AMD Ryzen 7 5700G or Intel Core i5-12400?

[Mussels]

userbenchmark is pure garbage and should never, EVER be used
You've got some giant graphs two posts up showing where the 5700g fits, its reduced cache gives it the opposite effect the 3D chips have - reduced gaming performance, worse 1% and 0.1% values

Going to actual FPS values if that helps more, BL3 from the 7700x review
The G chips game like a 3000 series CPU

 

[Chrispy_]

you sure?

Please click the green human to continue - UserBenchmark

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X vs Ryzen 7 5700G: performance comparison

We compared 8-core AMD Ryzen 7 5700X (3.4 GHz) against Ryzen 7 5700G (3.8 GHz) in games and benchmarks. Find out which CPU has better performance.

nanoreview.net

I posted as I know when i got my 5600G I had similar replies, people had assumed the cpu was massively gimped. These are still fast Zen3 chips.

The APUs are clearly inferior; They cost more and whilst you get an IGP you give up half the L3 cache and lose PCIe 4.0 which is a non-trivial problem these days given the number of x8 graphics cards.

If you need the IGP, then the APUs are sometimes worth it - but for a build with a discrete GPU, they are a lose-lose-lose situation of something that is more expensive, a slower CPU, and will hamstring your GPU.

Sure, the 5700G is not that much slower than a 5700X, you can sometimes find it on sale for less than a 5700X, and if you can afford a high-end GPU you don't have to worry about PCIe lanes. But that's a lot of 'ifs' and 'buts' that all have to be true for the 5700G to make sense over a 5700X.

 

[Mussels]

Here in Au, the 5700g costs more than a 5700x right now - that's an extremely easy choice to make

Paying $10 more for an IGP and less performance in everything would just be madness

 

[The King]

you sure?

Please click the green human to continue - UserBenchmark

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X vs Ryzen 7 5700G: performance comparison

We compared 8-core AMD Ryzen 7 5700X (3.4 GHz) against Ryzen 7 5700G (3.8 GHz) in games and benchmarks. Find out which CPU has better performance.

nanoreview.net

I posted as I know when i got my 5600G I had similar replies, people had assumed the cpu was massively gimped. These are still fast Zen3 chips.

There are plenty of reliable reviews on this site. I won't bother with those CPU comparison site that you linked.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G Review - Great Performance & Integrated Graphics

With the Ryzen 7 5700G, AMD is finally bringing their most powerful APU to the retail DIY channel. With 512 graphics cores based on the Vega architecture, the IGP is over twice as fast as Intel's Rocket Lake graphics. Thanks to the Zen 3 architecture, the eight CPU cores are blazing fast, too.

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G Review - Affordable Zen 3 with Integrated Graphics

The Ryzen 5 5600G is AMD's most affordable entry to the Zen 3 architecture. Priced at $260, this six-core, twelve-thread processor achieves excellent performance that rivals older eight-core processors from both Intel and AMD. The integrated Vega graphics cores are much more powerful than even...

www.techpowerup.com

Both the 5600G and 5700G are gimped because of there reduced L3 cache when it comes to gaming. There is no point debating that fact.
IF you OC these chips and knowledgeable on how to OC RAM you can indeed get very good performance out of these chips even beat Vermeer CPU in some cases.

Stock gaming the 5700X is about the same has a 5800X the 5700G is 10% behind that in @1080p gaming.
So yes I am sure that the 5700X is better at gaming and also about 10% ahead in compute.

This does not make the 5700G a bad chip just much less value for money if it is at the same price and you dont need the IGP.
Unless you really need the IGP for reasons then its better to go with the Vermeer ZEN 3 CPUs.

Here in Au, the 5700g costs more than a 5700x right now - that's an extremely easy choice to make

View attachment 273959


Paying $10 more for an IGP and less performance in everything would just be madness

Here the 5700G is priced almost the same to the 5800X with the 5700X being about 2K cheaper.

 

[Mussels]

And seriously never ever use userbench - the website is well known for outright lying and making things up, including paranoid rants and abuse at AMD.
The site owner is pro-Intel to an extreme that the website has been caught faking results, people uploaded new AMD hardware and dominated the website, only to be nerfed and cripped the next day and then insane rants appeared

Literally, the site owner has the website set up to detect hardware he doesnt like and lower their scores.

Scandal 1: (2020, lots of details in comments)

https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/g2uf7a

banned from the official intel subreddit too
Userbenchmark has been banned from /r/Intel : intel (reddit.com)
They also claimed "conspiracies in the media" against intel
UserBenchmark claim an actual conspiracy against Intel : Amd (reddit.com)

2021 updates of it continuing
UserBenchmark Can't Be Trusted, Here's Why - Gizmosphere

And the 2022 stuff
I knew Userbenchmark was bad, but I didn't known it was THIS bad when it comes to AMD shaming : buildapc (reddit.com)


And this video covers the best and shiniest - if you ignore the rest of this post, watch this video

at 11:23 it gets great, picking the worst CPU intel launched (11900K) and how userbench was about the only website praising it

Like when they tweaked all the algorithms to prefer CPUs with less cores, only for intel to release CPU's with more cores and get the AMD penalty...
(Note the big "BUY" link on the expensive product?)

5800x3D: Fastest AMD CPU on their website
QUICK SAY ITS TERRIBLE
Ryzen 7 5800X3D becomes highest-ranked AMD chip on UserBenchmark but incurs astonishing criticism in the process - NotebookCheck.net News

 

[Chrispy_]

The problem with userbench is that they don't even do any tests.

They're as reliable as the hundreds of fake 5-star Amazon customer reviews for no-name Chinese knock-offs. You have to go down to the bottom of the page, find the 2-star unhappy-customer reviews who posted photos of what they really got when they ordered.

 

[chrcoluk]

The APUs are clearly inferior; They cost more and whilst you get an IGP you give up half the L3 cache and lose PCIe 4.0 which is a non-trivial problem these days given the number of x8 graphics cards.

If you need the IGP, then the APUs are sometimes worth it - but for a build with a discrete GPU, they are a lose-lose-lose situation of something that is more expensive, a slower CPU, and will hamstring your GPU.

Sure, the 5700G is not that much slower than a 5700X, you can sometimes find it on sale for less than a 5700X, and if you can afford a high-end GPU you don't have to worry about PCIe lanes. But that's a lot of 'ifs' and 'buts' that all have to be true for the 5700G to make sense over a 5700X.

Its a little slower, I just wanted to correct the notion it was "way less" performant.

In my case yes I do value the integrated GPU, and also value the higher base clock speed at TDP target (better power efficiency). They still the same Zen3 core, just down spec'd PCIe, lower clock speed and smaller cache.

The problem with userbench is that they don't even do any tests.

They're as reliable as the hundreds of fake 5-star Amazon customer reviews for no-name Chinese knock-offs. You have to go down to the bottom of the page, find the 2-star unhappy-customer reviews who posted photos of what they really got when they ordered.

The page is bechmark data, and I posted a second link which had more tests done, there is other pages you can find also, but if you want to dispute it, go ahead, I own a 5600G and posted my results on this forum some time ago, it wasnt out of the range of these benchmarking sites.

 

[freeagent]

So much drama in the LBC

Wowsers. I don't reddit but it looks like there's a lot going on over there

Edit:

Out of the two probably the 12400 I guess.

 

[tabascosauz]

Its a little slower, I just wanted to correct the notion it was "way less" performant.

In my case yes I do value the integrated GPU, and also value the higher base clock speed at TDP target (better power efficiency). They still the same Zen3 core, just down spec'd PCIe, lower clock speed and smaller cache.

