Thursday, January 25th 2018

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G Smokes Core i5-8400 at iGPU Performance

AMD is pinning a lot of hopes on its upcoming Ryzen 2000G "Raven Ridge" desktop APU family, which combine a quad-core "Zen" CPU with a larger-than-expected integrated GPU based on the latest "Vega" architecture. While Intel's iGPU design focus for its "Coffee Lake-S" processors continues to be hardware-accelerated 4K video playback, and non-gaming tasks; AMD promises a more wholesome solution. The integrated Radeon Vega 11 graphics of the Ryzen 5 2400G features 11 "Vega" NGCUs (next-generation compute units), which translates to 704 stream processors, 44 TMUs (@ 4 TMUs per NGCU), 8 or 16 ROPs, and a bandwidth-rich pathway to the APU's dual-channel DDR4-2933 capable IMC, thanks to AMD's new Infinity Fabric interconnect.

In its pre-launch press-deck for the Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G, AMD did the obvious - comparing a similarly priced Intel Core i5-8400 six-core processor (MSRP: $189) with its faster Ryzen 5 2400G (MSRP: $169.99) at gaming, highlighting its products key promise - enabling 1080p gaming with many of the newer AAA titles. In AMD's testing, the Radeon Vega 11 iGPU keeps frame-rates well above 30 fps at 1080p. In key popular titles such as "Battlefield 1," the frame-rates cross 50 fps, titles like "Overwatch" and "Rocket League" are almost that fast. "Skyrim" approaches 96 fps, while "The Witcher 3" stays barely above 30 fps. The i5-8400 with its UHD 620 graphics barely touches the 30 fps mark in any of the games, at 1080p. Even taking into account AMD's marketing hyperbole, the Radeon Vega 11 seems capable of running most eSports titles at resolutions above 1600 x 900, which should particularly interest iCafes and gamers on a shoestring budget.
Source: TechSpot
Add your own comment

58 Comments on AMD Ryzen 5 2400G Smokes Core i5-8400 at iGPU Performance

#26
Vya Domus
"dj-electric said:
That's exactly why. Why compere an APU basically, to a production-dGPU gaming oriented hexa-core CPU. Doesn't make much sense.
APU or not , they are technically the same thing : a CPU + GPU package. But AMD's offering is way faster in terms of GPU performance. People do pick up AMD's APUs because of that where as no one buys an Intel CPU as a viable gaming choice.
Posted on Reply
#27
jabbadap
Yeah, eagerly waiting these to come. Might be great for HTPC usage, but for that it must have that stupid m§ playready 3.0 drm support for netflix 4k. How is it on amd side, can Vega cards play netflix 4k, or is it still 1080p only? Nvidia cards requires at least 4GB vram and pascal card, intel support it since kaby lake.
Posted on Reply
#28
Imsochobo
"dj-electric said:
What's so bad about sub 3000Mhz memory? especially these days? a good, tight 2666-2933 can squeeze pretty much everything outta these chips.

I would sin a bit and say that for many users these days, this just wouldn't cut it even for "light" esports who need high FPS with low settings.

I really really wanna see a 95W chip that has 4C\8T and a much beefier 14-16 cluster GPU
I have no clue, I run 64gb 2666 mhz and a mate with expensive x299 3200 mhz memory runs 2933 cause the cpu refuses above and it's a cpu issue cause another one manages 3200 not at XMP but high voltages and 1 cl lower so...
Ain't saying 10000 forums complaining about it but more is always better.

Ain't changing my 2666 memory until ddr5, no speed requirement :)
Posted on Reply
#29
TheinsanegamerN
"dj-electric said:
What's so bad about sub 3000Mhz memory? especially these days? a good, tight 2666-2933 can squeeze pretty much everything outta these chips.

I would sin a bit and say that for many users these days, this just wouldn't cut it even for "light" esports who need high FPS with low settings.

I really really wanna see a 95W chip that has 4C\8T and a much beefier 14-16 cluster GPU
How can you claim that 2933 "squeezes everything" out of these chips when they have not been released? Until we can test them, we have no way of knowing how much performance is left of the table. Even 2400 MHz didnt saturate their old carrizo chips, and those were hamstrung by abhorid memory controllers and abysmal CPUs. Performance was STILL held back. With 2400 MHz memory, their 512 core iGPU was slower then a 384 core DDR3 dGPU. Their new one has 704 cores. 2933MHz will not be close to saturating it.

4000 MHz might get close, as that would supply similar bandwidth to the 512 core 7750 GPU, and VEGA is more bandwidth efficient then GCN 1.0. But it still has to feed the system itself, so it may take more then that.

EDIT: I'm wrong, that still would not be enough. The 7750, a 512 core GPU, had 72GB of dedicated bandwidth. DDR4 memory, in dual channel, at 4266 MHz, would supply 71.2 GB/s, and that would also have to feed the system and a 704 core GPU. If VEGA scales with memory the same way as GCN, it is likely that the limit on performance will be whatever the memory controller can bear, with RAM speed never becoming the limting factor, rather it being how fast the controller will support.

Raven ridge really will need either more on board cache (like the 128MB L4 on crystal well which allowed intel's 580 GPU to move past memory bottlenecks) or a triple or quad channel memory controller, especially if the iGPU grows more with the second generation.

For CPU only, sub 3000 is just fine. But for iGPU usage, you need as much absolute bandwidth as you can get.
Posted on Reply
#30
Gasaraki
"Captain_Tom said:
"Infinity Fabric Ruined Ryzen"

LOL ok. I hope you don't have any positions of power at a technology company. WOW...
Infinity Fabric for such low core count CPUs are useless. It's extra latency for no reason. For server processors of above 8 cores or more, Infinity Fabric is great.
Posted on Reply
#31
TheTechGuy1337
An apu beating a stock non gaming igpu at gaming? The horror. I never thought it could be possible....for it to happen every single time. :P
Posted on Reply
#32
TheinsanegamerN
"Gasaraki said:
Infinity Fabric for such low core count CPUs are useless. It's extra latency for no reason. For server processors of above 8 cores or more, Infinity Fabric is great.
If infinity fabric is being used to link the iGPU and CPU together, allowing them to bypass the memory bus, that will be a fantastic use case. Perhaps wait for the chips to come out before declaring the fabric useless?
Posted on Reply
#33
theoneandonlymrk
"Gasaraki said:
Infinity Fabric for such low core count CPUs are useless. It's extra latency for no reason. For server processors of above 8 cores or more, Infinity Fabric is great.
Based on what facts, amba and ccix interconects onion and garlic are all outpaced and spec'd by infinity fabric afaik , intels new construct is even similar post ring bus.
Posted on Reply
#34
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
"dj-electric said:

I really really wanna see a 95W chip that has 4C\8T and a much beefier 14-16 cluster GPU
130W or bust. It'd probably be a bit expensive though... But iirc their previous gens had APUs in that power range. Should be a very decent all around performer.
Posted on Reply
#35
dj-electric
One can only dream. With this much TDP, they can shove even 20-24 clusters in. Beast mode.
Posted on Reply
#36
Imsochobo
"dj-electric said:
One can only dream. With this much TDP, they can shove even 20-24 clusters in. Beast mode.
Feeding it with memory bandwidth ?

To do so you can put in more pins for cpu and different socket and then it's dead in the water.
or a apu with memory onboard which we may see After 2020 but for now lets be satisfied with something decent, you can always OC this one :)
Posted on Reply
#37
Reeves81x
I'm shocked, never would have seen this coming... :kookoo: /[sarcasm]
Posted on Reply
#38
FeelinFroggy
"Imsochobo said:
As far as I've seen they said one should be able to do 3400 mhz memory on these apu's while 2933 is SUPPORTED!
7700K got 2400mhz memory support and run at 3800 mhz and sometimes above.

So I think we safely can guess 3200mhz+ as ryzen 1700,1700x etc. was supporting 2666mhz and does 3400 mhz.
While Rzyen motherboards do support high speed RAM, good luck finding a RAM and Mobo combo that will actually do it. Ryzen RAM compatibility is still an issue and getting posted RAM speeds is worse. Hopefully this issue will get better with Ryzen 2 in a couple of months.
Posted on Reply
#39
dicktracy
But the 8400 beats the 1800x with a descrete graphics card for less.
Posted on Reply
#40
Steevo
"dicktracy said:
But the 8400 beats the 1800x with a descrete graphics card for less.
Um..... The 1800 is an 8 core 16 thread chip meant to drive a mid to high end GPU, so your specific comparison makes no sense from the angle of more cores, more performance overall, low end performance, or any situation.


Try again?
Posted on Reply
#41
dicktracy
"Steevo said:
Um..... The 1800 is an 8 core 16 thread chip meant to drive a mid to high end GPU, so your specific comparison makes no sense from the angle of more cores, more performance overall, low end performance, or any situation.


