete video card 🙂 On the other hand, the energy efficiency has not deteriorated, despite the increased frequencies. Other «features» of crystals that were previously «not a pity» to start up on Ryzen 3 are also clearly visible, but now they have nowhere to come from.

    iXBT Game Benchmark 2017

    However, the mass version of the Intel video cores in this case is a little slower than the limit determined by the game, but the built-in Ryzen Vega is more than enough. The case when you can safely start to «twist the settings.»

    Somehow GPUs of mass processors for LGA1151 started to cope with this game in low resolution, however, is not a ride, but a squirming 🙂 … The new Ryzen can easily and safely withstand Full HD. At minimum settings, of course, but this is not surprising — by turning up the quality, here you can also “fill up” the GTX 1070 by forty-odd frames per second.

    No integrated GPUs were previously compatible with this game. Now here’s a couple who deal with it. Ryzen 3 2200G, however, is formally not enough, but you can somehow play RTS with such a frame rate. Exactly what at least somehow — you can’t call a comfortable gameplay, and 2400G still, strictly speaking, does not provide it. However, this was not even close before. Do you want a beautiful picture with an acceptable speed? In this game, only discrete graphics cards of the GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 470 and higher level will provide this. Therefore, the fact that somehow works on some integrated GPUs is already a great achievement 🙂 comfort in HD resolution. Our detailed research at one time showed that with a further decrease to 1280 × 800 on A10, you can already play more or less tolerably. However, since yesterday, all this is of historical interest — the new Ryzen cope with the minimum settings with a margin. Ryzen 5 2400G in Full HD even exceeded 30 FPS, and Ryzen 3 2200G at this resolution copes no worse than the former leaders with HD.

    A couple of cores is enough for the game, but the requirements for the GPU are quite high even when set to the minimum quality. As a result, earlier only the best integrated solutions met its requirements, and even then — in a reduced resolution. The new «insert» based on Vega, even in Full HD, demonstrates higher performance than the former leaders in HD (once again), so this situation does not need detailed comments.

    In principle, ring races are not particularly dynamic, so 20-25 FPS is enough for them. It would seem a little — but until recently, no integrated GPUs provided such a level of performance in this game, even in HD resolution, at best, only approaching the lower limit of comfort. The new Ryzen have the necessary performance — and you can even not reduce the resolution too radically. In any case, this is true for the Ryzen 5 2400G — the Ryzen 3 2200G is slightly slower, but not essential. And for HD-resolution it is enough without reservation.

    The minimum (and recommended) system requirements of this game are almost the same as those for Ashes of the Singularity, but in practice it is somewhat lighter — which allowed it to feel relatively tolerable on older APUs or Intel Iris. But (also similar to AotS) the performance of the desktop Ryzen G-series is about twice as high as the once best level, so even in Full HD you can start thinking about increasing the picture quality.

    Another pair of games with «heavy» graphics — and again, the new APUs are about twice as fast as the old ones. However, this still does not allow you to use full resolution — but at least you can try to play at a reduced one. And before it was impossible.

    «Relaunching» the game in 2016, despite graphics updates, did not increase its requirements for computer power too much — a common thing for multiplatform projects that were originally «sharpened» for five-year-old consoles. However, it does not follow from this that it was so easy for integrated graphics — not at all: except that Iris «pulled» FHD, and then somewhere on the lower limit of comfort. And for new APUs, this task is more than feasible. Also on the «minimal», of course, but with some margin of performance to increase the resolution and / or picture quality.

    The integral result looks like this. It is easy to see that the performance of new APUs when tested according to the 2017 sample method is approximately equal to that demonstrated by the best old ones in the previous set of games. That is, there were no fundamental changes in the market, just integrated graphics, having “marched” for three years in place, “tightened up” following the general progress. Accordingly, the number of games available to the buyer of new processors has increased significantly, but integrated graphics still cannot cope with all the games at least with the minimum picture quality in Full HD. So a real gaming computer, as before, could not do without a discrete graphics card, and now it cannot. And it is unlikely that he will ever be able to. In any case, for now, its price will correspond to the possibilities, because only a “real gaming” video card costs at least comparable to Ryzen 5, and you still have to buy a processor for it. And there is simply no bundle that can, for example, completely replace the Ryzen 3 2200G, taking into account the price, on the market.

    Total

    Unfortunately, the first thing to remember is the saying: the cost of a spoon for dinner is If these processors appeared in the summer or early autumn, and even at such prices, it would be a sensation. After all, all that would then be required from the Ryzen 5 2400G was to have performance at the level (or even slightly lower) of the Core i5-7400, and not the Core i5-8400. But the latter came out in the fall and set a new performance bar for around $200 solutions. AMD Responds By Lowering Ryzen 5 1600 MSRP To $189, which is only slightly higher than the CRP of $182 for the Core i5-8400 (which, recall, is about 15% slower), but it only “warms up” those who are still planning to purchase a discrete video card. An integrated video core with two CCXs in one chip is incompatible, and one CCX limits the number of cores to four. As a result, to the level of the Core i5-7400 (which, recall, is slower than the new Core i3-8100), you need to try to «jump» not Ryzen 5, but Ryzen 3 — which he cannot. Until the fall of last year, all Ryzen 3 quietly overtook the then Core i3, but the “eighth” generation that did not have time to appear in the past months.

    And then AMD has to «play» an already boring game: let the processor be slower, but cheaper and the graphics are more powerful than . At least formally so. On the other hand, the Core i3-8100 is not doing well on the market yet: it appeared only in December, and there are still no inexpensive boards for the second version of LGA1151 at all. In addition, suppliers also have solid stocks of Core i3 / i5 of the previous generations (“seventh” and even “sixth”), as well as boards for them, which must somehow be able to sell. Despite the fact that prices for processors in Intel have not been officially reduced, which greatly complicates the price maneuver on the part of sellers. As a result, in stores, the Ryzen 5 2400G has every chance to compete with, for example, the Core i5-6500, and the Ryzen 3 2200G often turns out to be a direct “competitor” of the Core i3-7100 or, at best, i3-7300. It is clear that in this situation, there is no need to talk about “slower”: everything is still faster. Although this is a temporary situation, it has not been possible to get away from it at the moment.

    Taking into account the «cheaper», the new processors are doing well against the background of the latest Core — especially since the x86 part is no longer as «slower» as in early APUs (in fact, of all generations). The Ryzen APU’s performance level for home use is sufficient, and power consumption (again for the first time) is normal. Strictly speaking, this is the level of Core i5/i7, if not the newest ones, despite the fact that there are still owners of Core 2 Quad or even Athlon II (and not only X4) that have enough. We are not talking about the same older FX processors, which alone consumed as much energy as a normal computer as a whole, but were not supplied with a graphics core.

    The Ryzen APU graphics core is the best on the market, except for Kaby Lake-G (but this is a SiP assembly of several crystals, including a discrete GPU with its own memory, and such models cannot be cheap). In this case, we get an inexpensive solution, which does not suffer from internal competition, as it was in the days of the first A10, which cost comparable to Athlon paired with a conditionally gaming discrete video card. AMD made the right conclusions: other things being equal (or close) the buyer is not against a more powerful GPU, but it is impossible to force him to seriously pay extra for the latter. As a result, new APUs cost almost the same as processors with similar characteristics without integrated graphics. Of course, now you can buy some Athlon X4 950 with a GeForce GT 1030, but even compared to the Ryzen 3 2200G, this will be a weaker solution in all respects.

    The new models are therefore very good in their place. The only pity is that there are only two of them: “up” scalability is impossible for obvious reasons, but “down” will be interesting over time. This will allow, for example, to produce processors with the performance of the same Pentium, but with slightly more powerful graphics — at least at the level of the current A10. Yes, and the release of models with a reduced TDP is an expected phenomenon: as a result, it will be possible to acquire an inexpensive compact computer that can, nevertheless, be used as a gaming one. Of course, such a computer will not be able to handle PC-exclusives in maximum quality, but there are already a lot of games that will work tolerably on such platforms, and new ones continue to appear. For example, Sonic Forces, released on November 7, 2017, is perfectly worn on the Iris Pro 6200 in HD resolution (at the minimum, of course, but the graphics and gameplay in the «hedgehog» series are such that it makes no sense to care much about the quality of the picture) — which means that on the new AMD APUs the game will work perfectly in Full HD (or even higher resolution). And this is not the only example of what Ryzen APUs can come in handy for — both present and future.

    Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G processor review: with Vega graphics at the ready

    Expanding its Ryzen processor lineup, AMD recently introduced Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen Ridge processors. At the same time, the new chips, in addition to the Zen computing cores, are also equipped with integrated graphics with the Vega architecture. Let’s evaluate the capabilities of universal APUs, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the new chips, along the way comparing the performance with those for likely Intel competitors.

    • 13.1 Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G provided by AMD, www.amd.com
    • 13.2 Core i3-8100 provided by Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua

    900 AMD2

    Almost a year after the announcement of the successful Summit Ridge processors, which allowed AMD to return to the serious game in the desktop CPU market, the company is looking to expand the scope of Zen chips and consolidate the success of the Socket AM4 platform. The release of Raven Ridge APUs is one such opportunity. Recall that earlier systems with Ryzen 3/5/7 required a discrete graphics card. AMD already had Bristol Ridge chips in its arsenal, but architecturally these are already age-old processors made using 28-nanometer technology, and in terms of performance they can only be attributed to entry-class solutions.

    That’s why it was very interesting to finally see processors with Zen+Vega bundle in AMD assortment. Such «hybrids» have always been a strength of the developer and an irritant for the main competitor.

    The presented Raven Ridge models belong to the two thousand series Ryzen, although these processors are manufactured according to the 14-nanometer process technology. Curiously, when using a single 4-core CCX module and integrated graphics, the resulting silicon die area and the number of transistors used are almost identical to those for 8-core Ryzen without a GPU. For Raven Ridge it is 210 mm² and 4.94 billion, while Summit Ridge uses a 218 mm² wafer containing 4.8 billion transistors.

