AMD Athlon 3000G with Vega 3 Graphics

[bobalazs]

Just imagine having this beast in 2010.

 

[IceShroom]

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

 

[W1zzard]

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

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

 

[CityCultivator]

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]

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]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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]

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

R-Series Embedded APU use that 2 core die.

 

[hojnikb]

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]

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]

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

 

[Houd.ini]

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]

Junk

 

[moob]

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]

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]

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

Nevermind, too late.

 

[john_]

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

Thanks for this review.

 

[agatong55]

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]

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]

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...

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]

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!

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...


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.

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.

 

[Ruru]

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]

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 !!!! ;-)).