Marrying Vega and Zen: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G Review
by Ian Cutress on February 12, 2018 9:00 AM ESTBenchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy Tests
Our legacy tests represent benchmarks that were once at the height of their time. Some of these are industry standard synthetics, and we have data going back over 10 years. All of the data here has been rerun on Windows 10, and we plan to go back several generations of components to see how performance has evolved.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
3D Particle Movement v1
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.
CineBench 11.5 and 10
Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.
x264 HD 3.0
Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.
177 Comments
View All Comments
Pork@III - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
I think I have to make it clear. The quoted processor(Core i7-8809G) will crush the Ryzen 5 2400G, but some other cheaper models in its series will perform better, just the superiority will be, not so great in the test results, but there will be such in terms of the price ratio / productivity.Manch - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Stfu trollHolliday75 - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
I don't know any idiots that would buy that CPU to build a low end gaming rig that can still handle facebook and Office products. Worthless comment.lilmoe - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Welcome back AMD :)I'll be holding on to my Haswell for another year or two. Fingers crossed for a 7nm quad core (6 core maybe???) with HT and Vega 16 (or 18) APU. When that's out, I'll be upgrading promptly, both laptop and desktop machines.
REALLY excited.
ToTTenTranz - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Thanks for the review!What are the system specs for the GT 1030 results? I can't find them in the review..
thevoiceofreason - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
They need to release a variant with halved CPU clocks and TDP for HTPC use.Manch - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Cant you just undervolt and downclock it?lilmoe - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
You don't need to half CPU clocks to reach half the TDP, you can get 70-80% by halfing TDP. That would be very appealing actually for 35-40 watts.Manch - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link
It's funny you said that bc you're spot on in regards to the GE variants!jjj - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
There was a leak over the weekend about GE SKUs at 35W and lower clocks.