    Visually evaluating the structure of the Raven Ridge die, it can be seen that the 4-core CCX module and the Radeon Vega graphics core occupy almost equal area. The manufacturer managed to integrate CPU blocks and a relatively powerful GPU on one silicon wafer. In the full version, the video core includes 11 execution units, containing a total of 704 stream processors.

    To unify the production process of mobile and desktop APUs, and also trying to reduce the cost of manufacturing processors, AMD used for Raven Ridge not solder, but a thermoplastic interface to connect the chip with the top heat distribution cover. The thermal conductivity of thermal paste is lower than that of low-melting solder, but according to the developers, such an interface is acceptable for this category of chips. Let’s see how this decision will work in practice.

    There are no architectural changes in the new processors at the level of computing cores, however, Raven Ridge chips have 4 MB of L3 cache, while Summit Ridge’s predecessors had twice as much — 8 MB. The manufacturer compensated for the decrease in L3 with increased operating frequencies, as well as a slight decrease in buffer latency. In addition, the use of one CCX module for 4-core processors, rather than two halves from different clusters, will have a certain positive effect. This will reduce the delay in internuclear interaction. In the process of synchronization between x86 blocks, there will be no dependence on the internal Infinity Fabric bus. The resources of the latter will be fully utilized for the exchange of data between the CPU and GPU, and the accompanying piping.

    Raven Ridge features 8 available external PCI Express 3.0 lanes instead of 16 for Summit Ridge. In a sense, this is a loss, but let’s not exaggerate its significance too much. The bandwidth of PCI-E 3.0 x8 is more than enough to synchronize with any top-end video card. Yes, SLI configurations will have to be abandoned, but Raven Ridge is unlikely to be seen in systems with multiple video cards.

    One of the nice features of the new APUs is the improved dual-channel memory controller. Raven Ridge officially supports DDR4-2933 and these are the first consumer processors with a similar standard mode. Recall that for Summit Ridge this is DDR4-2666, Coffee Lake chips from Intel also have guaranteed DDR4-2400/2666.

    The new chips also have improved dynamic auto-overclocking technology. The Precision Boost 2 algorithm is optimized for more efficient use of processor resources in conditions with a variable number of processed threads. For Ryzen 1xxx chips, auto overclocking actually uses two states. One frequency value is set at a load of 1-2 cores, the second — at a load of 3 or more cores. Now intermediate options are available to processor units.

    Ryzen 2xxxG lineup

    At launch, the Raven Ridge lineup of chips includes two models — Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G. Both processors use one CCX (CPU Complex) compute module with four x86 cores. Functionally, the block is virtually identical to those used for Ryzen processors without integrated graphics (Summit Ridge). The only difference is that the L3 cache here is 4 MB instead of 8 MB.

    Ryzen 3 2200G has 3.5/3.7 GHz operating frequencies. Whereas the older model, in addition to a more aggressive frequency formula (3. 6 / 3.9GHz) also supports SMT logical multi-core technology, allowing the processor to process up to 8 data streams simultaneously.

    family

    Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen 3 2200G
    Raven Ridge Raven Ridge
    Production technology 14 nm 14 nm
    Number of cores/threads 4/8 4/4
    Frequency formula 3. 6/3.9 GHz 3.5/3.7 GHz
    L2 cache size 4×512 KB 4×512 KB
    L3 cache size 4 MB 4 MB
    Memory support DDR4-2933 DDR4-2933
    Integrated graphics Radeon RX Vega 11 (11 CU, 704 units) Radeon RX Vega 8 (8 CU, 512 units)
    Processor socket Socket AM4 Socket AM4
    Unlocked multiplier + +
    Thermal pack 65 W 65 W
    MSRP at time of announcement $169 $99

    Both APUs are also equipped with relatively powerful video cores. Ryzen 3 2200G received Radeon Vega 8 graphics, consisting of 512 stream processors operating at 1100 MHz. The FP32 has a claimed compute performance of 1,126 TFLOPS.

    For the older model, all available integrated GPU units are used. The graphics processor Ryzen 5 2400G is called Radeon Vega 11. It includes a total of 704 computers (up to 1250 MHz) and offers a theoretical processing power of 1.76 TFLOPS. For the graphics part, the fifth generation GCN (Graphics Core Next) architecture is used — the same as for the top discrete Radeon RX Vega 56/64 graphics cards.

    Despite the relatively powerful built-in GPU and high clock speeds of the processor part, the manufacturer managed to keep within the 65 W TDP. Although, in the context of Raven Ridge, this value is very variable. Hybrid chips were initially developed taking into account mobile needs in order to be able to flexibly adjust the number of functional blocks, operating frequencies and supply voltages.

    In the context of desktop processors, in our opinion, the possibilities for expanding the range of Raven Ridge are limited. Considering the structure of the crystal, the manufacturer is unlikely to go for an increase in CPU computing units. That is, we are not talking about the appearance of 6- or 8-core processors with integrated graphics in the foreseeable future.