Try again?
Try what? The 8400 is faster than a maxed overclocked 1800x with a Titan Xp. The 8400 will also be faster than the 1800x when paired with a Titan V. It’s not rocket science.
Posted on Reply
#42
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
"FeelinFroggy said:
While Rzyen motherboards do support high speed RAM, good luck finding a RAM and Mobo combo that will actually do it. Ryzen RAM compatibility is still an issue and getting posted RAM speeds is worse. Hopefully this issue will get better with Ryzen 2 in a couple of months.
Ryzen 2 is not out till 2019, it is Ryzen+ due out

"dicktracy said:
Try what? The 8400 is faster than a maxed overclocked 1800x with a Titan Xp. The 8400 will also be faster than the 1800x when paired with a Titan V. It’s not rocket science.
8400 is limited in what can be done with it, good luck getting the base clock up.
Posted on Reply
#43
dicktracy
"eidairaman1 said:
Ryzen 2 is not out till 2019, it is Ryzen+ due out


8400 is limited in what can be done with it, good luck getting the base clock up.
8400 can more than hold its own at stock clock and slow RAM speed for its targeted audience.


Well you look at that. Locked. Only 6 threads. Comes from evil empire Intel. But still beats out majority of CPUs out there.
Posted on Reply
#44
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Synthetic benchmarks peh.
Posted on Reply
#45
Bengt-Arne
"dicktracy said:
But the 8400 beats the 1800x with a descrete graphics card for less.
That can be true in game, not for professional use.
But is the higher priced 8400 beating 2400G whiteout discreet graphic?
Posted on Reply
#46
john_
I wonder if miners will be choosing these 2000G series chips for their mining systems. They will have one more GPU for mining in their systems.
Posted on Reply
#47
FrustratedGarrett
"eidairaman1 said:
Ryzen 2 is not out till 2019, it is Ryzen+ due out


8400 is limited in what can be done with it, good luck getting the base clock up.
Clock speed is one of Ryzen's weaknesses, but it's not the whole story. Clock to clock, Coffee Lake's 4-core CPUs beat Ryzen 8 core CPUs in games, generally. Ryzen has some serious latency issues because of their gluing technology (Infinity Fabric). AMD should've designed a proper 6-core Ryzen CPU just like they did with Phenom back in 2010 instead of using this CCX approach. Infinity Fabric hurts Ryzen's performance more than anything else (weak AVX2 implementation, etc.).
Posted on Reply
#48
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
It actually doesnt affect it, however using compilers pitched infavor of intel does though.
Posted on Reply
#49
Bengt-Arne
"FrustratedGarrett said:
For those of us who are casual gamers and/or Indie gamers, the 2400G should be an excellent choice. I still think Infinity Fabric is ruining this chip just like it's ruined the Ryzen CPUs.
Huu.. :confused: Please explain?

"FrustratedGarrett said:
How so? And even if it does that, I'm sure there are other workarounds to have full 16x bandwidth without disabling the IGPU. Infinity Fabric surrounds a 4-core Ryzen Module making all communication between the CPU cores and the uncore (L3 cache, memory controller, etc.) significantly slower.
An CCX consist of four cores and all of L1/L2/L3 caches, it's not Intel we are talking about where the bus is connecting each core (and cache) with the next core (and cache).
Infinity Fabric is connecting CCX, ram controller, GPU and IO like PCIe 3.0, Infinity Fabric is an intelligent internal buss so the setup time may be slightly longer, but still more effective.
There is no buss whit zero delay, not even Intel's on die ring-bus for what the delay increases with increased cores or there later mesh that is addressing that problem to some parts..

"Captain_Tom said:
These might launch at exactly the right time. Slightly better than an RX 550, and it comes with a CPU (Remember RX 550's are almost $150 now).

AMD should make a 1536-SP APU as well so people can actually build gaming PC's in 2018 :D
Don't hold your breath for it, I still miss Ryzen 7 2x00G in the lineup.
Has heard about the AMD ‘Fenghuang APU’, maybe that one you are thinking about :D
Posted on Reply
#50
nem..
<div class="youtube-embed" data-id="-B6FlUA9PKI"><img src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-B6FlUA9PKI/hqdefault.jpg" /><div class="youtube-play"></div><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B6FlUA9PKI" target="_blank" class="youtube-title"></a></div>
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment