Monday, May 31st 2021

AMD Announces Ryzen 5000G and PRO 5000G Desktop Processors

AMD today announced the launch of its first Ryzen 5000 series desktop processors with integrated graphics, under the Ryzen 5000G and Ryzen Pro 5000G lines. These processors are based on the 7 nm "Cezanne" silicon, featuring up to 8 CPU cores based on the "Zen 3" microarchitecture, an iGPU based on the "Vega" graphics architecture with up to 8 compute units, but updated display- and media-acceleration engines; 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache that's shared between all eight cores. Built in the Socket AM4 package, the processors are compatible with AMD 500-series chipset motherboards. The chips feature PCI-Express Gen 3 downstream I/O.

The consumer Ryzen 5000G series include the Ryzen 7 5700G, and the Ryzen 5 5600G. The 5700G features an 8-core/16-thread CPU, clock speeds of 3.80 GHz, with up to 4.60 GHz boost, and all 8 iGPU compute units being unlocked with up to 2.00 GHz engine clocks. The 5600G, on the other hand, has a 6-core/12-thread CPU clocked at 3.90 GHz, with up to 4.40 GHz boost, and 7 iGPU compute units with up to 1.90 GHz engine clocks. Both chips have their TDP rated at 65 W. AMD claims that the 5700G beats the Core i7-11700 in a variety of content creation and iGPU gaming tasks, as shown in the graphs below; and the iGPU is capable of 1080p e-sports gaming. The 5700G is priced at USD $359, and the 5600G goes for $259. Both chips are available from August 5, 2021.
Moving on to the commercial desktop processor segment, and AMD launched three Ryzen Pro 5000G series processors. These chips are nearly identical to the consumer 5000G, but with two categories based on TDP—the 65 W Pro 5000G series, and the 35 W Pro 5000GE series. The chips feature additional security features, including AMD Shadow Stack technology, Secured-core PC, and FIPS 140-3 certification. The chips also feature AMD Pro management features, a set of features similar to Intel vPro.
Among the Pro 5000G series are the 8-core/16-thread Pro 5750G; the 6-core/12-thread Pro 5650G, and the 4-core/8-thread Pro 5350G, with their 35-Watt counterparts, the 5750GE, 5650GE, and 5350GE, respectively. The Pro 5750G is clocked at 3.80 GHz with up to 4.60 GHz boost, while the 5650G does 3.90 GHz with up to 4.40 GHz boost, and the 5350G does 4.00 GHz, with up to 4.20 GHz boost. The "GE" SKUs on average lower the nominal clock speeds by 400-800 MHz, and feature aggressive power management to achieve the power target. The company didn't release pricing for the Pro SKUs as they're sold exclusively in the commercial desktop segment, via OEMs.
The AMD Ryzen PRO 5000G desktop processor slide-deck follows.
Add your own comment

37 Comments on AMD Announces Ryzen 5000G and PRO 5000G Desktop Processors

#1
ViperXTR
5700G few months too late for me, this was my real target instead of the 5800X lol
Posted on Reply
#2
Tomorrow
ViperXTR
5700G few months too late for me, this was my real target instead of the 5800X lol
5700G would end up slower than 5800X due to less L3 cache onboard. Atleast in games. Obviosly it has the iGPU and monolithic (latency) advantages tho.
Posted on Reply
#3
lexluthermiester
About damn time. These APU's will be a godsend for many who want something to game on but don't have the flow to get a proper GPU.
Posted on Reply
#4
Mussels
Moderprator
8 core 16 thread 35W APU?


