# AMD Athlon 3000G with Vega 3 Graphics



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

AMD's Athlon 3000G is the dream of every entry-level system builder. Priced at only $49, it offers four threads, integrated Vega graphics, and an unlocked multiplier. We overclocked it beyond 4 GHz with minimal voltage increases, and memory support has improved, too.

*Show full review*


----------



## Jism (Nov 19, 2019)

Why would you attempt to run an entry level 49$ CPU onto a 570 class motherboard? Perhaps to bios flash one or another but your kind of stupid to buy a premium end motherboard with a 50 dollar CPU.

Cool review, pretty much competes against intel pentium. These are pretty much left overs from the first generation of CPU's that proberly did not qualify certain standards.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 19, 2019)

I guess they had plenty of samples of this then?


----------



## dj-electric (Nov 19, 2019)

I got one of those 3000G units for a few days now, and have yet to post my impressions, but here's the deal....

The competition to this CPU is less the Pentiums of the world, and more stuff like the Ryzen 3 2200G. The significantly more powerful on all front 2200G is relatively cheap these days, sometimes around the 65$ area. Its very hard not to justify the small extra for the big benefit of such upgrade. Its something ull hear again and again in media covering the 3000G


----------



## KarymidoN (Nov 19, 2019)

Jism said:


> Cool review, pretty much competes against intel pentium. These are pretty much left overs from the first generation of CPU's that proberly did not qualify certain standards.





the closest thing in price intel has to offer costs $35 more, this thing is a really low entry level processor for people with basically no money for a CPU.


----------



## sutyi (Nov 19, 2019)

2200G is 59.90 at microcenter (in store pick up) as we speak, you can probably can slap a cpu+mobo combo deal on top of that. Thats twice the cores, twice the iGPU horsepower and better upgradability with a dGPU.

3000G is a a solid *nyeh...*


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Nov 19, 2019)

I'd really like to know what the market is for these, it cant be for the pre-entry level desktop market can it?


----------



## kapone32 (Nov 19, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> I'd really like to know what the market is for these, it cant be for the pre-entry level desktop market can it?



For kids that want to get a PC to play Minecraft and League of Legends on their 2010 series 1080P TV.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 19, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> I'd really like to know what the market is for these, it cant be for the pre-entry level desktop market can it?


Africa, India, SE Asia, South America...
People think too much about their home countries when looking at hardware sometimes...


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 19, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Africa, India, SE Asia, South America...
> People think too much about their home countries when looking at hardware sometimes...


Exactly. It's not that rare to see even here in TPU some users with much older hardware even as their daily driver.

I'm pretty sure that someone who gets one of these, knows exactly that a 50 eur/usd CPU can't do miracles, but has a great price/performance ratio.


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

dj-electric said:


> The competition to this CPU is less the Pentiums of the world, and more stuff like the Ryzen 3 2200G. The significantly more powerful on all front 2200G is relatively cheap these days, sometimes around the 65$ area. Its very hard not to justify the small extra for the big benefit of such upgrade. Its something ull hear again and again in media covering the 3000G


Ryzen 2200G (and it's 3000-series successors) have TDP=65W. They're aimed at low-end, actively cooled PCs.
This Athlon is 35W, which makes it useful for passively cooled SFF PCs, AiO, high-end IoT, NAS.

The more interesting part is... why this even exists. It's a rebranded Athlon 240GE.
As a result 3000-series CPUs currently use all 3 generations of Zen dies. MESS.


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> The more interesting part is... why this even exists. It's a rebranded Athlon 240GE.


I guess that the unlocked multiplier is one reason, since those 200-series were locked.


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

Jism said:


> Why would you attempt to run an entry level 49$ CPU onto a 570 class motherboard? Perhaps to bios flash one or another but your kind of stupid to buy a premium end motherboard with a 50 dollar CPU.


To have identical test conditions for all CPUs? Also could be an upgrade path, buy a good motherboard now, with a cheap CPU & IGP, and buy a better CPU down the road



TheLostSwede said:


> I guess they had plenty of samples of this then?


Looks like it..


----------



## btarunr (Nov 19, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> India



PUBG addicts here pick up i3-9100F and pair it with GTX 1650. Everyone else in the lower end picks a G5400. Will be interesting to see if that changes.


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

KarymidoN said:


> View attachment 136995
> 
> the closest thing in price intel has to offer costs $35 more, this thing is a really low entry level processor for people with basically no money for a CPU.


Intel has a choice of $40-60 Pentium/Celeron chips that compete directly with Athlons.

i3-9100F has 4 cores and doesn't have an IGP, so it's put against (similarly priced) Ryzen 3.


----------



## newtekie1 (Nov 19, 2019)

KarymidoN said:


> the closest thing in price intel has to offer costs $35 more, this thing is a really low entry level processor for people with basically no money for a CPU.



The i3-9100F is not the closest thing Intel has to compete to this.  The G5400 would be, its only $10 more.


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

Chloe Price said:


> I guess that the unlocked multiplier is one reason, since those 200-series were locked.


Who overclocks $50 Athlons?
How much money would you have to spend on a cooler to make the gain noticeable?

The only target group for OCing this SoC I can think of are people who'd want to deliberately burn it.


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> Who overclocks $50 Athlons?
> How much money would you have to spend on a cooler to make the gain noticeable?
> 
> The only target group for OCing this SoC I can think of are people who'd want to deliberately burn it.


I would and probably many other who would get this to a HTPC or something, because why not?

We don't live the era of Socket A anymore when burning a CPU via OC'ing was possible.

edit: It would be cool from Intel to release an unlocked Pentium like the good old G3258.


----------



## Deathy (Nov 19, 2019)

Nice little CPU for the price. Too bad it isn't at least Zen+. I'd probably take this over a similar Intel offering (4C Atom or 2C/4T Pentium). But for a system I'd really want to use, I guess I would get one of those 100€ R5 2600 or a 50€ R 3 1200.
I'm really looking forward to some Zen 2 APUs, those will give us whole new HTPC / NAS with video out possibilities.

Edit: Hm, no OC power consumption / temperatures?


----------



## jabbadap (Nov 19, 2019)

newtekie1 said:


> The i3-9100F is not the closest thing Intel has to compete to this.  The G5400 would be, its only $10 more.



That actually got updated to G5420, G5400 is from Q2/2018. But yeah that one costs $64, so $15 more.


----------



## Mistral (Nov 19, 2019)

I honestly want to know, who would really run this A300G on a X570 motherboard?


----------



## dgianstefani (Nov 19, 2019)

i9-9100f should be i3-9100f in the review conclusion.


----------



## Frick (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> Who overclocks $50 Athlons?
> How much money would you have to spend on a cooler to make the gain noticeable?
> 
> The only target group for OCing this SoC I can think of are people who'd want to deliberately burn it.



Oohhhh remember when this was a thing? That is what I truly miss these days: buying cheap CPU's and overclocking them to the same level as their bigger siblings. That is what I think about when I hear the Athlon name. 2500+ Barton on an Abit NF7-S 2.0 and 512MB RAM...


Anyway, decent! Currently though there are plenty of Ryzen 1200's to be had for <€60. And personally I probably wouldn't buy a dual core for any occasion.


----------



## HwGeek (Nov 19, 2019)

You can get New Ryzen 1500X on Aliexpress for $66 without cooler or $72 with Box cooler with Free shipping ;-).
Nice review, maybe we should have 3000G OC competition so many ppl can participate since the CPU is so cheap and no worries killing it ;-).


----------



## hojnikb (Nov 19, 2019)

too bad you can't overclock it on a320 boards.

also, is this actually using carved out 2400G dies or are they using a special 2 core die (banded kestrel?)


----------



## bobalazs (Nov 19, 2019)

Just imagine having this beast in 2010.


----------



## IceShroom (Nov 19, 2019)

@W1zzard  which die the new 3000G has?? RAVEN1 or RAVEN2??


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

IceShroom said:


> @W1zzard  which die the new 3000G has?? RAVEN1 or RAVEN2??


