• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G 3.6 GHz with Vega 11 Graphics

Grasping at straws as usual. The chip itself is not marketed (or for better use of words, sold) as a gaming product, it is marketed as something that you can game on among other things. You can "game" on a 4 year old Atom, that doesn't make it a gaming cpu.

actually @bug has a good point as is marketed:

"The first desktop processor with 2 teraFLOPS of combined graphics and CPU power, this latest Ryzen™ processor offers an incredible platform for CPU dependent-tasks as well as enabling responsive, smooth gaming at full HD 1080p, in eSports and beyond."

IGP 1080 ;from 8 tested games only 2 have over 50 FPS, rest under; so which are the "beyond" games? .... tetris is there for sure....
 
Yes, that's exactly what a casual buyer will get from that page. o_O
Let's be honest the casual buyer knows jack s*** about computers, or gaming. That's why we get annual mobile GPU rebrands with a bumped up model number, sometimes half yearly as well.
 
  • BIOS update needed for support on existing motherboards
This is a thumbs down? :banghead:
 
  • BIOS update needed for support on existing motherboards
This is a thumbs down? :banghead:
It's expecting by anyone knowing anything about PCs, but everyone else never did a BIOS update in their life...
 
come on... We need some more in depth overclocking of the igpu. I've seen other reviewers hitting 1500 1600 and even 1700mhz

Link to 1600 and 1700 tests? I've seen tests that get to 1500. That's still a 20% performance boost.
 
Not bad for an APU
 
fd3bed6c4f9e2de97f0ca8cffb86ddd607888ee22124ccc161d5122e74d22086.png
3ff7328005152ae3a2c87ed35998bf135339ccd8b570809ac94703061166f322 (1).png
faabb82fbb233f6e2c6de2c38fe235c75aa9c88fd8dfa82b22a85a39b460b7bc (1).png
 
Any specific reason why the 2400G is 24% slower than the 1500X on the MySQL test? On most tests it's as fast or no more than 10% slower.
Also Kraken and WebXPRT are around 15% slower on the 2400G.
I would find it strange that the extra cache is causing such a performance increase since the 1500X has a 2+2 core configuration.
 
I can see this chip being amazing for the mobile market but very meh on the desktop side. A good APU is really great budget wise for a laptop which is where we need graphics performance improvements the most in the smaller laptops. Discreet GPU's will still rule there but it would be nice to get a laptop with this chip for around $500 bucks in my opinion.
 
I can see this chip being amazing for the mobile market but very meh on the desktop side. A good APU is really great budget wise for a laptop which is where we need graphics performance improvements the most in the smaller laptops. Discreet GPU's will still rule there but it would be nice to get a laptop with this chip for around $500 bucks in my opinion.

Compare the guts of these to the cpus, they are less.
 
  • BIOS update needed for support on existing motherboards
This is a thumbs down? :banghead:
Well, if you buy a brand new motherboard+APU, and you have to update the bios first, you are SOL unless you bought two CPUs.

That is a pretty big negative, as there will be a decent amount of time where all new mobos will need the update, but they will not have the ability to boot from the APU to update it. And we dont have $30 semphrons anymore to serve as sacrificial lambs to the bios god.
 
Well, if you buy a brand new motherboard+APU, and you have to update the bios first, you are SOL unless you bought two CPUs.

That is a pretty big negative, as there will be a decent amount of time where all new mobos will need the update, but they will not have the ability to boot from the APU to update it. And we dont have $30 semphrons anymore to serve as sacrificial lambs to the bios god.
True, but this situation has existed ever since we got new CPUs that work on existing motherboards. If you buy them together, you just have to look for a sticker saying the motherboard supports the new CPUs out of the box, that's all.
 
I know this topic might be old, but I just wanted to point out that the overclocking potential of the GPU was vastly underestimated.
There are so many reports on the web, plus my own 2400G, it is really easy (single trial, passing stability test with AIDA64, using Noctua L9x65) to get 1500 MHz @ 1.1-1.15 V for the GPU.

Then I could measure my score in Timespy and saw it going up from 1300 to 1450, and that's as much as 10% as oppose to the 5 stated.
On top of that, talking about raw performance like FP32 FLOPs, it went from (according to AIDA64) 1.7 to 2.1 TFLOPs, a solid 23% up. This is great as I actually use the APU for calculation.

For the 5% headroom in the review, could that be because of some bios issues at launch?
 
Last edited:
I am from the future her in mar 2019, but never have I seen mentioned the neat implications for unified cooling for both CPU & GPU.

AIO & entry level APU seem a mismatch, but maybe not?

I recently saw a natty copper base corsair single fan AIO for $60-65 - not much more than a decent air upgrade to stock cooling - better cooling with the killer advantages of taking the heat to a big ~quiet fan, outside the case.

To upgrade cooling for both dgpu and cpu separately would add serious cost and be messy. Combining cpu & gpu on the one socket module, means classy cooling is an affordable option.
 
Back
Top