The $60 CPU Question: AMD Athlon 200GE or Intel Pentium Gold G5400? A Review
by Ian Cutress on January 14, 2019 8:00 AM ESTConclusion: Split Strategy
Battling CPUs at $60 is going to be a tough call. Do you throw the best hardware around the chip that money can buy to compare the absolute limits of the hardware under ideal conditions, or do you keep it more reasonable for the price bracket it is intended for? I'm a big advocate of building a system piece by piece with the best you can afford at the time, rather than spreading out over several below average components at once, so I guess my suggested situation falls into neither the all-out or budget options. In our comparison of the G5400 and the 200GE however, the results are fairly clear-cut.
When deciding between these two processors, there's a hierarchy of questions you need to ask.
- Are you going to need the integrated graphics for gaming or compute?
- Do you already have good overclocking tools?
If the answer is yes to either of those, then the processor to get is the AMD Athlon 200GE. But the base answer for anyone getting a discrete graphics card, or a fresh system with a graphics card, then the answer is the Intel Pentium G5400.
Let me explain.
In all of our CPU and office benchmarks, except for those that are 'floating point' heavy (run math with fractions rather than whole numbers), then the Intel processor is the clear winner. There's no mistaking where it sits in our tests - it often beats the AMD chip by 8 to 20 percent.
In gaming with a discrete graphics card, for example, if you've invested in something like the GTX 1080, the Intel Pentium will push more frames and higher minimums in practically every test at every resolution.
If I were building a work and play system for anyone in my family, out of the two I'd take the Pentium G5400.
There are two situations in which I'd take the Athlon, however. If the system was a true budget gaming system, going for good 720p action without a discrete card, then the Athlon is the obvious choice. It knocks six shades out of the Pentium for its integrated graphics performance.
The other exception is if I already have a good motherboard and cooler to hand, and that motherboard allows me to overclock. I wouldn't go out of my way to invest in these parts for a specific build, but if I had them to spare and still had to choose between the two, then I'd get the Athlon in this situation as well, then push it to a good frequency.
But the baseline choice remains the Intel Pentium G5400 in this shoot-out.
If you want to compare either processor with any of the other processors we've tested on AnandTech, don't forget to check out our benchmark database comparison pages!
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
95 Comments
View All Comments
perdomot - Saturday, January 19, 2019 - link
How does the author of this article not know that the price of the G5400 is in the $120+ range? At that price, the 1300x would be the appropriate comparison and it clearly smokes the Intel cpu in the benches. The author needs a reprimand for this poor work.mito0815 - Thursday, January 24, 2019 - link
Oh ffs. Been a while since I was around, and OH WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT, the AMD shilling and -fanboyism in the comments has become just as unbearable as I'd imagined. People, he set up two budget CPUs on a comparable level (AMD strong in GPU, Intel a tad bit stronger in CPU performance & clock) against each other...nothing more, nothing less. Store prices for Intel CPU's being so inflated isn't really Intel's fault now, is it? The intended stock prices are still very much comparable. By your logic, AMD would've not been quite the price/performance god you all worship during the mining GPU price explosion now, would it?But no, all you guys want is an article with some AMD CPU coming out on top, no matter how it's done. Get over yourselves. By the looks of it, while GPU is still a sore point with AMD, Ryzen 2 seems to look good so far. Wait for that and don't go all rampant now.
kkilobyte - Saturday, January 26, 2019 - link
The article title starting with: "The $60 CPU question", it is not unreasonable 'fanboi-ism' to expect that the article is comparing CPUs costing, well, around $60.And the issue is not about Intel being guilty or not of the current high prices.
The problem is that the article draws conclusions that simply don't match reality, precisely because it doesn't adress the current discrepancy between the street prices and the manufacturer's suggested one. It would have taken a single paragraph to explain that.
My issue about the article is that, unlike what you are writing, it doesn't compare CPUs of similar (price) level. What it does is comparing CPUs of similar *theorical* price levels, but draws a conclusion as if those were the commonly seen street prices. This is dishonest and misleading.
watersb - Saturday, February 9, 2019 - link
Thanks for this review. I usually build low-end systems (PCs for family members), buy off-lease enterprise stuff (test servers), or used Apple or Lenovo gear (rebuilds and workstation projects).Budget gamng gear for the kids, then help them upgrade graohics card later, seems to be the one remaining path to "gaming enthusiast" hobby.
Everyone else gets a Chromebook. And a Raspberry Pi.
Dr Hasan - Tuesday, November 26, 2019 - link
Why are all products are old and prices too. Athlon 3000g is 50$ rayzen 2200g is less than 100$