Some of the most popular games these days don't require one of the best graphics cards to get the most out of the experience, and AMD's new combo processor-graphics chipsets are making that even easier. Yes, we're talking about a powerful AMD Ryzen CPU with integrated Vega GPU magic.
By the numbers
There are currently two Ryzen CPUs available with integrated Vega graphics processing: the Ryzen 3 2200G and more powerful Ryzen 5 2400G. Both are quad-core processors, with the Ryzen 5 coming with an additional four threads. The latter also packs in Vega 11 graphics.
|Category||Ryzen 3 2200G||Ryzen 5 2400G|
|Clock speed||3.7 GHz||3.9 GHz|
|GPU||Vega 8||Vega 11|
|Price||$100 (opens in new tab)||$170 (opens in new tab)|
These APUs even use the same AM4 socket other Ryzen processors use, which is a step up from the previous generation.
AMD Ryzen CPUs with Vega aren't the peak of performance, but what the release of the 2200G and 2400G show is a bright future for AMD processors with integrated graphics. Top-end GPUs will continue to be priced out of reach for many gamers, so an integrated solution such as this can be a much more attractive alternative option. Should AMD continue down the integrated APU path, adding more power and capability to the current duo of Ryzen and Vega, we could be looking at something really special.
The current line-up is perfect for games that do not need much in terms of computing power. Think League of Legends, Overwatch, and other light titles. It's also a solid option for eSports organizers, who only require enough power to run a specific title. PCs on the stage of this year's League of Legends Worlds tournament won't require GTX Titans, nor will they need an Intel Core i7. Throw a Ryzen 5 2400G inside and be done with it.
AMD is even working with Intel on adding Vega graphics to Intel processors. That's a major achievement for team red and shows the potential Vega has in the CPU segment, especially given how hard Intel has tried to get its own HD and Iris graphics chips off the ground, only to hit a brick wall.
Watch this space
If you're looking to put together a new PC and need to save some cash (and simply cannot fork out $700 on a GPU), you may want to consider AMD Ryzen APUs. The best part is everything on AMD's platform utilizes the AM4 socket. This makes it possible to upgrade to a more powerful Ryzen 7 (or Threadripper) at a point in future when pricing for dedicated GPUs comes down a little.
Rich Edmonds is Senior Editor of PC hardware at Windows Central, covering everything related to PC components and NAS. He's been involved in technology for more than a decade and knows a thing or two about the magic inside a PC chassis. You can follow him over on Twitter at @RichEdmonds.
The way things are going, we may see the integrated GPU becoming the main approach for gaming PCs as dedicated cards move further and further out of the price range of gamers. What we really need is cards made specifically for gamers which cannot SLI and are not very responsive when mining, and cards for miners focussed on the task of mining which do not support gaming APIs. These things need to be forcibly separated or integrated will be the only other option. Not great for Intel CPUs with those low level GPUs.
It would definitely be great if the cards for miners and gamers could be separated. The problem is, they could soon realize that making cards for miners is more beneficial, and thus make less gaming cards.
But even despite the price hike, I don't think the world will start playing on integrated ones. Performance is just not quite there, and will never be. It's enough to play casual and many older games, but why would anyone buy a modern game just to play it on the lowest details on integrated? Kills the fun.
These new AMD CPUs have Vega inside though, which is just so massive compared to those little Intel vid chips. This should be able to play games at mid settings. Anyway, games are designed to align with the average computing power of the customer. Once most gamers have been priced out of the discrete vid card market, games will be designed to run well on integrated solutions. The speed of these will be limited though, and so will hold back game engine technology but if the vid card manufacturers don't want to make cards for the gaming market anymore (and unless they try a solution or two that's all we can assume) that's all most people will be able to afford.
I've spent a lot of time researching the 2400G since I'm interested in building a new general purpose machine that the kids can use for games at low-mid settings. The problem is that I haven't found a lot of objective comparisons between the graphics performance of the 2400G vs. other Radeon cards. I'm trying to figure out what the closest comparison is in a Radeon to the 2400G. The other issue is that with the overclocking capabilities of both the GPU and CPU and the highly integrated physical/logical relationship between them, what would a maxed out GPU/CPU overclock look like compared to a Radeon. Can I expect to get 580 performance with a decent amount of RAM onboard? Since there is no crossfire support here, I don't want to be in a position where I end up buying this only to have to still buy a dGPU. Also, this article is somewhat misleading in that the boost frequencies are listed instead of the base frequencies for CPU correct? Anyone have any updated info on the 400 series chipsets? My understanding was that they would offer more headroom for overclocking. Just wondering if I should hold off for two months until they are released to see if I can squeeze a little more out of a 2400G. Really wish we could see a 7 series APU for those of us wanting a little more than the 2400G.
It beats Nvidia GT 1030
Yeah some sites say 550 performance others say 560 or even 570. I'm just trying to figure out where I can expect to land with a modest amount of overclocking on water and some moderately fast memory and a 2GB memory buffer (although I here 4GB and 8GB options are supposed to be coming to some bios in future releases).
I haven't seen anything of folks pushing these. However, remember that Ryzen loves fast RAM, and since this thing has none of the HMB2 Vega cards are known for, you are sharing your DDR4 between the CPU and GPU. That means you're REALLY going to want some quality RAM, like the G.SKILL TridentZ stuff, at 3000 MHz or higher. I know people were discussing it, but I didn't get to follow closely, regarding if you can prioritize memory to the GPU as VRAM or not. I'm guessing the 550/560/570 comparison is going to be about how well you get the clocks going. Under water, you're going to have the best luck, in terms of regulating temperatures (especially since Vega is known for getting cranky because of heat). Ther'es also the silicon lottery, and whether you're going to get a chip that will overclock to 3.8 GHz or 4.1 GHz or 4.5 GHz (which I've seen reported, but not reliably). I fully agree on wanting a R7G though. If they make one, I'll build a second PC off of it, just because. I'd love something in a mITX case with Ryzen 7 and Vega behind it. I imagine that'll be a future product--remember that Ryzen was a staggered launch as well (thoguh it was R7, then R5, then R3). Questions there are how much more GPU you get and if it's 4, 6, or 8 cores.
not really from the video I have seen but pretty close =)
It can beat a 550 but it will not match a 560 and defenetly not a 580 (that is One X performance) If you overclock it to 1500Mhz or more and pair it with fast dual channel Ram (3200Mhz) it can beat a 550 in 720p however things can be different in 1080p in some games because of memory bandwidth limitations so keep that in mind. This APU is a great solution if:
1- you want a very cheap gaming PC
2- you want to start gaming but is waiting for GPU prices to go down And Ryzen 7 APUs are impossible due to the architecture of Ryzen CPUs
What makes you think a R7G is impossible? The dies scale well to a number of package types, hence the ability to sell CPUS with anything from 4 to 16 cores.
But in APUs GPU takes half of that space. So 8c 16t is imposible. Only 4c 8t, or 4c 4t, like we have in these two APUs. Maybe they can make it happen on 7nm?
I want something like the Kaby Lake G APUs for a normal platform.
i'm trying to find out what's the highest memory that can be set through bios to the IGP-Vega chip but not finding that information.
From what I've seen it appears to be 2GB currently (based on the BIOS from each manufacturer) but there are supposed to be updates available in the future to allow for 4GB and 8GB.
Some wrong informations again. "There are currently two Ryzen CPUs available with integrated Vega graphics processing", but for desktop. There are already available mobile Ryzen APUs. Which would be much better option for Surface Pro then Intels HD graphic. You can't upgrade this to a Threadripper, because Treadripper is not on a AM4 socket. Same mistake again.
WC seem to claim TR is the same socket as Ryzen a lot. I have pointed it out to them before but they don't believe me I'm afraid.
WC seems to claim any kind of legitimate technical knowledge on PC building, while barely skimming the generics of PC building from CNET or something. I've pointed out the fact the TR4 socket is different in the past as well, but they don't care about accuracy.
I like this integrated idea. Should have known and got this 2 months ago, instead of buying a card with GT 1030 and a new motherboard. I am not a gamer, but want 360 spherical 4K 60 Hz video performance on my 4K monitor.
😂. Good luck to anyone getting a threadripper cpu into an AM4 socket. Joking aside, threadripper uses TR4 not AM4 as the threadripper cpu is much larger. So you won't be able to upgrade to threadripper on a AM4 board. Unless of course AMD shrinks it down to fit an AM4 board.
I built one of these last weekend. had an issue with an incompatible mobo firmware. returned for one that was certified and the build was easy. fortnite on mediumish settings getting 40-50fps on a 300 dollar system. it also runs very quiet and cool.
Get the best of Windows Central in in your inbox, every day!
Thank you for signing up to Windows Central. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.