AMD Ryzen 7 8700G Loves Memory Overclocking, which Vastly Favors its iGPU Performance

[AusWolf]

*Assign game EXE to dGPU and output the video from iGPU.

It's not as stupid as your think. If you connect your monitor to the iGPU, the game will run on your dGPU regardless. You don't need to assign anything. Try it.

 

[Puffy23]

Not to mention the 8700G's iGPU is RX 6400 to 6500 XT level of performance, meaning 720p30 Low-Med rather than 1080p60 High experience. RX 6600, on the other hand, is a proper 1080p60 GPU if you don't hunt max settings. RX 6600 XT (which is closer in terms of $$$) is even more of a proper gaming GPU. 12100F is fast enough to make use of such GPUs. Of course, it's not ideal, especially if you're a competitive gamer (i7-12700 + GTX 1650 Super it is then; might be more expensive but not by much) but if your only concern is money then 8700G makes negative sense.

Yeah, so my 8700G can run Cyberpunk at 1080p60 on High preset with crowd density turned to max. As long as you're willing to use FSR2.1 that is. I'd wager anyone gaming at 1080p doesn't care about the odd image artifact.

I can do this in a 4L case.

 

[Macro Device]

I'd wager anyone gaming at 1080p doesn't care about the odd image artifact.

This game is already godawful at 1080p. Getting FSR in the mix makes it unplayable. For me at least. I don't care how much FPS I'm getting at this point, be it 60, be it 9 thousand. Image quality is just unbearably bad. And yeah, 1080p gamers do care about these artifacts because they are getting much more of them than those rocking more advanced displays.

I can do this in a 4L case.

Like I said, if you are highly concerned about the dimensions of your system then of course this CPU makes all sorts of sense. But if your only goal is to make it cost efficient and you don't care how huge it is because you never move it then 8700G is not for you.

 

[AusWolf]

Yeah, so my 8700G can run Cyberpunk at 1080p60 on High preset with crowd density turned to max. As long as you're willing to use FSR2.1 that is. I'd wager anyone gaming at 1080p doesn't care about the odd image artifact.

I can do this in a 4L case.

So it's 720p, then.

This game is already godawful at 1080p. Getting FSR in the mix makes it unplayable. For me at least. I don't care how much FPS I'm getting at this point, be it 60, be it 9 thousand. Image quality is just unbearably bad. And yeah, 1080p gamers do care about these artifacts because they are getting much more of them than those rocking more advanced displays.

Like I said, if you are highly concerned about the dimensions of your system then of course this CPU makes all sorts of sense. But if your only goal is to make it cost efficient and you don't care how huge it is because you never move it then 8700G is not for you.

I agree. Any form of upscaling at 1080p, be it FSR or DLSS looks unbearably bad. 1440p and up is a different story, but that's way out of the 8700G's league.

With that said, I think the 8700G is an awesome achievement. 8-core CPU with a 6400/6500XT level GPU in a single package for 300 quid? If I didn't have a 1660 Ti in my HTPC, I'd say, sign me up right now. But I'm not fooling myself into believing that it can do 1080p with high graphics in the latest games because it simply can't.

 

[Macro Device]

for 300 quid?

And also 300 quid on the motherboard and fast enough RAM to justify it. It's enough to build a no-nonsense gaming PC capable of 2+ times higher framerates if you go CPU+dGPU way. Eh. Tiny PCs become more and more taxing compared to standard doomboxes.

 

[Puffy23]

So it's 720p, then.


I agree. Any form of upscaling at 1080p, be it FSR or DLSS looks unbearably bad. 1440p and up is a different story, but that's way out of the 8700G's league.

With that said, I think the 8700G is an awesome achievement. 8-core CPU with a 6400/6500XT level GPU in a single package for 300 quid? If I didn't have a 1660 Ti in my HTPC, I'd say, sign me up right now. But I'm not fooling myself into believing that it can do 1080p with high graphics in the latest games because it simply can't.

