5 ms·

While they may be cheaper for performance if you compare just cpu, but if you include a GPU then it isn't that clear. The fastest ryzen with integrated graphics

While they may be cheaper for performance if you compare just cpu, but if you include a GPU then it isn't that clear. The fastest ryzen with integrated graphics card is 2400g and it's only 4 cores. That's an extra $75-100 for the you. I had 2400g and it isn't cutting it anymore. And I don't need a gaming video card to work with visual studio at 4k@60. The 3rd gen Ryzen with iGPU aren't out yet

AsyncAwait 7y ago
Gamers don't care for an iGPU, honestly.
- klingonopera 7y ago
  I find this is a good move by AMD. Have 1-5x CPU models with IGPs, and keep the lineup clean and compact. Not like Intel, with their, what, 50 iterations of different types per generation? I think it could even be hundreds. I'm not sure if it was part of their business strategy to overwhelm, but they sure did, and this didn't make them any more sympathetic, on the contrary...
- HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
  If it worked well enough, I'd take it.
- blattimwind 7y ago
  Realistically developers are the only niche that needs as much CPU as they can get with virtually no GPU requirements. All other CPU-intensive applications tend to heavily profit from powerful GPUs.
chipperyman573 7y ago
If you're spending $300+ on a CPU, you're probably buying a GPU as well. And if you're not, and you just need something that's as good as onboard graphics you can probably get a old card for $20-30 on CL.
- free652 7y ago
  There is no $30 card that can do DP 4k@60 and that's my dev machine. I ordered a Nvidia 1030 thats $80. I doubt that any gamer need more than 4-6 cores, but single thread is very important. I am getting a 3600 to replace 1700x in my gaming build and replacing 2400g with 1700x and 1030 in my workstation build.
  - vkaku 7y ago
    Watch out for 3600G then. I don't know if there's a concrete plan to launch it immediately, but it looks like the additional $20 on it may give you what you need. The Navi should do 4k@60. I realize that this proofs you from getting a PCIe 4.0 GPU of your choice much later, when you have the budget for it. Of course, don't expect it to give you ultra level graphics for that small die size and heat dissipation.
    - hajile 7y ago
      I'm somewhat skeptical about the 3600G. The 2400G is already a bit bandwidth starved. Dual 64-bit DDR4 channels simply can't keep up with the CPU plus a large GPU. Adding channels isn't possible without changing sockets. There doesn't appear to be enough room on package for an HBM stack like Intel did with Hades Canyon. Running your RAM at 4400MHz with that 0.5x Infinity Fabric multiplier could probably allow a bump from 11CU to 16CU (or 20CU at lower clockspeed). A decent bump and enough to eat the entire low-end GPU market, but not incredible. I'm left wanting a heterogeneous next-gen system using shared HBM for everything. Intel currently sells the i7-8809G. It contains a substrate, 4GB HBM2, 24CU Vega M (14nm), and quad-core (3.7-4.7GHz, 14nm) with a TDP of 95w for an MSRP $546. If the substrate and HBM cost $100, then that's MSRP $446 for quad core plus 24CU GPU. AMD currently sells the 2400G for $130 (launch MSRP for 3400G is $150). The 1300X (100MHz slower, but double the cache) costs $110 giving us around $20 for the 11CU GPU (the 2200G can be had for about $90 indicating the GPU price may actually be lower than that). Let's build a next-gen APU for both desktop and gaming laptops. HBM3 spec was finalized almost 3 years ago. Estimates for Vega put 2 HBM2 chips (8GB) at around $150 with a substrate adding another $25. We'll actually work within the constraints of HBM 2 at the moment. Just realize you should get 2x the RAM for around the same price (die shrinks and advances in 2.5D chip construction) along with lower voltages, higher speeds per pin, and potentially fewer stacks needed. We'll use HBM because it has enough bandwidth and uses simpler memory controllers while also cutting latency in HALF vs DDR [latency source](http://www.pdsw.org/pdsw-discs17/slides/stocksdale-pdsw-discs17.pdf http://www.pdsw.org/pdsw-discs17/slides/stocksdale-pdsw-disc...). We'll need 16GB of HBM2 at a cost of $300 (remember, that should become 32GB of HBM3 or lower costs closer to $150 for 16GB). If we cost $20 for 11CU, we'll assume $100 for 40CU (adding around a 25% markup for the larger chip though 36CU and 24CU lasered versions could greatly reduce that). That puts us up to $400. A 3600 6-core CPU is selling at $200. We'll add another $50 to the MSRP just because for a final price of $650. That is $100 more than the MSRP for the i7-8809G, but has a TON of advantages. It has 2 more CPU cores and almost 2x the GPU power (with access to more RAM if it needs). There's no need to spend another $100-200 for additional DDR4 plus the CPU performance will be better due to reduced latency. The lack of RAM on the motherboard and getting rid of all those traces should reduce motherboard cost and size. Finally, at 7nm, this should all fit inside a 95w TDP suitable for both desktops and gaming laptops (which usually have 35-45w CPUs plus 50w+ GPUs).
TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
They announced the 3000-series APUs, but it looks like they're basically the same generation CPU-wise as the 2000-series CPUs, so I guess 7nm APUs with more cores will be sometime next year and be called 4000-series.
- hajile 7y ago
  The new ones are zen+, so about 5% faster per clock due to cache improvements. They are also 12nm instead of 14nm. The other zen+ chips shrunk the transistors, but left gaps between them so the physical size was the same, but with a GPU shrink, a few more months, and all the 3xxx mobile chips also being zen+, they may have gone ahead with a physical shrink too.
walshemj 7y ago
These are not CPU's you would ever really use with IGP

