Thursday, May 28th 2020

Benchmarks Surface for AMD Ryzen 4700G, 4400G and 4200G Renoir APUs

Renowned leaker APISAK has digged up benchmarks for AMD's upcoming Ryzen 4700G, 4400G and 4200G Renoir APUs in 3D Mark. These are actually for the PRO versions of the APUs, but these tend to be directly comparable with AMD's non-PRO offerings, so we can look at them to get an idea of where AMD's 4000G series' performance lies. AMD's 4000G will be increasing core-counts almost across the board - the midrange 4400G now sports 6 cores and 12 threads, which is more than the previous generation Ryzen 5 3400G offered (4 cores / 8 threads), while the top-of-the-line 4700G doubles the 3400G's core-cpount to 8 physical and 16 logical threads.

This increase in CPU cores, of course, has implied a reduction in the area of the chip that's dedicated to the integrated Vega graphics GPU - compute units have been reduced from the 3400G's 11 down to 8 compute units on the Ryzen 7 4700G and 7 compute units on the 4400G - while the 4200G now makes do with just 6 Vega compute units. Clocks have been severely increased across the board to compensate the CU reduction, though - the aim is to achieve similar GPU performance using a smaller amount of semiconductor real-estate.
The 4700G's 8 Vega CUs clocked at 2.1 GHz, as reported by the benchmark suite, achieve 4,301 points in the graphics and 23,392 points in the CPU score, which are respectively 6.65% and 22.3% higher than the 4400G's 4,033 and 19,113 points (achieved with the same 8 Vega CUs clocked at a slower 1.9 GHz and with two fewer cores. The 4700G scores 20% and a whopping 70.6% higher than the 4200G's in the graphics and physics tests respectively - which makes sense, considering the slower-clocked 6 Vega CUs (1.7 GHz) and 4 core / 8 thread configuration of the former. AMD's 4000G series keeps the same 65 W TDp despite higher number of CPU cores and higher-clocked Vega cores, but the company will also have Ryzen 400=GE series which achieve a 35 W TDP, albeit at the cost of reduced CPU clocks (and likely GPU clocks as well).

_rogame, another well-known leaker, found two comparable system configurations running the Ryzen 4200G and 3200G, where the 4200G delivered 57% higher CPU performance, but 7% less GPU performance.
Sources: via Videocardz, APISAK @ Twitter, _rogame @ Twitter
Add your own comment

37 Comments on Benchmarks Surface for AMD Ryzen 4700G, 4400G and 4200G Renoir APUs

#1
cucker tarlson
it's not the Vega part,it's the 8 cu.
this is a very fast cpu paired with a gpu that'll let you run games at 1080p.
run,not play.
Posted on Reply
#2
ARF
You can pair them with up to 128 GB DDR4-5400 on select Gigabyte B550 boards.
Or dual channel memory bandwidth of around 80 GB/s which is not bad and you will be able to play select modern games.
Posted on Reply
#3
Cheeseball
Not a Potato
A 4400G with an updated 11 CU iGPU would’ve been the perfect HTPC/lightweight gaming PC.
Posted on Reply
#4
hurakura
This is pointless, why would anyone "upgrade" to this if the gpu performance is similar to the previous generation
Posted on Reply
#5
ARF
hurakura
This is pointless, why would anyone "upgrade" to this if the gpu performance is similar to the previous generation
CPU bottleneck removed by going Zen 2, which improves the overall performance ?
Posted on Reply
#6
ppn
finally single chip integrated memory controller and ZEN2. should perform better than 10700K.
Posted on Reply
#7
Caring1
hurakura
This is pointless, why would anyone "upgrade" to this if the gpu performance is similar to the previous generation
Same reason Intel users upgrade, more cores and faster clock speeds. You don't see them complain their iGPU can't play the latest games, because they don't use it for games.
Posted on Reply
#8
hurakura
People buy AMD APUs just so they can play games casually without buying discrete gpu. AMD can get away with not including iGPU at all in their processors, because those that buy them get a good graphics card anyway. But APU user expect decent gaming performance out of the box.
Posted on Reply
#9
R0H1T
hurakura
This is pointless, why would anyone "upgrade" to this if the gpu performance is similar to the previous generation
What do you mean similar? It is definitively better than last gen, how much ~ well let's wait for the reviews!
Posted on Reply
#10
watzupken
The new Renoir APU is actually a compromise as compared to the last gen Picasso. While you get a significant boost in CPU even with the lowest end 4200G, you really lose a lot of graphic power comparing with the Ryzen 5 3400G. Till now, I am still not convinced that it is meaningful to pair the fastest 8CU iGPU with the top end Renoir unless it is cheap. iGPU are typically useful for budget gamers, or people that don't really need fast graphics (which kind of negates the benefit of the faster iGPU in this case). I believe Renoir is also like its predecessor, taking half of bandwidth from the PCI-E 3.0 x16 slot. So for those looking to get a dedicated graphics, this does not make sense.
R0H1T
What do you mean similar? It is definitively better than last gen, how much ~ well let's wait for the reviews!
I actually don't think its similar. Without looking at the top end Renoir, the 4 and 6 core Renoir APUs are likely to see no improvement, if not a regression in GPU performance. The reason why I excluded the top end Renoir is to compare graphics at around the same price point and since there wasn't any Ryzen 7 APUs in the past. CPU wise, there is no doubt the Renoir's Zen 2 will be significantly faster than the Zen+ though. So it really depends on what you are going to use the computer for.
Posted on Reply
#12
randomUser
hurakura
People buy AMD APUs just so they can play games casually without buying discrete gpu. AMD can get away with not including iGPU at all in their processors, because those that buy them get a good graphics card anyway. But APU user expect decent gaming performance out of the box.
I disagree. APUs and iGPU are more meant for office use and home use where games do not matter.
iGPU is there to just show something on the screen, not to play. Even tho amd and intel both try to cram better graphics from time to time, it is uselessly increasing cpu power consumption while achieving the similar results.
iGPU are also used for home server builds/NAS.

i've built a pc for my mom using a i5 2500, and it is doing its job just fine. She is playing games like candy crush and alike, no problem.
Posted on Reply
#13
BoboOOZ
Cheeseball
A 4400G with an updated 11 CU iGPU would’ve been the perfect HTPC/lightweight gaming PC.
AMD APU's have so much potential (just look at the PS5 and Xbox), I'm frustrated they are not pushing the concept further. One of these paired with 16 CU's would be so sweet, for mobile or small form factor desktop gaming...
Posted on Reply
#14
Airbag888
I think people are a bit tunnel visioned sadly.
Everything isn't gaming there's a lot of workloads out there and certainly AMD don't want to canibalise their low end GPUs either.
I think APUs are a good way to get people on a budget 'in' gaming, kind of getting their feet wet with the option to upgrade to a discrete GPU later on.

Personally I'm super stocked to get my hands on an APU equivalent to a 4900HS because I'll put it in a home server to run VMs, docker, etc without having to break the bank on new server hardware or use old ones that gulp down power (I want my power budget to be around 50W idle at the wall)
I also hope Asrock or someone updates the A300 with a motherboard that will support renoir APUs ..fingers crossed I guess
Posted on Reply
#15
BoboOOZ
Airbag888
I think people are a bit tunnel visioned sadly.
Everything isn't gaming there's a lot of workloads out there and certainly AMD don't want to canibalise their low end GPUs either.
I think APUs are a good way to get people on a budget 'in' gaming, kind of getting their feet wet with the option to upgrade to a discrete GPU later on.
A 3TFlop APU would not cannibalize the 5500XT, but would allow basic FHD gaming.

And it's coming, by the way, especially in the laptop market, where it will eat from the geforce mx market share:
Posted on Reply
#16
Chrispy_
Are we sure about the 8, 8, and 6 CU counts here? The mobile variants have very different CU counts - Ryzen 7 4700U only getting 7CUs and the baby Ryzen 3 4300U only getting 5CUs.

For the 4700G and even the 4400G to both get more CUs than the mobile variants seems odd, especially where the mobile variants with no way to upgrade to a dGPU later need it more.

I dunno, maybe the IGPs were thrown under the bus in the U-series for the sake of power targets, which is a tragedy because the graphics portion of an AMD APU is what made ultraportables competent at 3D work. If people wanted decent CPU performance and didn't give a damn about graphics, there was always a better Intel laptop option at 15W.
BoboOOZ

I may have to watch that in its entirety, despite that dude's offensively awful T-shirt.
Posted on Reply
#17
BoboOOZ
randomUser
I disagree. APUs and iGPU are more meant for office use and home use where games do not matter.
You know that the PS5 and XBox both have AMD APUS inside with 10 to 12TFlops of graphic computer power? APU's are definitely not for office use only.
Posted on Reply
#18
Hardware Geek
hurakura
This is pointless, why would anyone "upgrade" to this if the gpu performance is similar to the previous generation
The 8 core is exactly the chip I want in an APU. Sufficient graphics to run multiple monitors for work and great CPU performance. Paired with the right motherboard, I can add a discreet GPU that will allow me to run VR. which is the main reason I'd upgrade the graphics. With the option to buy a zen 3 processor assuming I already have a discreet GPU, this is what I've been waiting for.
Posted on Reply
#19
Airbag888
Hardware Geek
The 8 core is exactly the chip I want in an APU. Sufficient graphics to run multiple monitors for work and great CPU performance. Paired with the right motherboard, I can add a discreet GPU that will allow me to run VR. which is the main reason I'd upgrade the graphics. With the option to buy a zen 3 processor assuming I already have a discreet GPU, this is what I've been waiting for.
Exactly. I personally will use it as a home server that's always on, so likely go the route of the 4700GE.. jonesing for Asrock to make a A300 v2 for it :)
Posted on Reply
#20
Punkenjoy
The main limiting factor for APU performance is memory bandwidth and not the CU count. DDR5 might help there but it will still be way less than current mid or high end graphic card.

PS4/5 and Xbox one * have way more memory bandwidth than any pc APU.
Posted on Reply
#21
BoboOOZ
True, but for a 3 TFlop APU, access to 2GB of dual channel 3200MHz DDR4 should suffice.
Posted on Reply
#22
ratirt
Punkenjoy
The main limiting factor for APU performance is memory bandwidth and not the CU count. DDR5 might help there but it will still be way less than current mid or high end graphic card.

PS4/5 and Xbox one * have way more memory bandwidth than any pc APU.
I don't think you are correct and what you said is a bit of a stretch. CUs are just as important as memory bandwidth. You can't tell me that making the memory twice as fast would result in doubling the APU graphics performance? You would still need more CUs anyway to achieve that. It is more of a balance kinda thing then just memory bandwidth. Besides I'm sure there is no way that the APU will be able to pull of a high end graphics with 10 CU, only by increasing mem bandwidth to ridiculous speeds. You still need processing power anyway. Besides this APU = discrete graphics (even mid range) is not happening anytime soon or even ever.
Looking at a console side of things. You should not compare any console to a PC.
Posted on Reply
#23
hurakura
If it's not for gaming then why bother with boosting clocks. Then put some low power iGPU in it and sell it as regular CPU just like Intel does.
Posted on Reply
#24
ratirt
hurakura
If it's not for gaming then why bother with boosting clocks. Then put some low power iGPU in it and sell it as regular CPU just like Intel does.
There is a lot of different API's or software that use GPU acceleration not being a game. Different resolutions (we are in 4k era and that requires some resources you know) Why everything has to be about games with you?
Why not low power iGPU? Because there's a demand for something with more kick.
Posted on Reply
#25
Chrispy_
Punkenjoy
The main limiting factor for APU performance is memory bandwidth and not the CU count. DDR5 might help there but it will still be way less than current mid or high end graphic card.

PS4/5 and Xbox one * have way more memory bandwidth than any pc APU.
For 2000 and 3000 series APUs, the CU count was bottlenecked by most vendors pairing it with DDR4-2400. Two channels of DDR4-2400 were enough of a limit that moving from 8CU to 10CU or even 11CU didn't scale well.

They added CUs were faster, but just not fast enough to matter.

DDR4-3200 seems to be the baseline for Renoir designs, so there's 50% more bandwidth already and if you look at the Athlon 3000G with only 3CUs, it was very definitely short on CUs. Even in single-channel mode, that thing couldn't use the pathetic bandwidth it was given because 3CUs isn't enough, and adding more RAM or faster RAM did very little for the 3000G.

I'm guessing that 6CU configurations or Renoir will not be bandwidth starved like Vega10 and Vega11 were, and that Renoir's Vega8 with LPDDR4X will be entirely limited by the small number of CUs.
Budget gamers and laptop users with decent cooling will wish there was a Vega12 or Vega15 offering, as was originally rumoured. Compared to the rest of the APU, the actual CUs are tiny, so downgrading from 11 in Pinnacle Ridge APUs to 8 in Renoir is a deep cut that hasn't really reduced die area by all that much. False economy IMO but only time will tell if AMD correct that mistake in the 5000-series or abandon higher GPU capabilities in the APUs going forward.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment