Benchmarking Performance: CPU Office Tests

The office programs we use for benchmarking aren't specific programs per-se, but industry standard tests that hold weight with professionals. The goal of these tests is to use an array of software and techniques that a typical office user might encounter, such as video conferencing, document editing, architectural modelling, and so on and so forth.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

Chromium Compile (v56)

Our new compilation test uses Windows 10 Pro, VS Community 2015.3 with the Win10 SDK to combile a nightly build of Chromium. We've fixed the test for a build in late March 2017, and we run a fresh full compile in our test. Compilation is the typical example given of a variable threaded workload - some of the compile and linking is linear, whereas other parts are multithreaded.

Office: Chromium Compile (v56)

Our compile test has an eclectic mix of requirements, with different segments having different bottlenecks. The Ryzen 5 2400G matches the higher frequency of the Core i3-8350K, even though it already has a core and memory advantage. An interesting thing here is that the Ryzen 3 2200G and the Ryzen 5 1400 are almost evenly matched, even though the 1400 has double the threads. This is because of the frequency of the 2200G, and the memory speed.

PCMark 10

PCMark 10 is the latest all-in-one office-related performance tool that combines a number of tests for low-to-mid office workloads, including some gaming, but focusing on aspects like document manipulation, response, and video conferencing.

Office: PCMark10 Extended Score (Overall)

Office: PCMark10-1 Essential Set Score

Office: PCMark10-2 Productivity Set Score

Office: PCMark10-3 Creation Set Score

Office: PCMark10-4 Physics Score

PCMark8: link

Despite originally coming out in 2008/2009, Futuremark has maintained PCMark8 to remain relevant in 2017. On the scale of complicated tasks, PCMark focuses more on the low-to-mid range of professional workloads, making it a good indicator for what people consider 'office' work. We run the benchmark from the commandline in 'conventional' mode, meaning C++ over OpenCL, to remove the graphics card from the equation and focus purely on the CPU. PCMark8 offers Home, Work and Creative workloads, with some software tests shared and others unique to each benchmark set.

Office: PCMark8 Creative (non-OpenCL)

Office: PCMark8 Home (non-OpenCL)

Office: PCMark8 Work (non-OpenCL)

 

Benchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding Tests Benchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy Tests
Comments Locked

177 Comments

View All Comments

  • Fritzkier - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    Well not really. While they using Pentium G with GT 730 or lower, many uses AMD A-series APU too (since they no need to use low end discrete GPU to be on par)

    And Ryzen 2200G also priced the same as Pentium G with GT 730 tho. The exception is RAM prices...
  • watzupken - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    If AMD uses a beefier Vega IGPU, are you willing to pay for it is the question? I feel iGPU will only make sense if the price is low, or if the power consumption is low. Where Intel is using AMD graphics, is likely for a fruity client. Outside of that, you won't see many manufacturers using it because of the cost. For the same amount of money Intel is asking for the chip only, there are many possible configuration with dedicated graphics that you can think of. Also, the supposedly beefier AMD graphics is about as fast as a GTX 1050 class. You are better off buying a GTX 1050Ti.
  • iwod - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    Well unless we could solve the GPU Crypto problem in the near future ( Which we wont ) I think having better Vega GFx combined with CPU is good deal.
  • Gadgety - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    Will these APUs do HDR UHD 4k Bluray playback (yes I know it's a tiny niche), or is that still Intel only?
  • GreenReaper - Wednesday, February 14, 2018 - link

    Probably best to just get an Xbox One S for it. As a bonus you could play a few games on it, too!
  • watzupken - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    I feel the R3 2200G is still a better deal than the R5 2400G. The price gap is too big relative to the difference in performance. And because these chips are over clocking friendly, so despite the R3 being a cut down chip, there could be some performance catchup with some overclocking. Overall, I feel both are great chips especially for some light/ casual gaming. If gaming is the main stay, then there is no substitute for a dedicated graphic solution.
  • serendip - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    The 2200G is a sweet because it offers most of the 2400G's performance at a sub-$100 point. For most business and home desktops, it's more than enough for both CPU and GPU performance. And with discrete GPUs being so hard to get now, good-enough APU graphics will do for the majority of home users. Hopefully AMD can translate all this into actual shipping machines.

    I'm going to sound like a broken record but AMD could send another boot up Intel's behind by making an Atom competitor. A dual-core Zen with SMT and cut-down Vega graphics would still be enough to blow Atom out of the water.
  • msroadkill612 - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    Its a pity they dont get hbcc.
  • msroadkill612 - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    Simply put, amd now own the entry level up to most 1080p gaming, and its a daunting jump in cost to improve by much.

    Its polite and nice of this review to pretend intel has competitive products, and include them for old times sake.
  • serendip - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    Looks like AMD owns the good-enough category. As I said previously, let's hope this translates into actual machines being shipped, seeing as OEMs previously made some terrible AMD-based systems at the low end.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now