This game is already godawful at 1080p. Getting FSR in the mix makes it unplayable. For me at least. I don't care how much FPS I'm getting at this point, be it 60, be it 9 thousand. Image quality is just unbearably bad. And yeah, 1080p gamers do care about these artifacts because they are getting much more of them than those rocking more advanced displays.

Like I said, if you are highly concerned about the dimensions of your system then of course this CPU makes all sorts of sense. But if your only goal is to make it cost efficient and you don't care how huge it is because you never move it then 8700G is not for you.

Here are some benchmark numbers for you.

Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmarks

1080P High FSR Off - min. FPS: 27.57 | ave. FPS: 32.60 | max FPS: 39.73
1080P Medium FSR Off - min. FPS: 34.69 | ave. FPS: 40.16 | max FPS: 47.69
1080p Low FSR Off - min. FPS: 43.73 | ave. FPS: 51.57 | max FPS: 61.54

1080P High FSR Quality - min. FPS: 33.74 FPS | ave. FPS: 41.10 | max FPS: 50.14
1080P Medium FSR Quality - min. FPS: 45.72 FPS | ave. FPS: 53.73 | max FPS: 64.62
1080p Low FSR Quality - min. FPS: 53.72 FPS | ave. FPS: 64.12 | max FPS: 77.92

I am only demonstrating that the claim that you are stuck to 720p30 Low/Medium is patently false. Even without FSR you can achieve 1080p30 High. I'm not saying it's great, but it isn't nearly as bad you you keep insisting it is.

Edit: format of the text table to more uniformly display the data.

 

[Macro Device]

I am only demonstrating that the claim that you are stuck to 720p30 Low/Medium is patently false. Even without FSR you can achieve 1080p30 High.

The problem is the CP2077 is by no mean the most demanding game if you disable RT.

Try Alan Wake 2.
Try Lords of the Fallen.
Try Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora.
Try Atomic Heart.
Try The Last of Us Pt. 1.
Try Jedi Survivor.

And here are more UE5 games to come. Cyberprank is now 3 years old, effectively becoming two GPU generations old by the end of 2024. 1080p30 in CP2077 means 720p30 in some of the games from above. It also means 720p15 in upcoming titles. That's why I stated it's more likely to be 720p30 than to be 1080p60 if we're talking the most demanding games. Of course it'll get you hundreds of FPS at 1080p in games from early 2010s and more ancient ones. Of course it can "run" CP2077 at 1080p30. It's still not 1080p60.

 

[AusWolf]

Here are some benchmark numbers for you.

Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmarks

1080P High FSR Off - min. FPS: 27.57 | ave. FPS: 32.60 | max FPS: 39.73
1080P Medium FSR Off - min. FPS: 34.69 | ave. FPS: 40.16 | max FPS: 47.69
1080p Low FSR Off - min. FPS: 43.73 | ave. FPS: 51.57 | max FPS: 61.54

1080P High FSR Quality - min. FPS: 33.74 FPS | ave. FPS: 41.10 | max FPS: 50.14
1080P Medium FSR Quality - min. FPS: 45.72 FPS | ave. FPS: 53.73 | max FPS: 64.62
1080p Low FSR Quality - min. FPS: 53.72 FPS | ave. FPS: 64.12 | max FPS: 77.92

I am only demonstrating that the claim that you are stuck to 720p30 Low/Medium is patently false. Even without FSR you can achieve 1080p30 High. I'm not saying it's great, but it isn't nearly as bad you you keep insisting it is.

Edit: format of the text table to more uniformly display the data.

30 FPS is scraping the bottom. 40 isn't bad, so I'd stick to that. I would refrain from using FSR at 1080p at all costs because it looks like dogshit. I'd much rather use low graphics.

I agree that the 8700G isn't bad, but it isn't great for AAA gaming, either.

 

[Macro Device]

Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmarks

This PC cost me LESS than the 8700G alone.

 

[Puffy23]

The problem is the CP2077 is by no mean the most demanding game if you disable RT.

Try Alan Wake 2.
Try Lords of the Fallen.
Try Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora.
Try Atomic Heart.
Try The Last of Us Pt. 1.
Try Jedi Survivor.

And here are more UE5 games to come. Cyberprank is now 3 years old, effectively becoming two GPU generations old by the end of 2024. 1080p30 in CP2077 means 720p30 in some of the games from above. It also means 720p15 in upcoming titles. That's why I stated it's more likely to be 720p30 than to be 1080p60 if we're talking the most demanding games. Of course it'll get you hundreds of FPS at 1080p in games from early 2010s and more ancient ones. Of course it can "run" CP2077 at 1080p30. It's still not 1080p60.

Right, so you're stuck to 720p30 if you refuse to use upscaling, which you appear to have used yourself in the above example, and if you play 6 out of the millions of games in the world game library, or if you plan on playing games that don't exist yet. Yes, I agree with your statement.

 

[Macro Device]

which you appear to have used yourself

If there was a preset without upscaling turned on I'd use it. I just wanted to show a VALID result. And the result is 8700G is slower than a 60 dollar GPU from 2016.

so you're stuck to 720p30

You're stretching here. I don't say anyone is stuck there. I said, it's more likely to be 720p30 than 1080p60 in AAA games of today and tomorrow.

 

[AusWolf]

Right, so you're stuck to 720p30 if you refuse to use upscaling...

If you use 1080p with upscaling, then you're not really at 1080p, are you?

 

[Puffy23]

If there was a preset without upscaling turned on I'd use it. I just wanted to show a VALID result. And the result is 8700G is slower than a 60 dollar GPU from 2016.

You're stretching here. I don't say anyone is stuck there. I said, it's more likely to be 720p30 than 1080p60 in AAA games of today and tomorrow.

Right. I don't know if your emphasis on the word valid was to suggest I wasn't posting valid benchmarks or if you think turning off FSR somehow invalidates a benchmark. Either way, here is an apples to apples settings benchmark you'll hopefully find acceptable.

You're also being a bit intellectually dishonest comparing a 6-core 95w TDP CPU paired with a 225w dGPU to an 8-core 65w TDP CPU/GPU single package and acting as if the latter isn't impressive.

You can run the 8700G in a tin can with a 200w PSU and match the performance of a 12+L box with a 400-500w PSU.

For transparency I am on a BIOS profile that OCs the iGPU to 3200mhz so the above admittedly isn't stock. Although the only thing I needed to do to achieve this OC was to type 3 - 2 - 0 - 0 into 1 BIOS setting.

 

[Kapone33]

This PC cost me LESS than the 8700G alone.
View attachment 333563

Yes but you are not on AM5. A 5600 and 6600 would destroy this PC for around the same money, The issue I see is the 580 does not support the newest iteration of HDMI or DP. APUs have always been considered as not DGPU replacements in all scenarios. Where they make sense is in HTPC scenarios and beyond. There are plenty of people like me that look at handhelds and scoff at the prices but are intrigued by the form factor performance from the APU.

I do agree that the 8700G is expensive. It is $409 in Canada. A 7600 is $279. The chip to get is obviously the 8600G for $309. I found A620 boards for $100 and DDR5 6000 is about $120 for a good 32GB kit. With the 8600G you don't have to compromise. If we know AMD is supporting this socket for the next 2+ generations. That could be a way to avoid buying a GPU and still have access to the full upgrade path. Even with a A620 board you still get a full x16 slot when you are ready to buy a GPU.

Just about everyone who has been Gaming since 2017 on PC has a library of older Games that need some attention. Steam is universal across your local network. When hooked up to your living room TV. A nice small box, a little bigger than a router, would be nice to enjoy some casual Gaming in PIP, while the wife watches her shows.

I have a main PC already so the hook for me is actually no DGPU. I have bought APUs since the first gen and enjoy them for what they are. People like to use the 6500XT as comparison but in reality these should be compared to the 5600G/5700G and 2400G. Since those APUs can already emulate dead consoles/MAME Roms, these will mean even better and newer Dead console Games that can run smooth at 4K make a real case for Sprites.