The higher base clock doesn't really indicate anything in the 5700G's case. The 5700G and 5700X clock pretty much the same, being 8-core parts with an Fmax of 4650MHz (up to a theoretical 4850MHz with +200 PBO). Though, I've not seen an APU reach 4850 yet

5700G generally just scores lower at same clock than the chiplet 8-cores even in productivity workloads as well, and core clocks don't really scale well to higher wattage PBO either. Can't really call it "more efficient" if it's just literally slower while drawing more power (5700X is a 76W part like the 5600X, not the "normal" 88W).

The 5700G had a bit of a price niche back when the 5700X didn't exist and 5800X was at MSRP, but it's now pretty much relegated to iGPU usage and mem OC fun.

I own a 5700G and have had a 5600G before. 5700G is a different animal, even under PBO the 5600G is artificially limited by the Fmax limits that AMD has set.

 

[chrcoluk]

Well I dont use or care for PBO so wouldnt have noticed that.

When XFR is off 5600G is more efficient as it has higher clocks for the non turbo clocks power draw.

 

[tabascosauz]

Well I dont use or care for PBO so wouldnt have noticed that.

When XFR is off 5600G is more efficient as it has higher clocks for the non turbo clocks power draw.

I wasn't comparing the 5700G PBO. Stock it's an 88W part, the 5700X is a 76W part. A 5600G is not an appropriate stand-in for the 5700G, the two behave very differently.

 

[chrcoluk]

I wasn't comparing the 5700G PBO. Stock it's an 88W part, the 5700X is a 76W part. A 5600G is not an appropriate stand-in for the 5700G, the two behave very differently.

I was talking about G vs X, not a 5600G vs the 5700G. Sorry.

I will chime out on the 5700g vs 5600g given I never researched or tried the 5700G.

 

[SL2]

Unless you must have a 3060, get the (11 %) faster 6600 XT and save money. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-radeon-rx-6600-xt-gaming-x/28.html

https://www.costco.com/hp-victus-gaming-desktop---amd-ryzen-7-5700g---radeon-rx-6600xt.product.4000056482.html

$700

 

[Mussels]

Its a little slower, I just wanted to correct the notion it was "way less" performant.

In my case yes I do value the integrated GPU, and also value the higher base clock speed at TDP target (better power efficiency). They still the same Zen3 core, just down spec'd PCIe, lower clock speed and smaller cache.


The page is bechmark data, and I posted a second link which had more tests done, there is other pages you can find also, but if you want to dispute it, go ahead, I own a 5600G and posted my results on this forum some time ago, it wasnt out of the range of these benchmarking sites.

It performs like a ryzen 3000 series CPU, that one generation gap is definitely enough to call it slower

 

[SL2]

It performs like a ryzen 3000 series CPU, that one generation gap is definitely enough to call it slower

No, it's not that simple. (Just to clarify, we're still talking about the 5700G?)
The 5700G is faster than a 5600X outside games, and much faster than a 3700X.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G Review - Great Performance & Integrated Graphics

With the Ryzen 7 5700G, AMD is finally bringing their most powerful APU to the retail DIY channel. With 512 graphics cores based on the Vega architecture, the IGP is over twice as fast as Intel's Rocket Lake graphics. Thanks to the Zen 3 architecture, the eight CPU cores are blazing fast, too.

www.techpowerup.com

In games it's between a 3700X and a 5600X when using a high end graphics card (3080), with the three CPU's spread out a bit.
The differences will be a lot smaller when used together with a mid range card (3060), which the OP is looking for.

 

[Mussels]

No, it's not that simple. (Just to clarify, we're still talking about the 5700G?)
The 5700G is faster than a 5600X outside games, and much faster than a 3700X.

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G Review - Great Performance & Integrated Graphics

With the Ryzen 7 5700G, AMD is finally bringing their most powerful APU to the retail DIY channel. With 512 graphics cores based on the Vega architecture, the IGP is over twice as fast as Intel's Rocket Lake graphics. Thanks to the Zen 3 architecture, the eight CPU cores are blazing fast, too.

www.techpowerup.com

In games it's between a 3700X and a 5600X when using a high end graphics card (3080), with the three CPU's spread out a bit.
The differences will be a lot smaller when used together with a mid range card (3060), which the OP is looking for.

