Marrying Vega and Zen: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G Review
by Ian Cutress on February 12, 2018 9:00 AM ESTPower Consumption
For our power consumption metrics, we use a Prime 95 blend on fixed threads to generate a strong load, and then poll the internal power registers that determine power state calculations to get the power consumption. Each processor is different in how it reports its power, which depends on the level of control the processor has: some of the more advanced CPUs, such as Ryzen, will provide per-core power numbers, while the latest Intel CPUs only give a figure for the CPUs as a whole but also include DRAM controller and uncore power consumption.
An interesting element to the power consumption on the Ryzen APUs, due to the unified power delivery subsystem in play feeding the CPU and the integrated graphics, is that the power registers only report half the power consumption when probed (e.g. when 14W, shows 7W). As of yet, we are unsure if this has a knock-on effect on how the processor adjusts its turbo modes in response to power consumption. Nonetheless, a simple scaling factor gives the following results.
Total Package: The Whole Processor
For this data, we take the values of the processor as a whole, which includes all the interconnect, memory controllers, PCIe root complexes, etc. The system is still only loading the CPU cores with minimal effect on the rest of the system, however depending on how the power is managed, some of the sub-systems still remain enabled.
At full load, the difference between the Ryzen 5 and the other Ryzen CPUs shows that the 2400G is using more of its upper margin, compared to the 1400 which is rated at the same power (note TDP is only determined at the base frequency), but the extra frequency of the 2400G means that there is extra power draw overall. Part of this is due to the Infinity Fabric, which we will see below. But what these tests also underline is that in a quad-core configuration, the Intel CPUs are still very power efficient.
Cores Only: Pure Work
For the processors that split out the data, we can look at the power consumption of the cores on their own, without any of the sub-systems, like uncore, mesh, or infinity fabric. This usually paints a different picture to the package power.
For the core only power, the Ryzen 5 2400G uses less power than the Core i3-8350K, despite the situation being reversed when considering the whole package. This means that Infinity Fabric takes a lot of power here, and the ring bus solution that Intel uses benefits from being simpler, and Intel can push more power to its individual cores.
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.