holy shit. These are gunna make some monster laptops/All in one systems
Posted on Reply
#5
R0H1T
Tomorrow
5700G would end up slower than 5800X due to less L3 cache onboard. Atleast in games. Obviosly it has the iGPU and monolithic (latency) advantages tho.
No not really, 5700G also is a single die/package design with lower latency. The extra L3 cache somewhat masks the latency issue with zen3, monolithic designs are rather competitive with less cache just for this reason! The difference would be minimal, except in edge cases where 5800x can boost higher.
Posted on Reply
#6
Tomorrow
R0H1T
No not really, 5700G also is a single die/package design with lower latency. The extra L3 cache somewhat masks the latency issue with zen3, monolithic designs are rather competitive with less cache just for this reason! The difference would be minimal, except in edge cases where 5800x can boost higher.
I have no reason to expect 5700G to be competitive in games with 5800X. The same way i tested 4750G vs 3800X. Games love L3 cache and no amount of lower latency is gonna bridge that gap. Besides we are likely talking about 10-15ns lower vs 5800X. Hardly groundbreaking where as the cache difference is 16MB (vs 32MB on 5800X).
Posted on Reply
#7
R0H1T
Tomorrow
5700G to be competitive in games with 5800X
5700g literally doubled the cache over 4750g with support for even higher spe(cc)ed memory.
Like I said it mostly depends on clocks, the best mobile processor is about ~20% faster than the previous gen leader in 4900h.
Posted on Reply
#8
Tomorrow
5800X unified it's cache that also helped massively. If 5800X and by extension desktop Zen 3 had retained it's 2 x 16MB approach then yes 5700G would have likely cought up to 5800X.
Posted on Reply
#9
dicktracy
Still no 5700x because AMD has become greedy.
Posted on Reply
#10
lexluthermiester
dicktracy
Still no 5700x because AMD has become greedy.
Or it could be the chip shortage.
Posted on Reply
#11
BluesFanUK
Lovely, two more chips you won't be able to buy.
Posted on Reply
#12
AusWolf
No GE models for DIY? That's a shame... :(

Before anybody asks why bother, I know very well what a 65 W TDP means in AMD's terms - much higher actual power consumption, combine that with the heat density of 7 nm chips, and you get a solution that's impossible to cool with a low-profile cooler. Been there, done that, no thanks.
Posted on Reply
#13
ShurikN
Is there any info on PCI-E width for the 5600G? Is it still gonna be x8?
Posted on Reply
#14
Mathragh
AusWolf
No GE models for DIY? That's a shame... :(

Before anybody asks why bother, I know very well what a 65 W TDP means in AMD's terms - much higher actual power consumption, combine that with the heat density of 7 nm chips, and you get a solution that's impossible to cool with a low-profile cooler. Been there, done that, no thanks.
It might be worth looking for specific motherboards in your case.

My current motherboard - APU combo allows me to lower the APU TDP in BIOS; it lets me choose between 65W, 35W and custom TDP profiles. I imagine that would be perfect in your case, and performance is still plenty good with a lower TDP as those U chips show.
Posted on Reply
#15
R00kie
I take it the iGPU is still GCN based?
Posted on Reply
#16
Mathragh
R00kie
I take it the iGPU is still GCN based?
The GPU is indeed of the Vega type, just like previous ZEN APUs. The next APU is rumored to be RDNA2 based, but a long way off still.
Posted on Reply
#17
Valantar
AusWolf
No GE models for DIY? That's a shame... :(

Before anybody asks why bother, I know very well what a 65 W TDP means in AMD's terms - much higher actual power consumption, combine that with the heat density of 7 nm chips, and you get a solution that's impossible to cool with a low-profile cooler. Been there, done that, no thanks.
Yeah, just like Intel T-SKU chips those are likely to be rare at retail. Though with the right motherboard (it's exposed in my ASRock PG B550 ITX/ax at least) you have the option for a 45W "eco mode"/cTDP-down. Which should do mostly the same job :)
ShurikN
Is there any info on PCI-E width for the 5600G? Is it still gonna be x8?
It's been x16 since the 4000-series.
Posted on Reply
#18
Darmok N Jalad
This is what I’ve been waiting for. I don’t need a dedicated GPU, so it meant either spending too much money on am unavailable graphics card, or buying Intel. It’s about time a company with a GPU division offered something better than a 4C/8T chip with integrated graphics on the desktop.
Posted on Reply
#19
Valantar
Darmok N Jalad
This is what I’ve been waiting for. I don’t need a dedicated GPU, so it meant either spending too much money on am unavailable graphics card, or buying Intel. It’s about time a company with a GPU division offered something better than a 4C/8T chip with integrated graphics on the desktop.
I've been extremely happy with my gray-market Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G (in fact CPU-wise it's complete overkill for my HTPC!) so no doubt these will serve you well. Zen 3 should give these excellent CPU performance.
Posted on Reply
#20
Darmok N Jalad
Valantar
I've been extremely happy with my gray-market Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G (in fact CPU-wise it's complete overkill for my HTPC!) so no doubt these will serve you well. Zen 3 should give these excellent CPU performance.
I know a question that comes up occasionally is “who buys a high-end CPU and uses integrated graphics?” For me, my biggest demand is photo editing, so the extra CPU threads are great for import, and even a base IGP does well enough to handle most GPU-accelerated duties on image editors. What AMD has offered desktop users so far is not just fewer core counts, but slower clocks. It’s was a double penalty. Throw in the crazy GPU market, and AMD was just hurting their own sales.
Posted on Reply
#21
mechtech
Hmmmmmm A 5400G 4-core 8 thread cpu with 16 RDNA2 CU dGPU for $180 US would have been nice.............