    More affordable Raven Ridge models don’t look realistic either. It is unlikely that the manufacturer will «devalue» the Ryzen series, releasing, for example, dual-core APUs. And reducing the number of Vega computing units seems to be an inefficient way to reduce the cost of manufacturing chips.

    Platform

    AMD has repeatedly stated that the current Socket AM4 desktop platform will be relevant until at least 2020. Therefore, it is not surprising that Raven Ridge chips are compatible with all motherboards with the corresponding processor socket.

    The range of devices for Socket AM4 is very wide. According to the manufacturer, at the end of 2017, manufacturers offered more than 120 diverse models. From the most affordable devices based on the AMD A320 chipset for $60 to the top-end, maximum-equipped models based on the AMD X370 costing over $300.

    Newer APUs require a firmware update to work. Without a fresh BIOS version, the platform will almost certainly not start. This must be considered before buying a Ryzen 3 2200G or Ryzen 5 2400G.

    To update the BIOS, you will need to use one of the Summit Ridge or Bristol Ridge family models. What is the algorithm of actions in case such a processor is not at hand? First of all, you should first ask the retailer if they can provide such a service. Large market players with their service points will certainly meet halfway. If they cannot help you locally, you will have to contact the service center of the manufacturer whose motherboard you have chosen for your system. The service will be free, but if there is no official service in your locality, you will have to spend money on sending the fee.

    Anticipating some inconvenience with firmware updates, the manufacturer offers a special assistance program for some regions. If necessary, AMD will send A6-9500 processors to Raven Ridge owners, which can be used to update the motherboard firmware. Alas, such a program does not work in Ukraine.

    In practice, the MSI B350I PRO AC board used in the test was flashed initially. But this is an exception to the rule. In most cases, the firmware will need to be updated.

    During the preparation of the material, we also tried the ASUS TUF B350M-PLUS GAMING board, which came to us from the distributor’s warehouse, that is, in the form in which the devices are available to retail customers. Here, to work with Raven Ridge, it was necessary to update the BIOS, in our case, from version 0902 to 3803. The microcode is available on the manufacturer’s website, but, again, without a processor with which the board will start, flashing will not work. If Ryzen of the Summit Ridge family is used for these purposes, then a discrete graphics card will also be temporarily needed.

    A combination of Raven Ridge and an AMD B350-based board will look natural. Models based on this chipset allow you to experiment with overclocking processor cores, integrated graphics and use high-speed memory kits. If you plan to use the resources of the integrated Vega 8/11, you should make sure that the video outputs of the appropriate format are available on the board. Please note that a number of motherboards for the Socket AM4 platform do not have video outputs, in which case Raven Ridge can only be used with a discrete video card.

    Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G

    The new processors come in a package that is very similar to that used for the Summit Ridge chips.

    At the same time, there is a noticeable mention on the top edge of the front panel of the box that this processor contains Radeon Vega graphics. Already by this feature of the external design, it is easy to distinguish Raven Ridge processors from their predecessors.

    Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G processors come with a Wraith Stealth cooler. This is the base model of the air cooler offered for the lower models of the Ryzen family. 300 gram radiator block with 92mm axial fan. A simple but effective design is a good option for a regular cooler.

    To install the Wraith Stealth, you will need to remove the plastic brackets on the motherboard that are provided for other ways to mount coolers. The AMD Starter Cooler is fixed with pre-installed screws.

    In the kit, you can find a message about the compatibility of the processor with motherboards for Socket AM4, but only after updating the BIOS. For those who like to decorate the case of their system with branded stickers, a pair of original stickers with the logo of the Ryzen 3/5 series and Radeon Vega Graphics has been prepared.

    Visually, the processors themselves do not differ from other chips for the Socket AM4 platform except for the designation.

    Ryzen 3 2200G has a base operating frequency of 3500 MHz, Ryzen 5 2400G starts at 3600 MHz. Both models are equipped with 4 MB L3 cache, while the older APU supports SMT technology.

    MSI B350I PRO AC BIOS has a Core Performance Boost option enabled by default. In this case, Ryzen 3 2200G accelerated up to 3700 MHz even with a load on all cores, and Ryzen 5 2400G — up to 3900 MHz, respectively. A sort of free overclocking that does not require user intervention. However, to evaluate the actual capabilities of processors in normal mode, this parameter was disabled.

    The Ryzen 3 2200G is equipped with Vega 8 integrated graphics with 512 compute units and 32 texture units. The integrated GPU runs at 1100 MHz. The older model has a more powerful video core — Vega 11. In the complete set, the module contains 704 stream computers and 44 texture units. In normal mode, the video core accelerates to 1250 MHz (on the GPU-Z screen — 1240 MHz). In both cases, in idle mode, the GPU frequency is reduced to 400 MHz.

    The memory bandwidth directly depends on the mode of operation of the system RAM. As you can see, when using a dual-channel DDR4-3200 kit, the peak memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s. If you use the DDR4-2400 set, the value will be more modest — 38.4 GB / s. If we compare these figures with those for basic discrete video cards, then, for example, the GeForce GT 1030 with GDDR5 chips has a memory bandwidth of 48. 06 GB / s. Here, although GDDR5 chips are used, operating at an effective 6000 MHz, the speed is limited by a slow 64-bit bus. But the Radeon RX 550/560 has a 128-bit memory bus, and the final memory bandwidth is 112 GB / s. Similar memory bandwidth and solutions from the competing camp — GeForce GTX 1050/1050 Ti.

    Test bench configuration

    Processors Ryzen 3 2200G, Ryzen 5 2400G, Ryzen 3 1200 AMD, www.amd.com
    Intel Core i3-8100 Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua
    Video card ASUS ROG-POSEIDON-GTX1080TI-P11G-GAMING; ASUS PH-GT1030-O2G ASUS, www.asus.ua
    Motherboard MSI B350I PRO AC (AMD B350) AMD, www.amd.com
    ASUS TUF B350M-PLUS GAMING (AMD B350)
    ASUS ROG MAXIMUS X Hero (Intel Z370)
    ASUS, www.asus.ua
    Open memory G. Skill Flare X Black DDR4-3200 (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) AMD, www.amd.com
    Accumulator HyperX Savage 960 GB (SHSS37A/960G) HyperX, www.hyperxgaming.com
    Power supply Thermaltake Toughpower Grand TPG-1200M (1200 W) Thermaltake, www.thermaltakeusa.com
    Monitor Acer Predator XB271HK (27″, 3840×2160) Acer, www.acer.ua

    CPU Performance

    When evaluating the capabilities of the new Raven Ridge processors, we compared their performance with those of the Ryzen 3 1200 and Core i3-8100. The youngest model in the Ryzen lineup is the predecessor to the Ryzen 3 2200G. This processor has a less aggressive frequency formula, but more L3 cache. That is why this comparison was especially interesting.

    family

    Ryzen 5 2400G Ryzen 3 2200G Ryzen 3 1200 Core i3-8100
    Raven Ridge Raven Ridge Summit Ridge Coffee lake
    Production technology 14 nm 14 nm 14 nm 14 nm
    Number of cores/threads 4/8 4/4 4/4 4/4
    Frequency formula 3. 6/3.9 GHz 3.5/3.7 GHz 3.1/3.4 GHz 3.6 GHz
    L2 cache size 4×512 KB 4×512 KB 4×512 KB 4×256 KB
    L3 cache size 4 MB 4 MB 8MB 6 MB
    Memory support DDR4-2933 DDR4-2933 DDR4-2666 DDR4-2400
    Integrated graphics Radeon RX Vega 11 (704 units) Radeon RX Vega 8 (512 units) Intel UHD Graphics 630
    Processor socket Socket AM4 Socket AM4 Socket AM4 LGA1151
    Unlocked multiplier + + +
    Thermal pack 65 W 65 W 65 W 65 W
    MSRP at time of announcement $169 $99 $109 $117

    It is equally interesting to evaluate the capabilities of new AMD chips in the context of confrontation with the junior 4-core model of the Coffee Lake line. In terms of cost, the Core i3-8100 gravitates towards the Ryzen 3 2200G, while the Ryzen 5 2400G remains without a direct opponent, but practical tests will show the ratio of the capabilities of these chips.

    Before moving on to applied tests, let’s evaluate the performance of processors with RAM using the AIDA64 utility.

    The Ryzen 3 1200 is no stranger to newbies here. Other things being equal, its read speed is slightly higher than that of the Raven Ridge models, while the latter are not inferior in write speed, and the Ryzen 5 2400G even has some advantage. It is difficult to guess about the reasons here, rather, you need to wait for new firmware, on which board manufacturers are now actively working. The Core i3-8100 turned out to be the last one on linear transfers, and it lost about 10% to the leader in read speed.

    Curious indicators can be observed in the memory latency test. The chip from Intel with a result of 45.7 ns is out of reach here. At the same time, Raven Ridge managed to improve Summit Ridge’s performance.

    Judging by the results, the new chips have noticeably improved latency when handling the third-level cache. Although the volume of L3 has become half as much, the delays when working with this buffer have decreased.

    We traditionally start applied tests with very resource-intensive computational tasks, which at the same time lend themselves well to parallelization. In Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 5 2400G processor leaves no chance for opponents and is a clear example of why this model is noticeably more expensive than the rest of the test participants. Ryzen 3 2200G is expectedly ahead of Ryzen 3 1200. Here, higher frequency is a priority, and with this, the new product is better. As a result, we have an advantage of 14%. In turn, the Core i3-8100 renders the scene another 8% faster than the younger Raven Ridge.

    In single-threaded mode, the 4-core Intel processor takes the lead, even though this chip does not have Turbo Boost technology with dynamic auto-overclocking. For the Core i3-8100, 3.6 GHz is enough to take the first position in this nomination. The rest of the places are distributed predictably.

    The situation with archivers is very curious. WinRAR is very sensitive to memory latency, so the Core i3-8100 and Ryzen 5 2400G go head to head here. The Ryzen 3 2200G is about a third slower, with the Ryzen 3 1200 rounding out the top four.

    But 7-Zip is very susceptible to multithreading, forgiving imperfect work with RAM. Here, the SMT-enabled Ryzen 5 2400G again shows a solid lead over pure quad-cores. Note that in the case of both archivers, Ryzen 3 2200G has about a 15% advantage over Ryzen 3 1200. Increased frequency, fast inter-core communication, improved memory handling and reduced cache latency cover the possible negative from the reduction in L3 volume. Moreover, just archivers are applications that respond to the capabilities of the memory subsystem in general and the system of additional buffers in particular.

    To close the issue with processor capabilities when rendering scenes, here are the results obtained in the Blender 2.78 application, as well as the Fryrender test. The situation here is very similar and generally repeats the one that we observed in Cinebench. The eight-threaded Ryzen 5 2400G confidently staked out a leading position. The Core i3-8100 took 38% more time to complete the scene in Blender 2.78 and 20% more in Fryrender. In turn, the Ryzen 3 2200G lagged behind the Intel chip by 15–20% here, but at the same time was ahead of its predecessor by 9-fifteen%.

    Another resource-intensive task — video encoding — processors handled in an interesting rivalry. When transcoding a 4K stream to Full HD in the Handbrake application, the Core i3-8100 processor unexpectedly lost minimally to the Ryzen 3 2200G. But when preparing a video in Adobe Premiere Pro CC, the Intel chip coped with the task in the same time as the Ryzen 5 2400G. The younger model Raven Ridge lagged behind by 22% here, the results of the Ryzen 3 1200 are even more modest.

    Synthetic PerformanceTest 9 responds to a decrease in L3 volume. If the older model manages to hide behind an increased number of threads and demonstrate a high integral result, then the Ryzen 3 2200G is minimally inferior to the Ryzen 3 1200. Obviously, for a number of tasks, the capacity of the high-speed buffer is also important. However, as promised by the developers, they managed to compensate for the decrease in L3 in other ways. And if, in the worst cases, the Ryzen 3 2200G will show results similar to those of the Ryzen 3 1200, then the engineers have done their job.

    The Ryzen 3 2200G performs a little better than the Ryzen 3 1200 with a series of diverse tests contained within GeekBench 4.2.2. . The performance per thread of the Core i3-8100 is higher, which is why the 4-core Intel chip is faster than the more expensive 8-thread Ryzen 5 in some tasks.

    Integrated graphics performance

    Integrated graphics are the forte of AMD APUs. Raven Ridge processors were the first to use the Vega video core with the most advanced 5th generation GCN architecture. Therefore, it was very interesting to evaluate the graphic capabilities of the new APUs. For comparison, we used the same Core i3-8100 processor with Intel UHD Graphics 630 graphics. models. Devices of this line are now offered at a price of $90-100.

    We’ve also added the system results with the GeForce GTX 1050 as an upper benchmark. We recommend this card for the base gaming platform as part of the traditional PC of the Month category.

    We used 1920×1080 resolution and low graphics quality presets during our gaming testing. The results obtained differ depending on the project, but in general the overall picture is similar. The Ryzen 5 2400G processor with Vega 11 graphics often shows results similar to those shown by a system with a Core i3-8100 + GeForce GT 1030 bundle. More often, a platform with a discrete graphics card is slightly more productive, but reverse situations are also possible. In general, we can say that these are solutions of the same class, adjusted for the predisposition of various game engines to the architectures of various developers.

    Ryzen 3 2200G with an integrated Vega 8 video core, although it is inferior to the older chip by 10-20%. It no longer directly competes with the GeForce GT 1030, but still remains a solution of the same order.

    The results of the Core i3-8100 with UHD 630 do not require much comment. The performance of integrated Intel graphics in this case is 2-3 times lower, and in order to get frame / s similar to those demonstrated by Raven Ridge, you can’t do without a discrete video card.

    At the same time, it is worth evaluating the gaming capabilities of the APU objectively. In fairly heavy projects, even with low graphics quality in Full HD mode, processors provide 20-30 frames / s. How many will find this performance comfortable? To improve the results, in some cases you will have to reduce the image resolution. For example, when switching to 1280×720, the indicators on the charts can be increased by about 70-80%.

    The GeForce GTX 1050 nearly doubles the performance of the GeForce GT 1030 or top integrated graphics. Of course, this is a good way to increase the frames / c in games, but it works if you are willing to add about $ 160 to buy the appropriate video card.

    Memory-focused

    When using integrated graphics, the data necessary for the operation of the GPU is stored in RAM. Therefore, the overall performance of the video core largely depends on the capabilities of the RAM subsystem.

    In the case of the rather powerful Vega 8/11 graphics, it was interesting to see how much memory bandwidth impacted the final performance in games.

    For the test system, we used a dual-channel DDR4-3200 memory kit with low timings (14-14-14-32). Of course, if possible, it is better to acquire such. But, given the current cost of DDR4 speed kits, potential APU owners are more likely to look towards more affordable memory sticks. Therefore, we conducted an experiment by reducing the effective frequency of the modules to the DDR4-2400 mode, as well as increasing the delay formula to 16-16-16-39.

    As you can see, the transition from DDR4-2400 to DDR4-3200 provides an increase in the number of frames / s at the level of 10-15%. Not a bad increase, especially considering the system-wide performance improvement of the Ryzen-based platform. But the single-channel memory access mode catastrophically reduces the performance of the integrated graphics. If in “synthetics” one can observe a one and a half times drop, then in real games, sometimes the number of frames / s is almost halved, that is, in proportion to the decrease in bandwidth.

    Therefore, for Raven Ridge based systems, the use of two memory modules is simply mandatory. Of course, if you basically rely on the capabilities of integrated graphics. Two DDR4-2400 modules are significantly better than one DDR4-3200.

    This feature must be taken into account if you choose a motherboard with two DIMM slots. In this case, you will have to initially plan the necessary volumes, because it will be problematic to upgrade the system.

    If we are talking about volumes, then when planning to use integrated graphics, you need to be prepared for the fact that you will need to reserve 2 GB of memory for the needs of the GPU. With a total of 8 GB of RAM — a common case for base configurations — this will be a significant loss. Of the remaining 6 GB, approximately 1.5 GB will be occupied by a clean operating system. Running heavy games in this case is indispensable without a swap file. 16 GB cardinally solves the issue, but an additional 8 GB even DDR4-2400 is now plus $ 90 to the cost of the system.

    Performance with discrete graphics

    Using Raven Ridge with integrated graphics is a natural, but only one, scenario for new APUs. We were also curious to evaluate the balance of power with the test participants in the presence of a powerful discrete graphics card. In order not to limit the capabilities of the chips, we used the ultimate modification of the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti — ASUS ROG-POSEIDON-GTX1080TI-P11G-GAMING.

    We note right away that the video card communicated with the Raven Ridge processors via the PCI Express x8 bus. Recall that this is a feature of AMD hybrid processors, which, however, should not affect the performance.

    During testing, we used modes with Full HD resolution, as well as high, but not maximum graphics quality. On the one hand, we still wanted to catch the influence of processors on the final result, and not test the capabilities of the forced GeForce GTX 1080 Ti. At the other extreme, poor graphics quality is an unlikely scenario for real-world use of the system with a powerful discrete graphics card.

    According to the test results, in most cases, the platform with the Core i3-8100 processor has the advantage. Support for SMT greatly helps the Ryzen 5 2400G in multi-threaded projects, allowing it to even outperform the Intel processor in 3DMark Time Spy and Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation. At the same time, in projects with weak multi-threaded optimization (Far Cry Primal, Dirt Rally), the advantage of Core i3 can be more than 10%.

    The Ryzen 3 2200G has a solid lead over the Ryzen 3 1200. It would be naive to think that L3 cache size doesn’t matter in games. However, within the framework of one architecture, the improvements used made it possible to successfully compensate for the smaller buffer capacity. Of course, primarily due to the higher frequency both in multithreaded mode and under load on 1-2 cores.

    If we talk about regular modes, it is obvious that the Ryzen 3 2200G will eventually displace the Ryzen 3 1200 from the line. It is generally more productive and cheaper (nominally). In addition, the owner receives a graphics core of the GeForce GT 1030 level at no additional charge. It’s always nice to have such a reserve.

    A similar situation is in a pair of Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 5 1400. The new APU will not leave a chance for its predecessor. The one-year-old Summit Ridge did not make it into the current test, but the balance of power will most likely be identical. More performance for less money, plus graphics are tempting conditions to adopt an APU into your system.

    CPU overclocking

    All AMD Ryzen chips, regardless of price and letter indexes in the model name, initially have an unlocked frequency multiplier, which makes it easy to experiment with overclocking. This nice feature of Zen architecture processors is also relevant for Raven Ridge.

    In our case, the clock speed of the Ryzen 3 2200G was increased to 3950 MHz with the load on all cores. For stable operation in this mode, the processor supply voltage had to be increased to 1.4V. The chip started at this frequency at 1.3-1.35 volts, but crashed intermittently during heavy loads.

    With a stock cooler, under load in the powerMAX application, the chip temperature increased to 75-77C. If you overclock the processor without much fanaticism, then the complete cooler will be enough to remove heat, although at a maximum rotation speed of 1900 rpm it can not be called silent. In this case, lovers of silence are better off thinking about alternative CO options.

    The test copy of the Ryzen 5 2400G willingly took the iconic 4000 MHz with an increase in the supply voltage. Taking into account the initially rather high clock frequency of the model, in absolute terms, the increase is relatively small, but the efforts are minimal, and the acceleration effect goes far beyond the measurement error.

    Fundamentally, the balance of power of the test participants has not changed, but in some tests, the Ryzen 3 2200G, after a frequency spurt, approached the Core i3-8100, and in some cases even bypassed the chip from Intel. The older model Raven Ridge also improved its performance.

    The frequency potential of the new APUs is generally consistent with that of Summit Ridge. It uses the same manufacturing process of crystals, which means that exceeding 4 GHz will already be a good enthusiast’s luck. Solder under the processor cover would hardly have changed the situation here, except that it would have allowed to reduce the temperature of the processors under load.

    GPU Overclocking

    The graphics core can also be overclocked by yourself, and if you rely on the capabilities of integrated graphics, this is a much more effective way to increase the number of frames / c in games. In the case of the Ryzen 3 2200G, the video core was overclocked from the base 1100 to 1575 MHz (+43.2%).

    For Ryzen 5 2400G graphics, the allowable increase turned out to be a little more modest — from 1250 MHz to 1550 MHz (+ 24%). In general, the absolute acceleration of the GPU is very impressive, but despite the very impressive increase in clock speed, you should not count on a similar increase in performance. Memory bandwidth and higher timings will remain the bottleneck of the graphics subsystem, which does not allow the potential of the integrated video core to be unlocked. However, even in this case, the performance gain will not be zero.

    Thanks to the additional acceleration, Vega 8 in most cases managed to compensate for the lag behind Vega 11. In turn, the integrated graphics of the Ryzen 5 2400G received an increase of 5-15% after overclocking, which allowed it to more confidently compete with the GeForce GT 1030.

    Experiments with overclocked Raven Ridge is by no means useless for several reasons. Thrifty enthusiasts will certainly find the process itself fascinating. To speed up the processor, even a relatively simple motherboard based on the AMD B350 chipset and a standard cooler are enough. Although the increase in performance will not be radical, especially when forcing the older model, it is quite possible to count on a small increase (5-15%).

    Price

    As we have already noted, the recommended price of the Ryzen 3 2200G is $99, while the Ryzen 5 2400G is priced at $169. It’s nice to note the actual availability of Raven Ridge processors. Directly on the day of the official start of sales — February 12 — new APUs could already be bought in Ukraine. Of course, the retail price was slightly higher. Initially, the Ryzen 3 2200G appeared in the prices of online platforms for about $130, and the Ryzen 5 2400G was offered for about $200.

    A month after the start of sales, the chips have already managed to get a little cheaper. So Ryzen 3 2200G can already be purchased for $120-125, and you can become the owner of Ryzen 5 2400G with the equivalent of $185-190. Over time, for sure, the cost of Raven Ridge will decrease further, gradually drifting towards the recommended values.

    If we mention the closest opponents in the current class, then the Ryzen 3 1200 is now offered for $110, and the Ryzen 5 1400 costs about $155.

    As for devices from the competing camp, the purchase of the Core i3-8100 now costs about $120, but for $200-210 6-core Core i5-8400 processors are already offered.

    A temporary advantage of the AMD platform is the lower price of Socket AM4 motherboards. For Raven Ridge, you can use even the most affordable models on AMD A320 starting at $60, while for Coffee Lake processors you still have to buy motherboards on the top Intel Z370, which is at least $130. However, already in early April, Intel will offer more affordable chipsets for 8th generation Core chips and the skew with the cost of the platforms will even out.

    In light of the appearance of Raven Ridge and in particular the «hundred-dollar» Ryzen 3 2200G, the further fate of Bristol Ridge chips, and especially the top models A10/A12, is interesting. These 4-core chips with Excavator architecture and Radeon R7 (GCN 1.3) graphics will be noticeably inferior to Raven Ridge both in terms of CPU performance and video core power. Obviously, with a price of $100, they simply don’t have any pros. Perhaps a serious reassessment of these models will follow (it’s strange that we didn’t see it right after the announcement of Raven Ridge), or these chips, having played the role of useful temporary workers for Socket AM4, will leave AMD’s assortment.

    Summary

    Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G are AMD’s first APUs to combine Zen architecture compute cores with Radeon Vega 8/11 integrated graphics. The result is a very interesting combination. The demand for such APUs can be judged by the fact that both models immediately entered the top ten most popular processors on hotline.ua.

    In our opinion, the younger Raven Ridge chip is more attractive. If you do not take into account the starting price hype, then this is nominally the most affordable model in the Ryzen processor line. Only $99, the developer offers a 4-core processor with integrated graphics that has the performance of entry-level discrete graphics cards. Although, to get such speed, you need high-speed RAM operating in dual-channel mode.

    The

    Ryzen 5 2400G is also interesting, but it is already noticeably more expensive, which is sensitive for potential APU owners who expect to do without an external video card. In addition, the capabilities of a more powerful GPU are more difficult to unlock due to the limitations of the memory subsystem, and those who primarily need increased performance of the CPU unit will most likely initially look towards 6-core models. Support for SMT certainly helps the Ryzen 5 2400G, but lowering the price would add to this model’s appeal.

    We’re not going to repeat the big marketing slogans that Raven Ridge is the perfect solution for a gaming system that doesn’t require a graphics card. The results in the charts allow you to draw your own conclusions. The new APUs from AMD are really noteworthy. These are interesting and technologically advanced chips with decent computing performance and the most powerful integrated graphics in their class.

    Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G processors provided by AMD, www.amd.com

    Core i3-8100 processor provided by Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua

    processor requirements Windows Windows 11 supported AMD

    processors

    Twitter

    LinkedIn

    Facebook

    E-mail address

    • Article
    • Reading takes 4 minutes

    OEMs can use the following CPUs for new Windows 11 devices.