13 ms·
AMD Ryzen 5 8500G: A surprisingly fascinating sub-$200 CPU
- jes5199 3y agoa surprisingly what
- _ea1k 3y agoSurprisingly fascinating according to the article. It does seem like great performance for the price and Watt.
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoLimitation of HN title lengths probably. Or OP's capability to edit titles.
- Arnavion 3y agoHN automatically filters words from titles that they think are clickbaity. "Fascinating" is probably in that list.
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoThat's pretty stupid, no? Why doesn't it alert the poster of the clickbaity word prompting him to remove it before being allowed to post it, instead of silently removing it without the poster's knowledge ending up with janky titles?
- bayindirh 3y agoWith the approach you're proposing, we'd possibly start to see titles like "AMD Ryzen 5 8500G: A Surprisingly F*$cin@ting Sub-$200 CPU".
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoWhy? People could also do that now if they wish. You can't stop malicious compliance with a poorly implemented filter. And for that you have the flag button and dang who deletes them. But if you do have a poorly implemented filter, why not let your users know the rules instead of them finding out through obscurity? Openness is better than obscurity, no? Isn't that the FOSS ethos?
- stavros 3y agoI prefer that to "a surprisingly sub-$200".
- neogodless 3y agoThe HN ethos is to cultivate curiosity, so the word "Fascinating" seems on brand, even if it does help a bit to draw attention.
- nsxwolf 3y agoSurprisingly sub-$200
- stavros 3y agoI definitely didn't expect it to be so sub-$200.
- based_gigachad2 3y agoOne of the CPUs of all times Edit: the title now has been fixed
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- moffkalast 3y agoDefinitely one of the CPUs ever made, possibly ever.
- sliken 3y agoYou'd think after AMD shipped Xbox One, XboxX, PS4, and PS5 with decent iGPUs and a decent memory bandwidth they might bless one of their APUs with > 128 bit wide memory. Seems an obvious bottleneck that would improve GPU performance. It's coming with the Halo Strix with it's 256 bit wide memory, but should it really have taken over a decade?
- KennyBlanken 3y agoWhat market would they be targeting? People who want casual gaming buy consoles. People who want gaming-level performance buy discreet GPUs. AMD makes more money selling a CPU and GPU.
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoYeah same. Especially that those consoles were launched all the way back in 2020, nearly 4 years ago. I guess it's difficult to replicate the console performance when those run on GDDR as system memory and PCs on DDR so the bandwidth difference is huge. But it's not like a system integrator like Asus or Gigabyte couldn't have built a small form factor PC based on a PC variant of the consoles APU and use GDDR instead. AMD really missed out on this, especially during the pandemic when everyone was stuck indoor trying to game and looking for inexistent GPUs.
- sliken 3y agoXbox One came out in 2013, 11 years ago, with an AMD CPU. PS4 came out in 2013, 11 years ago, with an AMD CPU.
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoYes, but what's your point with those facts? Those were Bulldozer based APUs, not very good compared to what you could buy for PC back then, in an era where AMD wasn't very competitive and GPUs weren't overpriced unobtanium.
- 3y ago
- naranha 3y agoIn the graphics benchmarks it performs mostly worse than the 5600g/5700g. That's pretty disappointing 3 years later.
- undersuit 3y agoIt's the lowest end of the consumer APUs. The 8600g and the 8700g are those models replacements.
- daemonologist 3y agoYeah it's a shame, you really have to step up to the 8700G (or at least the 8600G) to get the true APU experience with modern graphics performance. That said even the bottom of the range significantly outperforms Intel's integrated solutions, and I support anything that gives them a kick in the pants to ship better iGPUs - one step closer to my work laptop being able to run the Windows desktop at 4k without turning into a laggy mess.
- tremon 3y agoThe 5600G had 7 graphics compute units, the 8500G only has 4; if it performs within 10% of the 5600G, the compute units are almost 60% faster than 3 years ago.
- ColonelPhantom 3y agoThey had better be; 5000G chips are based on old GCN Vega stuff, while these are based on the latest RDNA3 architecture. They're also clocked MUCH higher, as AMD focused a lot on clock speeds when developing RDNA2. In fact, pretty much all of the performance gain going from a 5700 XT to a 6700 XT is based on the latter's higher clock speed, as their specs are very similar otherwise (although a 6700 XT has 12 GB 192bit memory and a heap of cache, whereas the 5700 XT has 8GB 256bit memory that runs a small bit slower, and crucially, way less cache).
- kvemkon 3y agoAt least you hope, it is more power efficient due to advanced manufacturing process. And then a totally disappointment: new CPU consumes significantly more both under load and idle. The AI-extensions are also missing. ECC is missing in all 8300G/8500G/8600G/8700G.
- hospitalJail 3y agoWhat are people using CPUs for? I mean I have a crappy 7 year old CPU that I use for single threaded dev, and it works for 99% of cases. In the 1% of cases, I threw on multithreading and its fine. Now my daily driver has a GPU and it unlocks new possibilities. Its been over 10 years since I've really spent time thinking about a CPU.
- jibe 3y agoA lot of games still bottleneck on CPU.
- wilsonnb3 3y agoespecially if you are trying to get high framerates
- brucethemoose2 3y agoOr trying to run large maps in sim games. Speaking as a 7800X3D owner, I don't think any CPU on the planet is sufficient for modded Rimworld yet.
- josephg 3y agoCompiling rust code is slow and cpu bound. I have a fast cpu in part to improve compile times while I’m programming.
- tupolef 3y agoDid you experience a big gap between an older CPU and the current one? I did not change mine for 6 years, but looking at some benchmarks, it looks like compilation times would not get more than a few percents faster per generation. I expect to get maybe 20% faster with a recent CPU in the same price range. Until 2005 I was updating the CPU every 2-3 years, then every 5 years, and when I'll get the next one I plan to keep it 10 years easy.
- 3y ago
- everyone 3y agoI got a Ryzen 7 2700X, cus it seemed to have good benchmarks for the price. I have a vague feeling I might have been happier with less cores but faster ones. A lot of games put all, or almost all, their load on one core only, particularly older games. A lot of old games have amazing modpacks for them nowadays and I often run into CPU bound slowdown and lagspikes in stuff like Stalker GAMMA, Rlcraft, Supreme commander forged alliance forever. Overall I just dont know much about CPUs and just got one that was recommended by people at the time.
- tracker1 3y agoIf there's an updated BIOS for your board, going to a 5700X3D or 5800X3D is a drop in replacement (maybe a third party tower cooler if you're running stock. Would be a noticeable experience difference, especially in games.
- RussianCow 3y agoI'll add that this will likely only make a significant difference if your GPU is relatively powerful. If you're still rocking an RX 480 or similar, the GPU is going to be your bottleneck in most games and upgrading the CPU won't make as big a difference. I went from a 1700X to a 5900X with an RX 580, and I only noticed a difference in one game until I upgraded the GPU.
- tracker1 3y agoFair enough... I tend to do GPU upgrade mine often than system, wasn't thinking about it. That said. Still a big difference for a lot of use cases.
- baobun 3y ago5700G might be a great upgrade from a 2700X. Better performance at lower TDP and the integrated graphics are impressive. Even if you do end up with a discrete GPU, being able to do passthrough with a secondary can be quite useful.
- binary132 3y agoI just want to see an X3D series APU with a gigantic video cache.
- AdrianB1 3y agoThat would be irrelevant, tens of MB of cache do not cover for Gigabytes of slow memory for textures. Modern games use 4-8 GB of RAM, mostly for HD textures. Screen buffers are already in the cache.
- undersuit 3y agoI think it's gotta be big, to be worth it. The X3D dies are tiny and the additional SRAM is flanked by unused silicon to keep the package a uniform shape. The lowest end Radeon 7600 still has 8MB of infinity cache. Giving an APU 64MB of cache would be a mistake at current performamne levels, giving it 4MB might not be worth the time or silicon or the 4MB SRAM die floats away from the wind generated by the place and pick.
- betaby 3y agoDoes hardware accelerated video decoding woks in Chrome on Linux for that CPU?
- seabrookmx 3y agoI've honestly had bad luck with this with _any_ CPU
- NohatCoder 3y agoThis review seems to miss one of the most important competitors. The Ryzen 5 7600 costs only $20 more, and performs a good deal better for not a whole lot more power. I don't think there is a lot of customers to whom the iGPU difference is important, but not important enough to get a discreet graphics card.
- babypuncher 3y ago> I don't think there is a lot of customers to whom the iGPU difference is important, but not important enough to get a discreet graphics card. I think this is the exact segment of customers this chip is aiming for. You can throw this chip in a new build without a dedicated GPU, and get a playable (30+ fps) experience in Cyberpunk 2077. It's an option for someone wanting to spend entry-level money on a gaming PC with the option to upgrade to a real GPU further down the line. EDIT: Just realized this is the 8500g not the 8600g. The slower GPU and the fact that dedicated graphics would be limited to 4x PCI-E lanes make this a much less interesting as an entry-level gaming product.
- ColonelPhantom 3y agoYeah, the 8500G is just not interesting in that sense at all. It has only 4 CU's, which is twice what a 7600 has but still not enough for anything even remotely graphically demanding. An 8600G has 8 CUs which starts to approach usable territory.
- zamadatix 3y agoThe power and cost of the discrete GPU alone in that scenario will far outweigh the cost of the APU here. The nice thing about the APU line is you can throw them in cheap mini PCs and not have to worry about having PCIe slots or "real" PSUs, you get a good CPU with a better-than-basic GPU without having to shell out double for a GPU or having a big PC to do it in. They are also monolithic on top of being combined parts so not just the active but the idle power is highly optimized.
- qwertox 3y agoThese days I noticed that my laptop, which has 32GB of RAM, is only capable of using 16GB of RAM, because the other 16GB are reserved by Windows 11 for "shared GPU memory" This Dell Precision 3541 with an i9-9880H and a 4GB VRAM Quadro P620 runs just fine with Ubuntu, but in Windows 11, as I said, the integrated GPU as well as the Quadro get the "shared GPU memory". For me the 4GB of the Quadro, which Chrome and other apps are using, is more than enough. The iGPU barely gets used and the BIOS has reserved 128MB of dedicated memory for it. Windows doesn't allow me to change how much memory is assigned to the "shared GPU memory", so 16GB of RAM is empty while the other 16GB are getting stressed to an extreme, so that the machine becomes unusable. Now, since this 5800G has an integrated GPU, I wonder if it has the same problem with Windows 11. Any Windows experts in here who know how to fix the issue (the registry fix with "DedicatedSegmentSize" has no effect)?
- szatkus 3y agoUsually you can modify the amount of RAM dedicated to the GPU in BIOS.
- RussianCow 3y agoI believe most (all?) machines allow you to configure this through the UEFI interface (pre-boot). Search your laptop model and you should find a way to change the amount of RAM dedicated to the integrated GPU.
- qwertox 3y agoDell's BIOS has no option to change it, but it says that it has reserved 128MB for it. As I said, Ubuntu has zero issues with handing 28GB+ RAM to applications, so this is convincingly a Windows thing and not something related to the BIOS. While searching for a solution there's another person having this issue with a Gigabyte Z97-D3H-CF mainboard. He has 32GB RAM and half of it goes to "Shared Video Memory". I downloaded the manual and the relevant section reads `Intel Processor Graphics Memory Allocation: Allows you to set the onboard graphics memory size. Options are: 32M~1024M. (Default: 64M)` So the mainboard has no option for 16GB "Shared Video Memory", yet Windows 10 is causing this problem to him [0]. For me the "Works in Ubuntu" is what makes me disbelieve the BIOS-settings claims. [0] https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/change-the-amount-of-ram-used-as-shared-gpu-memory/dcf6677b-32f9-43b2-9433-2eedd5e30acf https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/change...
- tremon 3y agoIt's only just below $200 though. In my opinion, it's too close to the price of the 8600G which has a dedicated NPU, twice the graphics core count and, more importantly in my opinion, has twice the available PCIe lanes: the 8500G only has 14 in total, of which 8 go to the southbridge -- the other 6 will be shared between the PCIe x16 slot and the first NVMe drive.
- chem83 3y agoGood opportunity to remember that AVX-512 is more than 512 bit vectors. Too bad that Intel is dropping it from their consumer CPUs. https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@rygorous/110572829749524388 https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@rygorous/110572829749524388
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoIsn't AVX 512 very useful for emulating PS3 and Xbox 360 games?
- orangeboats 3y agoThe extra instructions that came along with AVX512, yes. The 512-bit vectors themselves, not so much, but it still helps a little.
- xeeeeeeeeeeenu 3y agoA few months ago Intel announced AVX10, which is basically AVX-512 but without mandatory 512-bit vectors: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intels-new-avx10-brings-avx-512-capabilities-to-e-cores https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intels-new-avx10-brings-av...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 3abiton 3y agoA reminder that rocm is getting better! Great news for GenAi budget users