Analysis taken from our AMD Tech Day 2018 article.

AMD vs. Intel

AMD’s main target with these new processors is to offer something Intel cannot: a combined processor and graphics package. Much like a number of AMD’s previous generation of products, the focus is two-fold: offering more performance at the same price, or being cheaper at equal performance.

For the first part of that argument, about having more performance at the same price, AMD suggests the following competition for the Ryzen 5 2400G:

  • $169 Ryzen 5 2400G (4C/8T, 3.6 GHz, 704 SPs)
  • $182 Core i5-7400 (4C/4T, xxx, 24 EUs)
  • $187 Core i5-8400 (6C/6T, xxx, 24 EUs)

AMD cites that in its internal testing, the 2400G scores 20% higher than the i5-8400 on PCMark 10, and can post 1920x1080 gaming results above 49 FPS in titles such as Battlefield One, Overwatch, Rocket League, and Skyrim, having 2x to 3x higher framerates than Intel’s integrated graphics. This is a claim we can confirm in this review.

For the Ryzen 3 2200G, the competing products are less well defined:

  • $99 Ryzen 3 2200G (4C/4T, 3.5 GHz, 512 SPs)
  • $117 Core i3-8100 (4C/4T, xxx, 23 EUs)
  • $84 Pentium G4620 (2C/4T, xxx, 12 EUs)

Again, through its internal testing, AMD is stating that the 2200G scores 13% higher than the Core i3-8100 in PCMark 10, as well as being within a few frames of the Ryzen 3 2400G in titles such as Rocket League, Skyrim, and Battlefield One. We have a similar scenario tested in this review.

The other side of the argument is price for the same performance. For this comparison, AMD suggests to test the new APUs against Intel processors paired with NVIDIA graphics, specifically the GT 1030. AMD’s data suggests that a Core i5-8400 with a GT1030 scores the same as a Ryzen 5 2400G in the 3DMark TimeSpy benchmark, although costing $290 (vs $169 for the APU) and drawing 30W more power. This is a scenario we also test in this review.

AMD vs. AMD: Raven Ridge and Bristol Ridge

These two new APUs have the internal codename of ‘Raven Ridge’ to signify the family of products. AMD also has ‘Bristol Ridge’ already in the market, using the previous generation of CPU cores and previous generation of integrated graphics. AMD has not actively promoted Bristol Ridge to the public in any serious way, with these parts being hold-overs from the previous platform and designed to be a quick fill within AMD’s product line. To that effect, Bristol Ridge processors were only available for OEMs at the beginning for pre-built systems, and AMD only made them available to the public within the last few months. To our knowledge, AMD did not initiate a review sampling program to the press of these processors either.

With the launch of the two new Zen-plus-Vega Raven Ridge APUs, the Bristol Ridge processors will still continue to be sold. AMD’s reasoning revolves around offering choice in the market, particularly to its OEM customers, and has stated that the two products offer different features and is thus not competing on price. It is clear to say that for anyone buying a new system, the newest products offer the better value: a much higher per-core performance, improved thermal budgeting, newer integrated graphics, and ultimately the core design is the future of AMD. The only items that Bristol Ridge brings to the table now are the legacy aspect, to replace like-for-like, and the offer of a number of 35W-rated products. Bristol Ridge PRO processors are also on the market, offered alongside the new Ryzen PRO with Vega.

Squaring up the competing parts shows that:

Raven Ridge vs. Bristol Ridge
  Ryzen 5
2400G
A12-9800   Ryzen 3
2200G
A10-9700
Core uArch Zen Excavator   Zen Excavator
Cores/Threads 4 / 8 2 / 4   4 / 4 2 / 4
Base CPU Frequency 3.6 GHz 3.8 GHz   3.5 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo CPU Frequency 3.9 GHz 4.2 GHz   3.7 GHz 3.8 GHz
TDP 65 W 65 W   65 W 65 W
cTDP 46-65 W 45-65W   46-65 W 45-65W
L2 Cache 512 KB/core 1 MB/core   512 KB/core 1 MB/core
L3 Cache 4 MB -   4 MB -
Graphics Vega 11 GCN 3 Gen   Vega 8 GCN 3 Gen
Compute Units 11 CUs 8 CUs   8 CUs 6 CUs
Streaming Processors 704 SPs 512 SPs   512 SPs 384 SPs
Base GPU Frequency 1250 MHz 1108 MHz   1100 MHz 1029 MHz
DRAM Support DDR4-2933 DDR4-2400   DDR4-2933 DDR4-2400
Price $169 $99   $99 $79

Given the performance uplift we have seen from previous generation A-series processors to the Ryzen desktop parts already, the new APUs should put the nail in the coffin for older AMD parts.

Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G: The Ryzen 2000 Series Test Bed and Setup
POST A COMMENT

179 Comments

View All Comments

  • coolhardware - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    I have been holding on to my Intel 2500K desktop for what seems like forever. It has been a trusty companion but with a TDP of 95W and a dedicated GPU pulling 100W+ I'm looking for something a little less power hungry. AMD seems to have what I've been looking for and the price is right :-)

    Amazon has the 2400G in stock, http://amzn.to/2BVzSSn and I think I'm going to bite the bullet!

    PS does anybody have a mobo recommendation for pairing with the 2400G? (stability is my main concern, probably won't OC since the 2400G should be a nice step up from my 2500K)
    Reply
  • zaza - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    if already have a decent GPU it is better to get the Ryzen 1600 instead. it is only 10 or 20$ more but you will get two extra and 8 extra PCIe lanes. These APU only make sense as a placeholder to get something better, for example building a working PC, then add a dedicated GPU later. Reply
  • haukionkannel - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    Or this will get you very good office computer, without ever needing external GPU... Reply
  • forgerone - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    EXACTLY!!! This is the market for Ryzen with Vega. Business PC's and Laptops and also economy gaming for the markets that can not afford discrete GPU AIB. Reply
  • coolhardware - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    Cool, thanks for the tip! How is discrete non-gaming (desktop, Photoshop) GPU power usage these days? I live off the grid and so energy efficiency is a big plus. I do not game much so (SC2 and some lower end Steam games).

    Also, any suggestions for motherboards for 1600 or 2400G? Again, stability is top criteria for me.

    Last question, what's the max number of video outputs for the 2400G? Thx!
    Reply
  • coolhardware - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    PS I currently have a GTX 960. It does look like a step down versus the 2400G, as ~1030 (similar benchs to 2400G) is quite a bit lower speed than a 960:
    http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-96...
    Reply
  • Cellar Door - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    The 960 is 2-3x the performance of this. Reply
  • Samus - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    GTX960 is a $200+ GPU. It's substantially faster than any integrated graphics and probably will be for the next few years. Reply
  • msroadkill612 - Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - link

    " I live off the grid and so energy efficiency is a big plus." - apuS are exactly what you should be using. Reply
  • WorldWithoutMadness - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link

    then might as well wait for ryzen+ version.

    Seriously AMD need to release something akin to NUC using the Raven Ridge. They can rake quite a lot of market with that. I will change my office's PCs with those, better GPU and comparable CPU.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now