AsyncAwait 7y ago

Gamers don't care for an iGPU, honestly.

klingonopera 7y ago
I find this is a good move by AMD. Have 1-5x CPU models with IGPs, and keep the lineup clean and compact. Not like Intel, with their, what, 50 iterations of different types per generation? I think it could even be hundreds. I'm not sure if it was part of their business strategy to overwhelm, but they sure did, and this didn't make them any more sympathetic, on the contrary...
HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
If it worked well enough, I'd take it.
blattimwind 7y ago
Realistically developers are the only niche that needs as much CPU as they can get with virtually no GPU requirements. All other CPU-intensive applications tend to heavily profit from powerful GPUs.

chipperyman573 7y ago

If you're spending $300+ on a CPU, you're probably buying a GPU as well. And if you're not, and you just need something that's as good as onboard graphics you can probably get a old card for $20-30 on CL.

free652 7y ago
There is no $30 card that can do DP 4k@60 and that's my dev machine. I ordered a Nvidia 1030 thats $80. I doubt that any gamer need more than 4-6 cores, but single thread is very important. I am getting a 3600 to replace 1700x in my gaming build and replacing 2400g with 1700x and 1030 in my workstation build.
- vkaku 7y ago
  Watch out for 3600G then. I don't know if there's a concrete plan to launch it immediately, but it looks like the additional $20 on it may give you what you need. The Navi should do 4k@60. I realize that this proofs you from getting a PCIe 4.0 GPU of your choice much later, when you have the budget for it. Of course, don't expect it to give you ultra level graphics for that small die size and heat dissipation.
  - hajile 7y ago
    I'm somewhat skeptical about the 3600G. The 2400G is already a bit bandwidth starved. Dual 64-bit DDR4 channels simply can't keep up with the CPU plus a large GPU. Adding channels isn't possible without changing sockets. There doesn't appear to be enough room on package for an HBM stack like Intel did with Hades Canyon. Running your RAM at 4400MHz with that 0.5x Infinity Fabric multiplier could probably allow a bump from 11CU to 16CU (or 20CU at lower clockspeed). A decent bump and enough to eat the entire low-end GPU market, but not incredible. I'm left wanting a heterogeneous next-gen system using shared HBM for everything. Intel currently sells the i7-8809G. It contains a substrate, 4GB HBM2, 24CU Vega M (14nm), and quad-core (3.7-4.7GHz, 14nm) with a TDP of 95w for an MSRP $546. If the substrate and HBM cost $100, then that's MSRP $446 for quad core plus 24CU GPU. AMD currently sells the 2400G for $130 (launch MSRP for 3400G is $150). The 1300X (100MHz slower, but double the cache) costs $110 giving us around $20 for the 11CU GPU (the 2200G can be had for about $90 indicating the GPU price may actually be lower than that). Let's build a next-gen APU for both desktop and gaming laptops. HBM3 spec was finalized almost 3 years ago. Estimates for Vega put 2 HBM2 chips (8GB) at around $150 with a substrate adding another $25. We'll actually work within the constraints of HBM 2 at the moment. Just realize you should get 2x the RAM for around the same price (die shrinks and advances in 2.5D chip construction) along with lower voltages, higher speeds per pin, and potentially fewer stacks needed. We'll use HBM because it has enough bandwidth and uses simpler memory controllers while also cutting latency in HALF vs DDR [latency source](http://www.pdsw.org/pdsw-discs17/slides/stocksdale-pdsw-discs17.pdf http://www.pdsw.org/pdsw-discs17/slides/stocksdale-pdsw-disc...). We'll need 16GB of HBM2 at a cost of $300 (remember, that should become 32GB of HBM3 or lower costs closer to $150 for 16GB). If we cost $20 for 11CU, we'll assume $100 for 40CU (adding around a 25% markup for the larger chip though 36CU and 24CU lasered versions could greatly reduce that). That puts us up to $400. A 3600 6-core CPU is selling at $200. We'll add another $50 to the MSRP just because for a final price of $650. That is $100 more than the MSRP for the i7-8809G, but has a TON of advantages. It has 2 more CPU cores and almost 2x the GPU power (with access to more RAM if it needs). There's no need to spend another $100-200 for additional DDR4 plus the CPU performance will be better due to reduced latency. The lack of RAM on the motherboard and getting rid of all those traces should reduce motherboard cost and size. Finally, at 7nm, this should all fit inside a 95w TDP suitable for both desktops and gaming laptops (which usually have 35-45w CPUs plus 50w+ GPUs).

TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago

They announced the 3000-series APUs, but it looks like they're basically the same generation CPU-wise as the 2000-series CPUs, so I guess 7nm APUs with more cores will be sometime next year and be called 4000-series.

hajile 7y ago
The new ones are zen+, so about 5% faster per clock due to cache improvements. They are also 12nm instead of 14nm. The other zen+ chips shrunk the transistors, but left gaps between them so the physical size was the same, but with a GPU shrink, a few more months, and all the 3xxx mobile chips also being zen+, they may have gone ahead with a physical shrink too.

walshemj 7y ago

These are not CPU's you would ever really use with IGP