The R3 2200G fills that need, and we think it does it exceptionally well.
They are not equivalent in lows, however; we noticed that the APU underperformed in 0.1% low metrics, something we can show better with this frametime plot:The R5 2400G experiences a 10% uplift when overclocked from baseline.
Long-term, as process technology continues to shrink and we get even more transistors to work with, we'll probably on-die or on-package memory, and prices for such things will eventually come down. ), graphics processing tends to be extremely bandwidth hungry. It's a bit slower on the CPU side than a Core i3-8100, and the graphics are a bit slower than a GT 1030 (give or take depending on the game).
To achieve 83% of performance at 58% of the price, plus or minus the impact of $10, is damn impressive. Treat this like something of a synthetic test, though know that scaling is linear as settings are reduced.
Hearthstone).
While it's theoretically possible to have an APU with two or three times the GPU cores as the 2200G (Ryzen 7 2700G with Vega 24, anyone? The Witcher 3 - 01:02 Fallout 4 - 02:26 Far Cry 5 - 03:47 Arma 3 Apex - 04:49 Kingdom Come Deliverance - 06:18 Assassin's Creed Origins - 07:30 Battlefield 1 - 09:12 System: Windows 10 Pro Intel i3 8100 3.6Ghz Asus ROG STRIX Z370-H AMD Ryzen 3 2200G 3.5Ghz Gigabyte GA-AB350N GTX 1060 6Gb 16Gb RAM 3200Mhz These features, as well as an IPC (instructions per cycle) number, determine how well a processor performs.
While it's theoretically possible to have an APU with two or three times the GPU cores as the 2200G (Ryzen 7 2700G with Vega 24, anyone? The R3 2200G operates at 86FPS AVG, permitting the 2400G a lead of 10.5%. What is the difference between AMD Ryzen 3 3200G and Intel Core i3-8100?
Neither solution is going to handle the latest games at higher quality settings and 1080p or higher resolutions, but I did some additional 1080p low testing and the 2200G gets above 30fps in the majority of games. Knock off about 10-15 percent from the 7600K results in the above charts and you'd have the i3-8100. lower wattage PSUs that cost less and are still worth getting. vs Ryzen 5 1400. vs Ryzen 7 1700. vs i5-7600K. The stock 2400G does hold a meaningful time reduction of 22% over the stock 2200G, and the overclocked variants put the 2400G as 21% reduced. The R5 2400G proves to be poor value in the face of AMD’s own 2200G, and the GT 1030 and G4560 would cost approximately $170-$190, depending on prices. Stock, the 2400G completes its turns approximately 2 seconds slower than overclocked, granting the overclocked 2400G a 9% turn time reduction. It ends up a bit slower than the 2400G across nearly all tests, but then it also costs about a third less.