AMD says "14 nanometer Raven Ridge" (not 12 nm Picasso)


----------



## CityCultivator (Nov 19, 2019)

hojnikb said:


> too bad you can't overclock it on a320 boards.
> 
> also, is this actually using carved out 2400G dies or are they using a special 2 core die (banded kestrel?)


No special dies. Carved out raven ridge.


----------



## IceShroom (Nov 19, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> AMD says "14 nanometer Raven Ridge" (not 12 nm Picasso)


AMD has two 14nm APU die. One with 4 CPU core and 11GPU CU, and one with 2 CPU core and 3GPU core. 
So which is powering the new 3000G?? Maybe we have to delid to findout.


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

IceShroom said:


> AMD has two 14nm APU die. One with 4 CPU core and 11GPU CU, and one with 2 CPU core and 3GPU core.
> So which is powering the new 3000G?? Maybe we have to delid to findout.


Correct. Don't think we can find out without delid, and AMD might change that for harvesting anyway.


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

Chloe Price said:


> I would and probably many other who would get this to a HTPC or something, because why not?
> We don't live the era of Socket A anymore when burning a CPU via OC'ing was possible.


Sure, it's a perfect choice for a HTPC or NAS or some funky SFF project. I'm not against the CPU. I'm shocked anyone mentioned overclocking. 

And I said: deliberately. As in: you'd really want to see what happens when you run a CPU without a cooler. Does it melt or smoke? Because who wouldn't? 


Frick said:


> Oohhhh remember when this was a thing? That is what I truly miss these days: buying cheap CPU's and overclocking them to the same level as their bigger siblings. That is what I think about when I hear the Athlon name. 2500+ Barton on an Abit NF7-S 2.0 and 512MB RAM...


Different, boost-less times. They are never coming back.

If you take a modern CPU and compare max OC to base clocks, you may still see that ~30% performance gain one could get from old Athlons. 


> Anyway, decent! Currently though there are plenty of Ryzen 1200's to be had for <€60. And personally I probably wouldn't buy a dual core for any occasion.


For an occasion of basic NAS? I repeat: this CPU is a 35W, not 65W. It's a different product.

Low-end is crowded and it often seems that a few extra bucks can elevate performance. And it's true.
In this price range is more about features and... actually having or not having a CPU. ;-)


----------



## warpedpuck (Nov 19, 2019)

At last CPU that is not to much for a B350 Asus Prime plus to OC to the max. I had to move my R5 1600 to a Crosshair VI to get reliable 3.85 OC. The Prime plus B350 would do it until it over heated. Still have it gathering dust in the garage. Now I am a believer. Guess I will have place a build by the TV to make my bare bones HDTV smarter than the $200+ cost more  'smart" TV.


----------



## hojnikb (Nov 19, 2019)

IceShroom said:


> AMD has two 14nm APU die. One with 4 CPU core and 11GPU CU, and one with 2 CPU core and 3GPU core.
> So which is powering the new 3000G?? Maybe we have to delid to findout.



did 2core/3gpu die ever materialize in a product though?


----------



## IceShroom (Nov 19, 2019)

hojnikb said:


> did 2core/3gpu die ever materialize in a product though?


R-Series Embedded APU use that 2 core die.


----------



## hojnikb (Nov 19, 2019)

IceShroom said:


> R-Series Embedded APU use that 2 core die.


Interesting. Too bad they didnt use that die outside of embedded world. It would make a ton of sense for a cheap integrated cpu for a itx board for example. like the am1.


----------



## jabbadap (Nov 19, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> AMD says "14 nanometer Raven Ridge" (not 12 nm Picasso)



Hmh, your cpu-z pic says Picasso 12nm. Could you try newest version if there's some update for cpuid dB for this(Albeit change log does not mention any)?


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 19, 2019)

added IGP OC results.. +50%, pretty nice


----------



## Houd.ini (Nov 19, 2019)

Frick said:


> Oohhhh remember when this was a thing? That is what I truly miss these days: buying cheap CPU's and overclocking them to the same level as their bigger siblings. That is what I think about when I hear the Athlon name. 2500+ Barton on an Abit NF7-S 2.0 and 512MB RAM...
> 
> 
> Anyway, decent! Currently though there are plenty of Ryzen 1200's to be had for <€60. And personally I probably wouldn't buy a dual core for any occasion.


Or even better, an Athlon XP-M 2500+ on an Abit NF7-S v2.0 with 512 MB of that high voltage DDR IC that I can´t remember the name of. 70$ CPU goodness that overclocked to speeds faster than any CPU available to buy at the time (mine did 2,55 GHz if I recall).


----------



## dicktracy (Nov 19, 2019)

Junk


----------



## moob (Nov 19, 2019)

sutyi said:


> 2200G is 59.90 at microcenter (in store pick up) as we speak, you can probably can slap a cpu+mobo combo deal on top of that. Thats twice the cores, twice the iGPU horsepower and better upgradability with a dGPU.
> 
> 3000G is a a solid *nyeh...*


Which is great for those of us with a Micro Center near us, but even within the US that simply isn't the case.


----------



## R0H1T (Nov 19, 2019)

Surprised to see so many negative comments about this chip as it has literally killed Pentium/Celeron territory, excluding the rebates of course that make their investments worth it for many OEMs. Also OCing with a stock cooler, yeah try that on your Intel chip ~ oh wait those cheapskates don't bundle a cooler with it


----------



## Nihilus (Nov 19, 2019)

On before "you can get x CPU at microcenter for..."

Nevermind, too late.


----------



## john_ (Nov 19, 2019)

The performance difference between the Athlon and the 9900KS/Ryzen 9 3900X at 4K resolution, is really funny.

Thanks for this review.


----------



## agatong55 (Nov 19, 2019)

wonder how this would work for a plex server, could it do 4k video and wonder how many streams at once it could handle.


----------



## jabbadap (Nov 19, 2019)

R0H1T said:


> Surprised to see so many negative comments about this chip as it has literally killed Pentium/Celeron territory, excluding the rebates of course that make their investments worth it for many OEMs. Also OCing with a stock cooler, yeah try that on your Intel chip ~ oh wait those cheapskates don't bundle a cooler with it



Don't really know though... It can be OC, which is good, but cpu performance is still overall below intel pentiums. For IGpu alone is one reason to go with these. But if one add dgpu, intel pentiums are still better backbone to those.

And all but k processors from intel comes with that crappy stock cooler, unless one especially is purchasing tray processor.


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

R0H1T said:


> Surprised to see so many negative comments about this chip as it has literally killed Pentium/Celeron territory, excluding the rebates of course that make their investments worth it for many OEMs.


Yeah. It has literally killed the Pentium alternatives which offer the same characteristics (sans gaming) for $14 more on MSRP ($5-10 in stores). And they've been around for over a year, so shifting them to $50 shouldn't be a problem.


> Also OCing with a stock cooler, yeah try that on your Intel chip ~ oh wait those cheapskates don't bundle a cooler with it


Yes yes. OCing a $50 CPU. This is what every teenage gamer looks forward to. And imagine all the overclocked NASes!

AFAIK all boxed Pentiums have a cooler bundled. Surely the ones this challenges (G5400, G5420 and their -T variants).
And it's very likely better than what AMD bundles with this Athlon...



jabbadap said:


> And all but k processors from intel comes with that crappy stock cooler, unless one especially is purchasing tray processor.


If you don't like the cooler, throw it away. You wrote that like if the cooler was glued to the CPU (sounded like "-K" were better because they come without one).

And actually the Intel cooler isn't bad for Pentiums. The reason is very simple: Intel uses the same design for all consumer CPUs - from 35W Pentiums to 65W i7/i9 (higher in boost).
On a i7-9700 it's quite loud but does the job. But on a 35W Pentium you can leave it at 1100 rpm and it's almost noiseless.

AMD, on the other hand, uses 4 different coolers for the Zen lineup. The basic is rated for 65W, but AMD bundles it only with 35W CPUs. I've seen it live and IMO it's way louder than Intel's.
And, honestly, it's really badly made... I hope someone actually buys these Athlons so that we could learn if they can survive 2-3 years.

Intel stock coolers compromise on many things (almost all of them, too be honest), but are made to last a decade.


----------



## jabbadap (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> Yeah. It has literally killed the Pentium alternatives which offer the same characteristics (sans gaming) for $14 more on MSRP ($5-10 in stores). And they've been around for over a year, so shifting them to $50 shouldn't be a problem.
> 
> Yes yes. OCing a $50 CPU. This is what every teenage gamer look forward to. And imagine all the overclocked NASes!
> 
> ...



Yeah, I actually agree with that one, just said it a bit awkward way. Pentiums are max. 54W TDP processors without turbo, so that "crappy" 65W rated Intel stock cooler is just perfect fit for them.


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> And I said: deliberately. As in: you'd really want to see what happens when you run a CPU without a cooler. Does it melt or smoke? Because who wouldn't?


The system would shut down when the CPU reaches that limit, just like they've did since Pentium 4 days 

edit: and yeah, that's something I've actually tried.


----------



## Deathy (Nov 19, 2019)

notb said:


> For an occasion of basic NAS? I repeat: this CPU is a 35W, not 65W. It's a different product.


It is a different product in the strictest sense of the word. But if the price is the same (and it is for a lot of people right now), it really isn't. That "35W vs 65W" doesn't fly either, as this test shows (TDP does not equal power consumption!). The actual system difference at the wall (I assum that is how TPU tests it) is:
- 9W at idle in favor of the 3000G
- 27W at single thread
- 17W for multi thread
- 24W for power virus
- 23W for gaming
Some of it will be the chip, some of it will be the VRM. Nowhere is it the full 30W difference. And "basic NAS" and "x86 CPU built system" seems to be an oxymoron. If one wants basic NAS functionality, chances are, they'll get a basic NAS from an established vendor with an Atom or ARM based solution. Lots of good stuff around 200€ for 4 bays. If you want more than 4 HDDs, it stops being basic and at that point the price of the HDDs will negate a lot of the upsell (again, the R3 1300 is not more expensive than the 3000G right now, it is only 5€ more than the 200GE) of a more powerful CPU, as well as even further reduce the power consumption differences on a percentage level. If you want to build a basic NAS with not a lot of power, I'd suggest a motherboard with an integrated CPU. Some nice bargains can be had there. 4 SATA ports are common and a free PCIe slot or two for expansion. Those combos are usually below 100€ and consume even less power (15W !!!! ;-)).


----------



## notb (Nov 19, 2019)

Deathy said:


> It is a different product in the strictest sense of the word. But if the price is the same (and it is for a lot of people right now), it really isn't.


Well, it is. Because CPU is more than price and performance. So particular models will find buyers even if they're far from the "optimal" price/performance curve.
The most obvious factors in CPUs are: ECC support and security features (Intel vPro, AMD PRO).
TDP also has a big role here, since being able to cool a CPU using passive or extremely silent solution raises its value.
The list is longer.


> That "35W vs 65W" doesn't fly either, as this test shows (TDP does not equal power consumption!).


If someone told you TDP means power consumption or heat dissipation, I'm afraid he lied (or didn't know).
TDP shows what kind of cooling will be sufficient for the chip (at base clocks).
More below.


> The actual system difference at the wall (I assum that is how TPU tests it) is:
> - 9W at idle in favor of the 3000G
> - 27W at single thread
> - 17W for multi thread
> ...


I'm not sure what you're comparing to. I assume it's a 65W Pentium.

TDP looks like a quantitative value, but it's actually categorical. As in: distinct, textual, non-numerical.
Numbers are easy to remember and there's an obvious order, so you know how to compare them. You can expect that a 90W cooler will be OK for a 65W CPU (because 90 > 65).
It would be equally OK if TDP was "small", "normal" or "high" as long as the same values appeared on coolers and there was a well defined order.

I don't know why these values are 35W and 65W, but it became a standard.
So if a CPU maxes out at 61W, why not give that as TDP? Same for coolers?
Because we would have a mess. Because people would constantly ask questions like: "my Pentium has TDP of 63W and I want to use it with a 59W cooler. Will it explode?"
So instead we called all of it 65W. And CPU makers try not to go too far over 65W. And cooler makers always include a safety margin. It's just a convention. It's all relative. And it works!
And when a CPU uses 32W, Intel calls it 35W. Why? Because that's the category for thin/mini systems (some passively cooled). Again - 35W is a made up value.


----------



## windwhirl (Nov 20, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Africa, India, SE Asia, South America...
> People think too much about their home countries when looking at hardware sometimes...



True. Never in my life have I seen anything over 10% discount on new, boxed hardware. And even that 10% is rather hard to come by.

And down here, there is also the exchange rate. Almost everyone has an eye on it, and if the AR$ goes down a bit, you get a chain reaction of prices going upwards. But prices going down? That never happens.

EDIT: I don't know why I wrote "unboxed"....


----------



## sutyi (Nov 20, 2019)

moob said:


> Which is great for those of us with a Micro Center near us, but even within the US that simply isn't the case.



I live about 6700km / 4163 miles away from the nearest MicroCenter... you don't see me complain about it do you?

Keep an eye out on Amazon and other deals. Seen the 2200G go sub 60EUR here in euroland on occasions, while it was on sale.




Nihilus said:


> On before "you can get x CPU at microcenter for..."
> 
> Nevermind, too late.



It's 2019 mah man. Buying a 2C/4T processor while you can get a 4C/4T one with double the GPU performance for about 10-20USD more, does it really make sense when you are already spending 400-500USD on said computer? Its like a 4-5% price hike considering the whole PC...


----------



## ironwolf (Nov 20, 2019)

This a hard launch or a paper launch?  Not seeing it on Newegg or Amazon right now.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Nov 20, 2019)

God, this CPU has pre-2000 year like performance. No way someone can justify buying this garbage instead of paying 20$ more and get a proper 4 core CPU.
Can this even play a 4K video stream?


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 20, 2019)

Prima.Vera said:


> God, this CPU has pre-2000 year like performance. No way someone can justify buying this garbage instead of paying 20$ more and get a proper 4 core CPU.
> Can this even play a 4K video stream?


I'm pretty sure that this beats a 800MHz Athlon Classic from 1999..

I had a G4560 2½ years ago and it was a great example that a budget CPU can run games.


----------



## windwhirl (Nov 20, 2019)

Prima.Vera said:


> God, this CPU has pre-2000 year like performance. No way someone can justify buying this garbage instead of paying 20$ more and get a proper 4 core CPU.
> Can this even play a 4K video stream?



Why would someone invest in a 4K display while only paying up to $50 for a CPU? That doesn't make sense. Heck, at this price range, a 1080p display is probably the best that potential user can or cares to buy.

IMO, this CPU is targeted at people or business with very low performance expectations. Text documents, spreadsheets and light web browsing and e-mail. Office use, pretty much.

Performance-wise, it should be enough for the kind of work that I do at a small/medium sized accounting firm, which is all of the above plus the accounting and tax/report software.


----------



## ShurikN (Nov 20, 2019)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> I'd really like to know what the market is for these, it cant be for the pre-entry level desktop market can it?


My dad is the perfect target audience for this. 
He has an Athlon 2 X4 on a DDR2 platform, and this little thing would run circles around it. I know for a fact how sluggish things get with large PDFs, or 1080p YT videos, or just general system performance. The entire platform is also showing its age in terms of driver compatibility, random isssues with an old MB, Sata 2, no USB3, etc... 
He also only plays hidden object games, so gpu performance is not that important to him. 
He could sell his current setup with an HD7770 and cover over 50% of the new pc cost. Which would be this cpu, an a320 mobo (or the cheapest possible b450) and 2*4GB ddr4


----------



## notb (Nov 20, 2019)

Prima.Vera said:


> God, this CPU has pre-2000 year like performance. No way someone can justify buying this garbage instead of paying 20$ more and get a proper 4 core CPU.


Because if cheaper 2 cores are enough, why get 4 cores? Isn't this a sufficient argument?
And as mentioned earlier: it's a 35W CPU. It creates possibilities.
AFAIK this is the only retail 35W CPU for AM4. All retail Ryzen 3 are 65W.
Clocked-down Ryzen 3 GE are OEM-only (unlike Intel's -T).


windwhirl said:


> Why would someone invest in a 4K display while only paying up to $50 for a CPU? That doesn't make sense. Heck, at this price range, a 1080p display is probably the best that potential user can or cares to buy.


You do understand that gaming is not only way humans use computers? 


> IMO, this CPU is targeted at people or business with very low performance expectations. Text documents, spreadsheets and light web browsing and e-mail. Office use, pretty much.


It's definitely not fast enough for general office PCs.


----------



## john_ (Nov 20, 2019)

I think this kind of reviews need a processor from the other company that it is selling at the same price. Is this a Celeron 2 generations old? Put that 2 generations old Celeron there to have a correct comparison. I see people commenting about Athlon's performance compared to the much more expensive Pentium, forgetting that this is a much more expensive Pentium.

Also, about Overclocking. Many of you have it the other way around. Overclocking was a thing in the past because it could make a slow system look better than it was. It could make it much more usable. Heavy tasks, like transcoding one movie or a video, finishing an hour earlier, games running at 30fps instead of 25fps etc. Overclocking is not about cutting 2 seconds time or moving from 120fps to 130fps. The Athlon IS EXACTLY THE TYPE OF PROCESSOR that you will buy in the morning and overclock it at noon, from the first boot. It's NOT about benchmark scores.


----------



## ironwolf (Nov 20, 2019)

Seeing specs all over the place on this.  Someone over at cpu-world indicated it is Zen+: "Manufacturing process is the GloFo 12nm and not 14nm, the APU belongs to the Picasso family. "  So not sure what info is right on this thing.


----------



## notb (Nov 20, 2019)

ironwolf said:


> Seeing specs all over the place on this.  Someone over at cpu-world indicated it is Zen+: "Manufacturing process is the GloFo 12nm and not 14nm, the APU belongs to the Picasso family. "  So not sure what info is right on this thing.


I know this is shocking, but you can actually check AMD's website, instead of forum comments...



			https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-athlon-3000g
		

14nm

Zen+ Athlon is described as 12nm:


			https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-athlon-pro-300ge
		


AMD's website is a mess and they give you hardly any data about CPUs, but since process node is among the ~10 things mentioned, they unlikely made a mistake...


----------



## Prima.Vera (Nov 21, 2019)

notb said:


> Because if cheaper 2 cores are enough, why get 4 cores? Isn't this a sufficient argument?


Nah, never. 2 Cores are not enough anymore, not even for a crappy office PC. Multitasking is just impossible on those machines. Good luck having a browser session with 20 windows open, 1 Word, 2 Excel instances, Outlook open, and maybe a music player in the background... Trust me, I speak from experience actually...


----------



## ironwolf (Nov 21, 2019)

Prima.Vera said:


> Nah, never. 2 Cores are not enough anymore, not even for a crappy office PC. Multitasking is just impossible on those machines. Good luck having a browser session with 20 windows open, 1 Word, 2 Excel instances, Outlook open, and maybe a music player in the background... Trust me, I speak from experience actually...


Nah.  I have several clients still running Quickbooks POS on Core2Duo era 2-core boxes with 32-bit Windows 7 on 2 GB of RAM.  A 2C/4T APU would be more than sufficient for them.  Speaking from experience myself.


----------



## tussinman (Nov 21, 2019)

ironwolf said:


> Nah.  I have several clients still running Quickbooks POS on Core2Duo era 2-core boxes with 32-bit Windows 7 on 2 GB of RAM.  A 2C/4T APU would be more than sufficient for them.  Speaking from experience myself.


 The AMD 3000G is literally faster than a decent chunk of  laptop processors (some of which companies actually issue employees) yet according to some people on here "uhhh it's too slow to do office work" (lol).

That's the problem with this forum, enthuasist think their needs or wants equals what most people really need.


----------

