Thursday, July 23rd 2020

AMD Ryzen PRO 4750G, PRO 4650G, and PRO 4350G Tested

Taiwan-based tech publication CoolPC.com.tw published one of the first comprehensive performance reviews of the recently announced AMD Ryzen PRO 4750G, PRO 4650G, and PRO 4350G Socket AM4 desktop processors based on the 7 nm "Renoir" silicon that combines up to 8 "Zen 2" GPU cores with a Radeon Vega iGPU that has up to 8 compute units (512 stream processors). In their testing, the processors were paired with an AMD Wraith Prism (125 W TDP capable) cooler, an ASUS ROG Strix B550-I Gaming motherboard, 2x 8 GB ADATA Spectrix D50 DDR4-3600 memory, and a Seagate FireCuda NVMe SSD.

The benchmark results are a fascinating mix. The top-dog Ryzen 7 4750G was found to be trading blows with the Core i7-10700K, the i7-10700, and AMD's own Ryzen 7 3700X, depending on the benchmark. In CPUMark 99 and Cinebench R20 nT, the PRO 4750G beats the i7-10700 and 3700X while practically matching the i7-10700K. It beats the i7-10700K at 7-Zip (de-compression) and HWBOT x265 video encoding benchmark. The story repeats with the 6-core/12-thread PRO 4650G beating the Core i5-10600K in some tests, and AMD's own Ryzen 5 3600X in quite a few tests. Ditto with the quad-core PRO 4350G pasting the previous generation Ryzen 3 3300G.
Armed with "unlimited powah" of the desktop platform, the "Renoir" silicon is emerging as a beast when it comes to memory overclocking, and cache/memory latencies. It may be a monolithic die like "Pinnacle Ridge," but enjoys several de-coupled clock-domains that let you go to town with memory OC, all while benefiting from the low latencies of the monolithic die approach (compared to the MCM design of "Matisse."). Find several fascinating results in the source link below.
Source: CoolPC.com.tw
Add your own comment

38 Comments on AMD Ryzen PRO 4750G, PRO 4650G, and PRO 4350G Tested

#1
HD64G
It becomes clear that the single CCX performance on 6-core or more Zen2 CPUs is great due to low latency and AMD will release those Renoir desktop CPUs on retail packages only when Zen3 desktop CPUs are almost ready to go on sale in order not to prematurely cut sales from Ryzen 3X00 series CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#2
ratirt
These 4000 series CPUs from AMD seem to be pretty strong in performance. If you can play 1080p in games with decent 60FPS I'm good with it but these are laptop designated so it will be slower.
Posted on Reply
#3
Tomorrow
Joke's on you AMD. I already bought 4750G. Now i just have to hope for BIOS support lol...
Posted on Reply
#4
AnarchoPrimitiv
Zen3 will double the cores peer CCX, and I feel like some of the benefits seen her will evident with zen3 (yes, I know Zen3 won't be monolithic) . Just look at the 3100 v 3300x, with the single CCX design of the 3300x, it had an average of 12% better performance clock for clock than the 3100...thats what I'm talking about. Reports are already saying Zen3 will have a 17% IPC uplift, you add in the doubled cores per CCX, 200-300Mhz increase to frequency and I don't see anything crazy about predicting a 25% overall performance increase core for core with Zen3.
Posted on Reply
#5
Tomorrow
AnarchoPrimitiv
Zen3 will double the cores peer CCX, and I feel like some of the benefits seen her will evident with zen3 (yes, I know Zen3 won't be monolithic) . Just look at the 3100 v 3300x, with the single CCX design of the 3300x, it had an average of 12% better performance clock for clock than the 3100...thats what I'm talking about. Reports are already saying Zen3 will have a 17% IPC uplift, you add in the doubled cores per CCX, 200-300Mhz increase to frequency and I don't see anything crazy about predicting a 25% overall performance increase core for core with Zen3.
Not sure where you get the double cores. Number of cores will remain the same within each CCX. However each 4 core group will now have access to all the cache within a CCX.
As far as i understand there will still be 4+4 cores with in a CCX instead of unified 8 cores.
Posted on Reply
#6
ncrs
Tomorrow
Not sure where you get the double cores. Number of cores will remain the same within each CCX. However each 4 core group will now have access to all the cache within a CCX.
As far as i understand there will still be 4+4 cores with in a CCX instead of unified 8 cores.
The number of cores in each CCD will remain the same, but each CCD will contain one CCX instead of up to two as it is today. This is based on semi-official AMD material.
Posted on Reply
#7
Tomorrow
ncrs
The number of cores in each CCD will remain the same, but each CCD will contain one CCX instead of up to two as it is today. This is based on semi-official AMD material.
Thats correct. However it is not year clear if all 8 cores within that CCX (now entire CCD) can communicate with each other without latency penalty or are there still two groups of 4 cores that now can share the cache. The diagram on the slide seems to suggest that (the 4 green Z3 blocks on either side).
Posted on Reply
#8
ncrs
Tomorrow
Thats correct. However it is not year clear if all 8 cores within that CCX (now entire CCD) can communicate with each other without latency penalty or are there still two groups of 4 cores that now can share the cache. The diagram on the slide seems to suggest that (the 4 green Z3 blocks on either side).
I'm suspecting that they will be fully uniform 8-core CCD/X.
The diagram itself is just a visualization, when you look at the Zen 2 CCD die shot the CCX are top and bottom instead of left and right ;)
Posted on Reply
#9
Tomorrow
ncrs
I'm suspecting that they will be fully uniform 8-core CCD/X.
The diagram itself is just a visualization, when you look at the Zen 2 CCD die shot the CCX are top and bottom instead of left and right ;)
Lets hope so.
Posted on Reply
#10
medi01
I'm lost in AMD lineups...

So what series will the Zen3 lineup be? 5xxx???
Posted on Reply
#11
mahirzukic2
medi01
I'm lost in AMD lineups...

So what series will the Zen3 lineup be? 5xxx???
Probably, but let's wait and see. :)
Posted on Reply
#12
Assimilator
medi01
I'm lost in AMD lineups...

So what series will the Zen3 lineup be? 5xxx???
AMD always releases their APUs as the last parts in an architectural cycle, while naming them the same as their next architecture.

So Zen CPUs were 1000-series but Zen APUs were 2000-series, 2000 CPUs = 3000 APUs, and now 3000 CPUs = 4000 APUs. Zen 3 CPUs will thus be 4000-series and Zen 3 APUs will be 5000-series.

It's weird and confusing but it is what it is.
Posted on Reply
#13
Tsukiyomi91
these are still 7nm refresh that the mobile Ryzen 4000 APUs are using, just being "adapted" into the desktop socket. I'm interested in how it performs in games, on top of memory OCing. Zen3 is powering the "real" Ryzen 4000 CPU (without iGPUs, obviously.) If these APUs are better than Intel's iGPU, or close to a GTX1050Ti level, both parties are gonna be in a rough spot.
Posted on Reply
#14
Assimilator
Tsukiyomi91
these are still 7nm refresh that the mobile Ryzen 4000 APUs are using, just being "adapted" into the desktop socket. I'm interested in how it performs in games, on top of memory OCing. Zen3 is powering the "real" Ryzen 4000 CPU (without iGPUs, obviously.) If these APUs are better than Intel's iGPU, or close to a GTX1050Ti level, both parties are gonna be in a rough spot.
AMD's APUs are faster than Intel's iGPUs by a factor of 2 - 3 times, but that's still nowhere near a midrange card like the 1050 Ti, and it's never going to be. The physical, thermal and power constraints of a CPU package will always dictate the maximum performance of any graphics integrated with said CPU, and the end result is that said maximum performance can never exceed the low end of the discrete GPU market.
Posted on Reply
#15
nBagasW
Assimilator
AMD's APUs are faster than Intel's iGPUs by a factor of 2 - 3 times, but that's still nowhere near a midrange card like the 1050 Ti, and it's never going to be. The physical, thermal and power constraints of a CPU package will always dictate the maximum performance of any graphics integrated with said CPU, and the end result is that said maximum performance can never exceed the low end of the discrete GPU market.
To match 1050 Ti maybe too much, but I think comparable performance to the good old 750 Ti on 95W APU is within reach of Zen3 + RDNA based IGP, and that will be a dream come true for budget gamers.
Posted on Reply
#16
Octopuss
My head hurts, what's the difference between a CCD and a CCX?
Posted on Reply
#18
windwhirl
Octopuss
My head hurts, what's the difference between a CCD and a CCX?
CCX is a Core Complex. Basically 4 cores plus cache and some other stuff. A CCD is a Core Chiplet Die. Two CCXs in the same die.
Posted on Reply
#20
windwhirl
Octopuss
Yea I wanted a quick and dirty explaination like the person below gave me, no thank you.