No, it goes slightly up in MT and down in ST
I've been very clear myself that the difference isn't huge, but if its for gaming it's downright silly to get the slower gaming CPU, possibly at higher dollar cost
the 5600x is a faster gaming CPU, and in most locations is cheaper (not all - sales and such alter things)

Keep in mind that you're looking at the 5700g review and i'm getting stats from the 7700x review - which includes the 5700g - i'm using the one with the updated information, newer drivers, windows features, etc.
The only difference is that since the 100% bar moves, the % values get smaller in comparison to whatever the fastest CPU is at the time of review
It's always a good tip to check the latest CPU reviews and see what they have (AMD reviews tend to have more AMD CPUs to compare to, intel has more intel etc)


From the 5700g review
5600x is 6.7% faster than a 5700g in gaming - that's not a small difference

You can also check out encoding where multi threaded the 6 core 5600x has the same performance as the 8 core 5700g
That holds true for the entire media encoding page where the lack of cache really hurts the 5700g - in every single result it's lucky to get a 3% advantage from 33% more cores
AMD Ryzen 7 5700G Review - Great Performance & Integrated Graphics - Media Encoding | TechPowerUp

If the 5700g is cheaper, sure - go for it

But if its the same price or more expensive, getting a slower CPU just because it has more cores (that do nothing for performance) or an IGP that wont be used is not wise

 

[SL2]

No, it goes slightly up in MT and down in ST

26 % faster in MT, and 2,5 % slower in ST.. I'd put the "slightly" at ST.
26 % is nothing to sneeze at.

I don't know how you interpret "outside gaming" as CBench specifically tho. This is what I linked to:

And again, differences between CPU's in gaming benchmarks will shrink when the GPU is slower.

From the 5700g review
5600x is 6.7% faster than a 5700g in gaming - that's not a small difference

I said:

In games it's between a 3700X and a 5600X when using a high end graphics card (3080), with the three CPU's spread out a bit.

Spread out a bit, as in not very close, while I added a link to the exact same review you got 6,7 % from.
(The 5600X is 5,9 % faster than the 5700G in the 7700X review, 0,8 % much of a difference if you're asking me.. )

And I didn't say anything about buying a more expensive computer.

 

[Chrispy_]

You really do have to consider your GPU choice with the 5700G. It's not just a slower CPU - that PCIe 3.0 will limit some GPUs and SSDs too.
For a budget part that performs like a 3000-series chip when it comes to minimum framerates, just pick up a 3700X on ebay for $100, or a fantastic 3900X for $150.

5700G's lack of PCIe 4.0 means big performance penalties with RTX 3050 and 3060-8G, RX 6400/6500/6600 series. In some titles and resolutions, the performance deficit can be 40%! Sure, you'd just change some settings to work around the bandwidth bottleneck, but the point is that it's a real problem that is exclusive to PCIe 3.0 CPUs. The 6600-series are arguably the best performance/$ cards right now and fine 1080pUltra options in just about every game on the market - why would you ruin it's performance AND pay more for a slower CPU?

Also, given the trend of midrange GPUs under $400 now coming with reduced x8 interfaces, the 5700G's GPU penalty will likely age poorly. Expect more GPUs next gen to have reduced x8 or even x4 interfaces.

 

[chrcoluk]

It performs like a ryzen 3000 series CPU, that one generation gap is definitely enough to call it slower

My 5600G is definitely faster than Zen 2. So not sure how the 5700G would be slower than my chip.

userbenchmark is pure garbage and should never, EVER be used
You've got some giant graphs two posts up showing where the 5700g fits, its reduced cache gives it the opposite effect the 3D chips have - reduced gaming performance, worse 1% and 0.1% values

Going to actual FPS values if that helps more, BL3 from the 7700x review
The G chips game like a 3000 series CPU
View attachment 273949

Ok, well its nice to cherry pick stuff I guess. These graphs look a bit better right? Shame there is no 5700X on them, so no more direct G to X comparison, but they dont look Zen 2 performance to me.