edit
www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-7-5800

well guess I will skip out this gen...........don't want or need the 'x' version.......................hmmm that 5700G though, same clocks as the 5800X, but half the L3 cache and pcie v3.0, but $100 cheaper.....hmmmmmm
Posted on Reply
#22
Valantar
Darmok N Jalad
I know a question that comes up occasionally is “who buys a high-end CPU and uses integrated graphics?” For me, my biggest demand is photo editing, so the extra CPU threads are great for import, and even a base IGP does well enough to handle most GPU-accelerated duties on image editors. What AMD has offered desktop users so far is not just fewer core counts, but slower clocks. It’s was a double penalty. Throw in the crazy GPU market, and AMD was just hurting their own sales.
Yeah, it's really sad they skipped the 4000-series APUs in retail channels and stuck people with the old, slow, 4c 3000-series.
The 4000-series was fantastic, though I guess they simply didn't want to gamble on retail availability for such a small product segment with limited chip supplies (I remember there were reports of low supplies of 4000-series laptop APUs for half a year after launch). Of course now there's a global chip shortage, but given the success of Ryzen 5000 in mobile and OEM desktop I think production volumes of the APUs are much higher than last time around - and thus there are likely more chips that fall into the "not that good at 15-45W, but great at 65W" bin. Which is great for us! And while I did want the best possible integrated graphics for my HTPC, I completely understand not wanting a dGPU. Unless you're gaming a lot there simply isn't a point.
Posted on Reply
#23
defaultluser
Tomorrow
I have no reason to expect 5700G to be competitive in games with 5800X. The same way i tested 4750G vs 3800X. Games love L3 cache and no amount of lower latency is gonna bridge that gap. Besides we are likely talking about 10-15ns lower vs 5800X. Hardly groundbreaking where as the cache difference is 16MB (vs 32MB on 5800X).
At the same TDP, I imagine that gap will fall below 5%

Unfortunately, we don't have a 3700x for direct 65w comparison this time!; this105 vs 65 is the only complete review:


I would hold judgement until someone runs 5600g vs 5600x
Posted on Reply
#24
AusWolf
defaultluser
At the same TDP, I imagine that gap will fall below 5%

Unfortunately, we don't have a 3700x for direct 65w comparison this time!; this105 vs 65 is the only complete review:


I would hold judgement until someone runs 5600g vs 5600x
Here:


Though I might add, 65 W on an AMD product means means as much as all the +es on 14 nm+++ Intel CPUs. We only know if it's a direct comparison or not when it comes out and somebody tests it for power consumption and heat.
Posted on Reply
#25
Darmok N Jalad
Valantar
Yeah, it's really sad they skipped the 4000-series APUs in retail channels and stuck people with the old, slow, 4c 3000-series.
The 4000-series was fantastic, though I guess they simply didn't want to gamble on retail availability for such a small product segment with limited chip supplies (I remember there were reports of low supplies of 4000-series laptop APUs for half a year after launch). Of course now there's a global chip shortage, but given the success of Ryzen 5000 in mobile and OEM desktop I think production volumes of the APUs are much higher than last time around - and thus there are likely more chips that fall into the "not that good at 15-45W, but great at 65W" bin. Which is great for us! And while I did want the best possible integrated graphics for my HTPC, I completely understand not wanting a dGPU. Unless you're gaming a lot there simply isn't a point.
I’m a little disappointed that AMD does not have an IGP on all its consumer-facing products. Even if it’s just a base unit to drive displays, it seems like they are missing out here. Now that it’s near impossible to buy a GPU at a decent price, how long before it cuts into CPU sales because people need something to drive the display? I know the G-line is monolithic, so I’m sure that brings about challenges, but I would think they could have added GPU functionality in there with the chiplet concept. Hard to believe we arrived at a time where most consumer Intel CPUs have an IGP, while most AMD CPUs do not.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment