AMD Athlon 3000G: Aligning Names and Numbers at $49

The odd-one out from today’s announcement is a processor at the other end of the portfolio. To put it into context, if a user wants to jump on board the 7nm and Zen 2 bandwagon, the entry price point is $199 for the Ryzen 5 3600. Below that we have older hardware based on Zen 1, and AMD’s APU line of processors featuring integrated graphics. The new Athlon 3000G sits firmly in this category, and aims to be a very interesting processor indeed.

The Athlon 3000G is a 35W dual core Zen+ processor with 3 compute units of Vega graphics, built on 12nm and falls in the Picasso family of hardware. It doesn’t have any turbo, but does have a nominal frequency of 3.5 GHz on the CPU and 1100 MHz on the GPU. Supported memory speeds are DDR4-2933 and it can support up to 64 GB. It will come bundled with AMD’s 65W near-silent stock cooler, which is absolutely overkill for this product.

If a dual core Zen+ Picasso APU sounds familiar, it’s because AMD already has a processor that fits the bill: the AMD Athlon 300GE. Following previous convention, I would have expected AMD to call this new processor the 320GE, as it has +100 MHz more on the CPU. However, AMD are changing the naming for two reasons.

First, to align it more with the Ryzen family. With the Ryzen 3000 series starting with the Ryzen 3 3200G for the 65W Zen+ APUs, moving into the Ryzen 5 3600 for the 65 W desktop Zen 2 CPUs, each of these are four digits plus a letter. By moving to 3000G, it allows AMD to equate the two families together (even if there’s still an APU/desktop CPU microarchitecture mismatch).

AMD AM4 APU List
AnandTech Cores
Threads
Base
Freq
Turbo
Freq
Vega
CUs
TDP Price
12nm Zen+ - Picasso
Ryzen 5 3400G 4 / 8 3700 4200 11 65 W $149
Ryzen 3 3200G 4 / 4 3600 4000 8 65 W $99
Athlon 3000G 2 / 4 3500 - 3 35 W $49
Athlon Pro 300GE 2 / 4 3400 - 3 35 W -
14nm Zen - Raven Ridge
Ryzen 5 2400G 4 / 8 3600 3900 11 65 W $169
Ryzen 5 2400GE 4 / 8 3200 3800 11 35 W -
Ryzen 3 2200G 4 / 4 3500 3700 8 65 W $99
Ryzen 3 2200GE 4 / 4 3200 3600 8 35 W -
Athlon 240GE 2 / 4 3500 - 3 35 W $75
Athlon 220GE 2 / 4 3400 - 3 35 W $65
Athlon 200GE 2 / 4 3200 - 3 35 W $55

The other aspect is that the Athlon 3000G is also unlocked. AMD touts the 3000G as the first AM4 Athlon that is fully unlocked for overclocking, allowing users to adjust the CPU multiplier as high as their dreams desire (or to the limits of the silicon). As AMD is pairing the CPU with its 65W cooler, that means a lot of users, as long as the motherboard supports overclocking, should be able to push their CPU a bit higher. AMD stated that the +400 MHz in the slide deck for our briefing would represent a ‘typical’ overclock for an end-user, but then clarified they did use a high-end cooler to achieve that value. Nonetheless, an unlocked $49 chip with a cooler than can handle double the TDP could be exciting for users wanting to test their overclocking skills.

The other feather in AMD’s cap for this new chip is that it competes against Intel’s Celeron and Pentium desktop processors. Given the high demand for Intel's high-end 14nm products, the Pentium and Celeron parts have been available in relatively low in volumes as they don’t make as much money, especially when high-end demand is high. In that instance, AMD has the advantage as the company stated that there will be plenty of Athlon silicon to go around.

TRX40: High-End Motherboards for TR3 AMD's Slide Deck
Comments Locked

171 Comments

View All Comments

  • Spunjji - Friday, November 8, 2019 - link

    Upgrading to a new Intel CPU also requires buying a new motherboard, and you'll only need to change RAM if you're going from DDR3 to DDR4 or your DDR4 is old and slow.

    Basically, AMD is a better value option and AM4 still has a potential upgrade path to Zen 3. Sounds like your "uninformed" comment is projection.
  • martinbrice - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    I'm really curious how the 3960X and 3970X might game. Sounds like architecturally with the single I/O die, they shouldn't suffer from the NUMA issues of the 2970WX or 2990WX. They're (essentially or precisely?) the same chiplets as the 3900X, but have a greater IHS surface area. Their advertised boost is competitive with 3900X, it'll be a matter of what they can hold as a steady state. They also have a larger cache.

    It'd be great if we could get all the benefits of the extra cores, PCIe lanes, and memory channels, without having to significantly sacrifice gaming performance.
  • Total Meltdowner - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    I was wondering the same thing. I game on an 1800x just fine at 1440p... This tr3 boosts 500mhz higher with about the same base clock...
  • jospoortvliet - Sunday, November 10, 2019 - link

    ... and much better IPC. I would expect the TR's to beat your 1800x easily.
  • abufrejoval - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    Adjustable cTDP is a godsent, but only if it is run-time adjustable (not just a fixed setting in the BIOS as with some older APUs) and preferably with command line and API: That allows you to really tune the hardware between energy efficient batch processing and fast interactive response times, especially when you can take cores offline similarly at run-time to make sure you hit high-frequency points consistently with the remaining ones (and re-enable them later).

    That would then turn most of the hundreds of fixed allocation SKUs Intel is selling into "CPU as code".

    Of course these cTDP limits would have to be very closely observed (or be adustable), so you can control power vs. temperature limits, depending on if you want to allocate PSU overcapacity to increase boost speeds while there is thermal capacity or if you want a PSU that is energy optimzed, but has few reserves.
  • M O B - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    Why are the TRX40 motherboards all the same? Why aren't there different roles being played out with all of those PCIe lanes the motherboard manufacturer's are being given? Please make a motherboard for those of us who need lots of PCIe lanes and aren't just for gamers.

    With the TRX40 boards I see 4x PCIe slot on almost every single board--total. Some have a 5th slot, but is a x1.

    I have been waiting for something like the X299 WS SAGE/10G to come out on the AMD side for more than a year, but apparently that day will never come.
  • Hammer_Man - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    The slide with the Threadripper prices, reads "New TRX40 Platform With 88 PCIe® 4.0"
    88 Lanes?
    Dose the Chipset use a MUX och do the CPU have all those lanes?
  • DigitalFreak - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    They're probably playing the Intel game of adding the PCIe lanes on the CPU and the chipset together.
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    What's not to understand? It talks about the TRX40 platform, which is the chipset and the CPU as a whole and the article shows quite nicely what can be configured how. The CPU has 48 + 8 + 4 + 4 (=64) and the chipset has 8+8+4+4 (=24) which is the 88 number they come up with. 16 of those area already in use for the chipset communication, so 72 can be made available to the use however the motherboard manufacturer choose (as seen on the "AMD TRX40 Platform" slide). This isn't rocket science.
  • pkv - Thursday, November 7, 2019 - link

    Very disappointed by two things:
    (1) lack of retrocompatibility with x399
    (2) no clear upgrade route for a setup with 16c/32t; from 1950x (999$) one could go to 2950x (899$); but now there's a 50% premium to go to the first TR40 offering (3960x 1399 $).
    Going to 3950x+ x570 is not a solution when you need the pcie lanes provided by TR4.
    @Ian: did you hear anything about a future 16c TR 3000, which would overlap with the 3950x obviously ? (Intel has done so in the past, mixing up HEDT and mainstream)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now