(multi threaded its toe to toe with much heavier threaded 3900)

- check Zen 2 3700X does that look close to 5700G to you?

I wouldnt consider that other site garbage but I didnt know TPU had reviewed the chip, so hopefully you wont be calling this TPU data garbage, of course the lower clock speeds means its loses some performance, and looks like in a few cases the cache size hurts noticeably.

You really do have to consider your GPU choice with the 5700G. It's not just a slower CPU - that PCIe 3.0 will limit some GPUs and SSDs too.
For a budget part that performs like a 3000-series chip when it comes to minimum framerates, just pick up a 3700X on ebay for $100, or a fantastic 3900X for $150.

5700G's lack of PCIe 4.0 means big performance penalties with RTX 3050 and 3060-8G, RX 6400/6500/6600 series. In some titles and resolutions, the performance deficit can be 40%! Sure, you'd just change some settings to work around the bandwidth bottleneck, but the point is that it's a real problem that is exclusive to PCIe 3.0 CPUs. The 6600-series are arguably the best performance/$ cards right now and fine 1080pUltra options in just about every game on the market - why would you ruin it's performance AND pay more for a slower CPU?

Also, given the trend of midrange GPUs under $400 now coming with reduced x8 interfaces, the 5700G's GPU penalty will likely age poorly. Expect more GPUs next gen to have reduced x8 or even x4 interfaces.

That is probably the fairest point I have read in this thread, its unfortunate that these GPUs are been released with only 8 lanes when gen 4 is barely out of the door. I would expect the vast majority of people buying those GPUs do not have gen 4 capable hardware. But you will need a gen 4 motherboard to match the gen 4 chip as well, of which many AM4 boards are not.

 

[damric]

Ok so these are pre-builts from Costco right?

I know a lot of harping on the lower L3 cache on 5700G Ok. I have two 4k rigs with 6900xt. One has a 5800x and x570. One has 5600G on X470. Can I tell the difference? No. If one day I do, maybe I'll update that X470 board. I will say that all of my 5000 series, even lowly 5500 run circles around all of the 3000, 2000, and 1000 series Ryzens I have had on my test benches.

The PCIE 3.0 is a concern with certain graphics cards that are wired x4 and x8. But if you have a 5700G APU you don't need those cards. Get a x16 wired card when you need more than that Vega 8.

But speaking of PCIE 3.0 and 4.0, we don't know what kind of shit motherboard is inside of those pre-builts. It might be some older PCIE 3.0 and be a moot point.

Another good point is that historically, in general, AMD pre-builts are poorly configured. If the BIOS is locked down you're screwed. I'd pick the Intel one because it's probably faster out of the box. But for $800-900 I'd see what I could build myself.

 

[Chrispy_]

Another good point is that historically, in general, AMD pre-builts are poorly configured.

Based on a few youtube channels doing pre-built roundups (LTT, GN, Dawid, etc) then yes. System integrators often seem to use AMD as the "shitty old budget part dumping ground" with terrible choices made in the spec.

That's not to say all AMD pre-builts are bad, but that it seems like there's a better chance of blindly buying a well-configured intel pre-built than an AMD one.

 

[damric]

Based on a few youtube channels doing pre-built roundups (LTT, GN, Dawid, etc) then yes. System integrators often seem to use AMD as the "shitty old budget part dumping ground" with terrible choices made in the spec.

That's not to say all AMD pre-builts are bad, but that it seems like there's a better chance of blindly buying a well-configured intel pre-built than an AMD one.

Exactly. Often you'll see APUs with single channel RAM of the lowest speed. Like why are they using a 5700G with an RTX 3060? Nonsensical.

 

[Chrispy_]

Exactly. Often you'll see APUs with single channel RAM of the lowest speed. Like why are they using a 5700G with an RTX 3060? Nonsensical.

5700G + dGPU is very dumb, hinting that this is a slapped together POS with whatever parts they couldn't sell any other way.