The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, Ryzen 5 5600G, and Ryzen 3 5300G Review
by Dr. Ian Cutress on August 4, 2021 1:45 PM ESTIntegrated Graphics Tests
Finding 60+ FPS
Never mind 30 frames per second, if we want gaming to be smooth, we look for true 60 FPS gaming. It's going to be a benchmark for any integrated graphics solution, but one question is if games are getting more difficult to render faster than integrated graphics is improving. Given how we used to talk about 30-40 FPS on integrated graphics before Ryzen, it stands to reason that the base requirements of games is only ever getting worse. To meet that need, we need processors with a good level of integrated oomph.
So here are a series of our tests that meet that mark. Unfortunately most of them are 720p Low (or worse).
A full list of results at various resolutions and settings can be found in our Benchmark Database.
These last couple of games here, World of Tanks and CS:Source are getting on in age a bit. Playing at 1080p High/Max on both is easily done, but we cranked Source up to 4K and we're not even getting 60 frames per second. The previous generation R7 even beat out the new APUs here, probably indicating that the previous generation had more power going into the GPU and the new models are balanced towards the CPU cores a bit more. It works in some games clearly, and 1080p resolutions, but not here at 4K.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
135 Comments
View All Comments
mode_13h - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
> that hot, expensive Gen 4 M.2 NVMe SSD you want to use on your new> motherboard will not achieve the speed you paid dearly for.
None of the 1st gen PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe SSDs did, in fact. A lot of them still don't. And if you're not running it at PCIe 4.0, then it's probably also running a bit cooler.
alfatekpt - Monday, August 9, 2021 - link
Currently 5600G and 5600X are at the same price in my country. Should I get the 5600G? I already have a GPU so having an integrated one is only useful in case the GPU breaks or needs to go under warranty and I still can use the PC...mode_13h - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
I wouldn't get the G. The X is faster in every single benchmark, and sometimes substantially! Plus, you get PCIe 4.0, in case that's ever of interest.If you just want a backup GPU, so you're not completely dead in the water, then maybe pick up a used low-end model (especially when GPU prices cool off, a bit). I'm seeing used RX 550's for < $100, which is roughly performance-equivalent.
If you don't care about performance, then you can go even older. I have a HD 5450 as a sort of last-resort fallback, and those are CHEAP! That's pre-GCN, but I know it still works on Linux. I think it shouldn't be too hard to find something a bit newer that's also cheap, though. Or, if you have some friends who would loan you an obsolete GPU in a pinch, that's also an option worth considering.
phoenix_rizzen - Monday, August 9, 2021 - link
The "Ryzen 5 APUs (65W)" table on page 1 lists the Ryzen 5 CPUs with 8 cores / 16 threads. Should be 6/12 instead.plonk420 - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
thanks for the core to core latency tests! looks like RPCS3 will definitely benefit from it \o/Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
‘In our largest sub-test, the Intel processors crack on ahead,’Did I miss the stuff about performance-per-watt?
If an Intel chip needs a boatload more power to do the barely faster work, how is that a victory for Intel’s chip?
Performance-per-watt is important when we’re dealing with today’s 14nm vs. ‘7nm’ situation.
There should be an entire page devoted to performance-per-watt.
mode_13h - Thursday, August 12, 2021 - link
There is indeed a page on power consumption, but the most revealing charts only compared the three AMD 5000G-series processors to each other. That was a painful omission.Intel got included in the peak power chart, but we all know that peak power is hardly the whole story.
Oxford Guy - Thursday, August 12, 2021 - link
‘There is indeed a page on power consumption’Indeed, there is no page on performance-per-watt — and the article continues this site’s erroneous tradition of claiming that getting a slightly higher score in a benchmark whilst using a ton more power constitutes a victory.
Context is key. These articles should pay more mind to practical context, rather than things like pumping 1.45 volts into Rocket Lake and ignoring power consumption failure (vis-a-vis the competition) when examining a benchmark.
mode_13h - Friday, August 13, 2021 - link
FWIW, I was trying to agree with you. Their "Power Consumption" page had several key omissions.Oxford Guy - Sunday, August 15, 2021 - link
Regardless... peak power isn’t enough to constitute a page on performance per watt.