So CCD=the actual CPU, roughly speaking.
Pretty much, yeah. Mem and IO controller are on a separate die, though, different to past approaches of unifying everything in a single die.
Posted on Reply
#21
springs113
windwhirl
Pretty much, yeah. Mem and IO controller are on a separate die, though, different to past approaches of unifying everything in a single die.
You're the real MVP. We need more ppl like you to come back to this site.
Posted on Reply
#22
windwhirl
Assimilator
AMD always releases their APUs as the last parts in an architectural cycle, while naming them the same as their next architecture.

So Zen CPUs were 1000-series but Zen APUs were 2000-series, 2000 CPUs = 3000 APUs, and now 3000 CPUs = 4000 APUs. Zen 3 CPUs will thus be 4000-series and Zen 3 APUs will be 5000-series.

It's weird and confusing but it is what it is.
About that, I think that's because if AMD had labeled the APUs with the same number series than their "architecturally similar" IGP-less desktop counterparts, it would not sell as well, since the APUs would be seen as old products. It's kinda a wild guess, but it's what I came up with...
Posted on Reply
#23
Nater
Assimilator
AMD always releases their APUs as the last parts in an architectural cycle, while naming them the same as their next architecture.

So Zen CPUs were 1000-series but Zen APUs were 2000-series, 2000 CPUs = 3000 APUs, and now 3000 CPUs = 4000 APUs. Zen 3 CPUs will thus be 4000-series and Zen 3 APUs will be 5000-series.

It's weird and confusing but it is what it is.
Ha, AMD - Intel is 10000. They're at least twice as good!

I can hear someones Grandma being sold a PC in Best Buy right now.

It's getting harder and harder to keep track for sure.
Posted on Reply
#24
Tomorrow
Assimilator
AMD's APUs are faster than Intel's iGPUs by a factor of 2 - 3 times, but that's still nowhere near a midrange card like the 1050 Ti, and it's never going to be. The physical, thermal and power constraints of a CPU package will always dictate the maximum performance of any graphics integrated with said CPU, and the end result is that said maximum performance can never exceed the low end of the discrete GPU market.
1050 is not midrange. It's entry elvel. 1650 is midrange.
Those are strong words - never going to be. Bad idea to make statements like this.
I agree that the package will always impose some limits but GPU's are not standing still. Efficiency improves all the time.

The real question is the low end discrete market even worth it? At some point iGPU's will be fast enough (some would aregue they already are) that buying a low end discrete GPU is pretty pointless. Currently the only advantage is see on those low end cards is their own dedicated VRAM where as APU uses system memory. Once HBM or other similar solution gets cheap enough and is 3D stacked on top of the die the low end GPU's lose their last advantage. Everything is getting more integrated and smaller.

Besides the low end GPU market has been in decline for years and the sort of people who buy those cards (corporate, OEM, esports) have or are migrating to all in one solutions like APU's. Now with up to 8c/16t and Zen2 IPC, decent iGPU and in case of Pro models enterprise security there's very little reason left to buy a discrete low end GPU just to get a picture and maybe play some casual games.

That's also the reason GPU prices have gone up. Discrete GPU's are more of niche thing now. Better hope it will not end up like the discrete audio card market where integrated sound is finally good enough for most people and only enthusasts still buy discrete cards in low volumes and high prices.
Posted on Reply
#25
Dave65
Tomorrow
Lets hope so.
Agreed!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment