AMD Athlon 200GE, The New Entry-Level King
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Corsair H100i Pro: www.corsair.co...
Check prices now:
Athlon 200GE - amzn.to/2AGjJOG
Ryzen 3 2200G - amzn.to/2QKL5JM
Ryzen 5 2400G - amzn.to/2No8KBx
Ryzen 5 2600X - amzn.to/2pjlVp6
Ryzen 7 2700X - amzn.to/2KKXw4M
Core i7 8700K - amzn.to/2INiKgF
Radeon RX 580 - amzn.to/2pbBNrj
GeForce GTX 1060 - amzn.to/2pLRKGt
Read this review on TechSpot:
www.techspot.c...
Support us on Patreon
/ hardwareunboxed
Disclaimer: Any pricing information shown or mentioned in this video was accurate at the time of video production, and may have since changed
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. We may also earn a commission on some sales made through other store links
FOLLOW US IN THESE PLACES FOR UPDATES
Twitter - / hardwareunboxed
Facebook - / hardwareunboxed
Instagram - / hardwareunboxed
Music By: / lakeyinspired
![AMD Ryzen 7 9700X vs. 7700X: 40+ Game Benchmark [23H2 vs. 24H2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rlfTHCzBnnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![AMD Ryzen 7 9700X vs. 7700X: 40+ Game Benchmark [23H2 vs. 24H2]](/img/tr.png)
Time stamps for benchmarks. feel free to copy them on the description
04:37 SiSoftware Sandra 2016
05:02 Cinebench R15
05:34 Corona 1.3
05:53 Blender
06:12 7-Zip
06:38 Excel (monte Carlo Simulation)
06:52 PCMark 10 (modern Office becnhmark)
07:10 Power Consumption
07:49 Fortnite Battle Royale
08:49 Star Wars Battlefront II
09:06 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO)
09:15 Dota 2
09:27 Overwatch
09:40 PlayerUnknown’s Battleground (PUBG)
09:56 Rocket league
10:08 Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
nice little CPU, but (as mentioned) you can easily get a GTX 660 (or even 960) for not much and get a much better experience
Nice work, thanks mate 👍
Better experience at what cost? Power draw will be a lot worse.
Jame Gumb Or, you could go 750ti or an OEM 960 and not worry about powerdraw.
*[shrieks in coil whine]*
I did use '*', that's what made the comment bold.
**what about this**
/* *I love programming* */
**weh?**
#What #the #fuck #is #this #shit?
Now the problem is the ram pricing.
@Rob_Semi-Nerdly switzerland here 16 gb ram ddr 4 is around 200 bucks if not more
Ram prices are literally killing budget builds that are under $500. Yes you could get a 8GBs, but we are on the literal edge of the 8GB era and will have to replace in say 2 or 3 years at best.
Building a 2200g budget pc with 3000mhz ddr4 costs almost 1 and half month of salary here -_-
@@super117knight Jesus
In the UK the cheapest 16gb of Ram I've seen is £127 but it was DDR4-2400Mhz.
I literally sneezed like 2 seconds before Steve said "It's nothing to sneeze at"
. . . . My bad.
prerunnerwannabe
Do you have proof of this alleged event?
@@x1c3x Umm. . . Well, not really. I'm not a vlogger who's constantly pointing cameras at my face, so I think it's just my word that you have to go by ;) But I promise it happened!
@@prerunnerwannabe then do you have any witnesses to the incident :p
@@suryaiyer13 Well, you see, I was taking my morning dump, soooo no. . .
prerunnerwannabe
Yeah, here's the thing...we're gonna need a sample.
CPU Side performance seems similar to that of a Core i5 2300, with around HD5670/HD5770 performance on the GPU Side (Albeit with better GPU Driver Support) which is very impressive given the TDP and price of the chip. It finally gives a lot of those A320 boards a bit of purpose aswell which is nice, as many are hitting sub £40. Still just RAM Stopping the budget aspect of this CPU, as DDR4 will end up costing more than twice of the chip is really worth given the current fixing on it.
Although tighting the ram timings could crawl back some of the performance that a reduced clock speed can do
Yes RAM is the killer. I'm still on Haswell and DDR3. It's not that bad especially when you have a dedicated graphics card. A kit of RAM is now starting to become the most costly part in the PC.
Not really its one hell of a placeholder if you want to save up a couple of months for a better processer whilst still buying the rest of the parts including the gpu buy a 1080ti with a high end b350 with 3200 ram then when you can get the r2700
Ronan: Definitely another use for it. I could see it dropping quite quikcly. My only concern there is that a used R3 1200 is only £50 nowerdays.
Good thing that Intel's having cpu shortages, this will basically drive down the demand for DDR4 memory and hopefully lower the prices.
How the actual f*** did he have time to test this, alongside the endless RTX testing??? Does Steve actually operate with 50 hours in a day?? Good job :-)
Martin Dubský I removed those comments, if they abuse anyone else on the channel they will be banned.
No he probably works 100 hrs a day (just like keima from kaminomi).
That's not work, Kamisama is simply living the Visual Novels.
I believe the description you're looking for is *multibox benching*
This is only one Steve. There are multiple Steves. Each Steve tests a game. Then alpha Steve tells us the results. Steve.
Steve's overclocked.
Seems like almost nobody cares about this...but Steve is here as usual. Legend!
i care. seems to outperform my old fx 8300 lol.
haha thanks mate ;) AMD timed this one so it was difficult to cover but we found a way 🤓
I care I love cheap things.
I care cause it means I can build a cheap rig using B350 knowing that there's a clear upgrade path and still be able to do some OK gaming on mostly older titles off of my steam account.
We still have the Athlon 220GE and Athlon 240GE coming out in Q4. Hopefully those will be clocked 200-400mhz higher at $10 price increments
Most likely as you this compete well with the g4560 and the rest is to be seen so them a320 after 2 years are really going to get good use
They'll be the same iGPU, its literally the same piece of silicon just with higher clocks from the factory. Best case scenario is the iGPU may have slightly higher clocks too.
Would be also great to have +1 and +2 Vega CU in 230 & 240GE respectively
Since the 200GE is $55 and the 2200G is $100 I feel like even with the increased Vega CUs it would still just make more sense to stretch like $20-$30 more for the 2200G which I'm sure would have a significantly better iGPU, 4 real cores and overclocking support.
Yes wouldn't surprise if the 220GE was at 3.5Ghz and the 240GE at 3.8Ghz. Oveclocking the iGPU will give almost no benefit (1fps in games?) and use more power. Can't see AMD bothering. I guess if they have good enough chips they could do a 250GEX (65w) at 4.0Ghz which is overclockable. Even at $80 they would sell a few at no extra cost to themselves.
Very nice CPU, perfect for a mini ITX HTPC
That's what it's perfect for. 35W is great when you want the system to be silent. You could even run it fanless.
@@DenGuleBalje *Arctic Alpine AM4 Passive* (47W TDP)
@@Felix-ve9hs That's just perfect
@MzNToS The 2200GE or 2400GE would be even better, but what happened to them. It's impossible to buy them anywhere.
You mean 220GE and 240GE, one zero fewer. :) Anandtech is saying "Details to be disclosed in Q4". I'd expect them to be sold in Q4 too.
Imagine if you were to run an office with several PCs running all the time, where raw CPU/GPU power is not required and as long as Office apps are fully functional it's alright. By using Athlon, you'll save quite a lot (in total at the end) of money, and you'll be easier on your electricity bill, and not to mention every single one of the PCs will be virtually silent with this TDP and no requirement of an additional crap GPU with noisy fans. In this scenario, Athlon makes a LOT of sense in my opinion! Great video btw!
Even an SBC based computer fits that purpose for less than 5 watts. The entire kit would be less than the cost of this APU.
Show me a SBC that runs Windows 10 and Office 2016 that costs less than $55.
hoangtu1710, You don't need Windows and you don't need MS Office. A lightweight FOSS OS with Libre Office does the job. It just takes time to get over the differences. Much less issues and maintenance costs are a huge bonus.
OTOH, I wouldn't run a desktop on that low end of an SBC directly. Maybe stream desktops from VMs run on a server that probably could be hosted by a 200GE. Response times contribute to the morale of the users.
But most companies run Windows and MS Office and they do need x86 performance when doing moderate/heavy Excel calculations. Excel also can do multi-threaded calculations while LibreOffice only partially supports it. Also, people run other programs aside from MS Office that are only available on Windows.
Athlon 200GE + ASROCK A320M + 8GB DDR4 is around 180$. Add in a MITX case for around $250. A $250 PC that can be mounted behind a monitor is almost maintenance free.
Everyone deserves some rant time. I actually enjoyed listening to random ad-lib.
Almost read this on TechSpot but decided I'd rather hear from HU Steve than this Steven Walton fellow...sounds like a real stiff! :)
I'm an AMD fan, but kinda hope they are releasing these lower-end products with Raven Ridge silicon that didn't make the cut...so lop off a couple cores rather than trash them. I understand the product segmentation thing, but definitely agree with HU that letting the users deal with the potentially mediocre overclocking would be preferred. Plus they can always keep segmenting with graphics CU variance and a marginal cpu frequency bumps. I think they *could* go 6 Vega CUs for 220GE and 8 for the 240GE...or potentially even mirror the 2200 and 2400 and go 8 and 12, but it isn't likely. We have to keep AMD honest. They are still the underdog...but if we don't let them know when we don't like their business practices (with feedback or lack of purchase), they will certainly take a mile and try to do anything they can to get those margins up.
Appreciate your take on this product and found it hilarious that you had to bash the 9800 a little bit! Those power consumption numbers were pretty impressive...the load #s were better than I thought.
I've never seen a conclusion begin halfway into a video...
i had a athlon 860k for like 4 years and i loved that little beast that could only got it for like 69$ in 2014 possibly early 2015 i cant remember. i got it to 4.2ghz no problem so if this was unlocked i would love to see how it competes such a shame from amd they could have crushed the extreme low end. but the 2200g already crushed everything else imo
i'm doing a build for my mom, office work, quickbooks and the like; and i've chosen to go w/ a 2200g over this 200GE. total build still coming in sub $500 and will last her 10 years or more.
basically; i concur that the 2200g has crushed everything for low end rigs.
AMD sucks lol
I had an Athlon 860k as well. Back in 2016 I replaced it with an i7 though, it was too slow to play Battlefield 4 and GTA V at 60fps.
For the price, it really wasn't a bad chip! I ran mine at 4.2 as well. 4.3 was _just_ undoable, would have to up the voltage so much it'd melt the poor thing.
I still have it lying around somewhere, in a dead motherboard.
Problem is, had they unlocked it, they would have cut into their 2200g sales. The basic work stations that are currently going to be running 2200g for people to be able to have a dual purpose machine for light gaming would be lost to the lesser cost.
@@Durthii cool effort. Hope it works as intended with nothing screwing up Windows
AMD learned something from 2200G cannibalizing 2400G.
would have really loved if you tested 720p low instead. as that what i would use if i were to buy this part but its ok steve i forgive you (but just barely) ;)
I mean.......i've only had this shitty pc my entire life, so 720p is my next step to gaming XD
35W! Perfect for a home server! Plenty of power and cheap.
I'm thinking that this is probably a ryzen 3 2200U mobile processor that didn't meet the TDP target of 15W. The specs line up: 1M L2, 4M L3, 2C/4T, Vega 3, etc. That would explain the ridiculously low power consumption and might also explain the locked multiplier, as that particular processor is 2.4Ghz and 3.4Turbo. That would mean that this is really a factory overclocked CPU already.
AFAIK the 2200u and 2200g use the same die, so it doesn't matter.
iamsoldats same bin all raven ridge based cpus are the same silicon
They may be the same silicon, but the substrates differ. I cant find any information about how the 2 core parts differ from the 4, and they may very well be just core deactivated and frequency limited parts. That would literally put these chips at the very bottom of the barrel... not even good enough for the lowest tier mobile chip. That extra 40 bucks for a 2200G is looking like you are getting a chip that is many tiers above this one not just in performance, but in actual silicon quality as well.
"Doing homework, whatever the last one is " I see what you did there.
What I see is a middle step for people upgrading to the AM4 platform. With memory prices being as high as they are, just getting a motherboard and decent amount of memory might empty a lot of peoples pockets already. Adding something like 2700X right away is really out of the question for many. If they have an older computer with, let's say something like an Radeon 7870 , they will most likely get a pretty decent gaming rig out of this, while saving up for their dream processor. :) it is about 25% faster than a core 2 quad. so it's still a decent upgrade.
locked probably because it's aimed at oem prebuilt market PCs which go to schools and other institutions where unlocked CPUs would be too risky.
The reason it's probably locked because these are the worst binned from the silicon wafers hence only 2 cores albeit with SMT enabled. Unlocking this wouldn't make much sense anyway because the max you'd probably get out of a low binned chip would be, well, one or two hundred MHz at best. This also allows AMD to set the chip TDP really low.
That being said, they should've... just left it unlocked, not much harm would've done leaving it unlocked anyway.
It doesn't have to be a low binned chip, just 2200G chips with defective core(s) or partly defective iGPU, which wouldn't harm the overclocking potential of the functioning part of the CPU. And the TDP would be exactly the same if the chip was unlocked, since you'd have 3.2 GHz as clock speed just like now. Only difference would be the possibility to overclock and increase power consumption this way, but someone overclocking will know that and use a better cooler.
Actually the raven ridge processors (2200g/2400g/200ge and the laptop processors) use a different die. They replaced the second CCX with the Vega GPU + Display engine.
Yep that is correct, the 200GE is the lowest binned Raven Ridge chips. AMD decided to take the half working ones with 2 cores that work and at least 3 Vega cores, disabled the other non-working ryzen and vega cores and bam 200GE
Wizard Koer I figure the 240ge would be more like 2c4t with 5 or so vega cores is hope
This Athlon is a option for AMD to sell more A320 MoBo, if they are puting the 200GE unlocked, probably more people will buy the B350/450 to OC the CPU, but they put it locked, because it have no sense to buy the B350/450
Yes! Finally tests for this CPU ! Thanks, Steve!
I don't find them locking the Athlon unusual. I think the only Athlons that were unlocked were the K ones on the older FM2+ platform. Athlons on AM1, AM3, and even as far back as Socket 462 were all locked, however.
You're right it's not unusual but why should it be a privilege accorded to mid/high-end CPU ? If an OEM doesn't want its client messing up with OC, it just has to program the BIOS/UEFI (They already customize it). They have the potential to bring a product for low-budget overclocking hobbyist, and there is a market for that : remember the Pentium G Anniversary.
They did say all ryzen skus are unlocked, and this is not a ryzen chip. Also I can understand not having overclocking support regardless, as this chip is 100% not aimed at any performance user. Sure it would be nice to see it unlocked, but the 2200G exist for "Enthusiast on a budget" and very few people actually overclock anyways. Side note this was aimed at very budget machines for home and small office commuters, and the laptop counterpart, the Ryzen 3 2200U for extremely low end laptops.
What I will be doing with this chip, is upgrading my nas with it.
12nm 4 core no SMT Athlon 300GE next year for 60 USD, unlocked, and AMD wins.
*By then AMD's Ryzen 3 like would possible have more cores due to more cores per CCX.
With Zen 2 Core
By the time next year hits, it won't be 12nm. Probably 7nm when AMD has been bragging about over the year.
+Deliveredmean42 Considering this Athlon seems to be on last year's node, I would guess that an Athlon in 2019 would be on this year's node; the 12nm.
@@TridonsEve the athlon shares node with the entire ryzen with Vega graphics product stack. So what ever there notebook CPU and desktop CPU are on these athlons will be as well. It's basically a lower binned 2400g with cores disabled.
Alexander Yordanov id love to see the low end be 4 core solid and for amd to shove 4c8t to the ryzen 3 lineup as a mid range Lmfao
Context for Intel "literally" having their pants down:
- Intel CEO Krzanich Resigns After Relationship With Employee
AM1 Kabini Athlon 5150 "locked" at 1.6 GHz can easily reach 2.0 GHz or more by just increasing the memory speed matching the Athlon 5350 so these "new" chips have more O.C. potential just like Steve says.
Great video but you should have done media consumption testing with this CPU...
I think they're keeping it locked so they don't cut into their own market by making it comparable to the 2200g.
You seem to be the only channel that get's 1st on testing, the same with the deskmini at the time, you guys are great :)
For budget builders still leaning towards the G4560, there is one board I am aware of that runs it with DDR3 modules driving the budget PC price even lower: Biostar H100MHV3. Of course it is not anything special, but for a budget gaming build it does pretty well. It supports up to 16GB of DDR3L.
AMD has announced the Athlon 220GE/240GE to be released in Q4. This was at the same time as the 200GE was released. The 220G is suspected to be a higher clocked version for $5 more, and the 240GE is suspected to be higher clocked and with 5 Vega cores enabled for $15 more. With that in mind, AMD would be downright idiotic if they were to unlock the 200GE and cannibalising sales of the suspected $5 and $15 more expensive 220GE/240GE. I find it strange that you'd criticize veiwers for pointing this out.
If you take this as me blindingly defending AMD then you could not be more wrong. It simply makes more sense to segment the lowest end of the product line more heavily. When you consider the cost to manufacture, packaging, retailer percentage etc etc, AMD may have a profit on the 200GE of no more than $6-8 so it would make no sense to unlock it and not reap the extra profit from selling the basically same cost 220GE/240GEs at a slightly higher cost for a much improved margin.
AGREED, because there will be 2 more higher clock Athlon APU coming. I believed these Athlon APUs was aiming toward OEM market. IMO, there should be an unlocked Athlon APU for general consumers.
Samsonite Dove E models always meant Efficiency... aka Low Power so if they remove the E then yes Likely going to be either a higher clocked but still locked model or it going to be unlocked variant of the same
Part.
meehhhe Of You AMD also has a 2200GE. That's 3.2GHz base clock/3.6GHz boost but 4 cores/4 threads and with Vega 8. Set at the same 35W TDP as the 200GE so obviously there's a good deal of wiggle room for higher clocks at that TDP rating. If I was to hazard a guess I'd say 3.5GHz base and 3.8GHz boost. Still locked though.
Samsonite Dove, The way AMD specifies TDP, the chip can go over that power if it boosts. Also the TDP isn't a super accurate prediction of power consumption, e.g. the R7 1700 and R3 1200 were both rated at 65W, but I doubt, that they use similar power.
Alexander Daum TDP has literally nothing to do with power consumption. It stands for Thermal Design Power and is used to indicate which type of cooling solution the CPU should have. Manufacturers put their CPUs into a limited number of TDP brackets which can have many different power consumption figures. The 220GE is probably at the lowest end of actual power consumption at the 35W TDP bracket while the 2200GE is probably at the highest end. The upcoming 220GE/240GEs will likely be somewhere in between.
This processor should be perfect for a HTPC or a basic use computer. Gaming would not be my priority here to be honest.
I still find 2200G a much more attractive option overall, for not much more money really. Thanks for the review Steve!
Agreed. I have lots of uses for these chips and A320 motherboards that I previously used socket AM1 motherboards and Kabini Athlon 5350s for. Not every computer user is a gamer - in fact most aren't.
One thing I don't understand is why Steve thinks that A320 is so bad. Compared with B350 you lose the ability to overclock - which I don't do anyway - one USB 3.1 Gen. 2 port - which some motherboard manufacturers don't implement anyway - and a couple of SATA ports.
JohnSTF72, a basic use computer doesn't need such powerful iGPU and for HTPC you just need the VPU. The AMD APU line has never targeted properly those usage, the weak Intel iGPU is quite enough.
johnm2012, A320 shouldn't exist at all : Those Rysen were meant to be SoCs. Those ASmedia chipsets were created to be extensions, they shouldn't be mandatory and certainly not locking the capabilities of your CPU. AMD is copying Intel and putting away features that we, consumers, were free to use or not. Not being as bad as Intel is not enough, they should be as good as their previous platforms. That's the mentality problem which Steve points out in this video.
@@PainterVierax You say that A320 shouldn't exist at all but you don't give a reason why. I have a use for it so I'm glad that it does.
well, my point is clear : as it is, the only correct chipset that doesn't arbitrary take away features is the X370.
You might be glad with your card, it's OK, but locking features of an SoC through the chipset is just a huge spit on PC consumers. I'm not sure you'll be glad the day when we'll need to pay a huge price to have non-soldered CPU and RAM. That sound alarmist but this is already happening in laptops and NUC-like computers.
BTW, overclocking is just fine-tuning your component with the ratio you want : you don't have to raise voltage, you can only raise the clock multiplier to gain extra Mhz with the stock voltage. With the A320 you're stuck to only undervolting (which I did on my Intel non-K build).
@@PainterVierax The most useful feature of the X370 and X470 is its ability to bifurcate the 16 PCIe v3 lanes, which is why I use it where I need that feature and, of course, it calls for a full ATX size board. My usual choice is a B350 or B450, if I'm using a micro ATX board. You might as well say that boards smaller than ATX should not exist because they too take away features. Myself, I appreciate having the choice. I would like to see an inexpensive mini ITX board based on the A320 because at the moment the small form factor is especially expensive and not all the features of the higher chipsets can be used.
thank you Steve I needed that bonus overclocking guide
something great about chips like this is that you can use them to build a cheap diy home-server. I use one for a linux-nas and a couple kvm virtual machines. speed is more than enough for that sort of thing and power consumption is super low.
Would've been nice to see a video test. Can you tell us if this CPU supports 4K HDR 60 FPS? How many PCI-E lanes does it support? 16 PCI-E Lanes?
I think it's the same as Raven Ridge, so just 8 lanes for GPU + 4 lanes for NVME
Will it run 4k Netflix?
Exactly what I would like to know. I would also like to know if it supports 4K HDR 60 FPS.
@@camixxx I don't know about HDR , but it does support 4k 60
Lol go an look on Rick and morty in 4k with your 200ge
This is very nice for a low end box for a firewall or NAS. especially with that low TDP
There is more to the unlocked part -> if you buy a motherboard that you can overclock you have set yourself up for a great way to have a future upgrade route for a later use, so yes, while you spend a little more on a motherboard and end up at the same price to performance as the intel counterpart, you now have a motherboard that are ready for a good upgrade when you so desire
+jahejsa:
Intel was planning to sell a kind of software-hardware upgrade kit.
You buy a 2 GHz or something CPU for cheap. If in 2 years, you want an upgrade, you pay Intel 50$ or something and they send you the software to increase the frequency or unlock cores.
@@louistournas120 so cpu's Come with a DLC pack now.. Jesus
+jahejsa:
Not yet. It was something that Intel was considering.
Mountain out of a mole hill, it's not like AMD have always sold only unlocked processors. These are fine as they are under the Athlon branding, my opinion would be different if they were Ryzen branded.
Athlon branding has become low-end with Athlon II, that wasn't the case before. And why not bringing back "Black Edition" to keep Rysen brand ?
I don't see how unlocking the CPU cost anything from my understanding they are unlocked at the start.
Probably afraid of undercutting other products.
220GE and 240GE are coming later this year. I'm surprised if they aren't clocked higher.
yep, what costs to the manufacturer is locking the CPU… if they didn't implemented that mechanism earlier in Zen development. Steve's assumption about AMD going to the artificially segmented market way is true since they already copied some shitty habits of Intel.
+Cool Moo5e:
"I don't see how unlocking the CPU cost anything from my understanding they are unlocked at the start."
==Because if the CPUs you manufacture, all can achieve 4 GHz, are you going to sell them all at 4 GHz and 400$?
It is better to cripple some of them.
Sell a few as 2.0 GHz, a few as 2.5 GHz, a few as 3.0 GHz.
Sell the 3.5 GHz and 4.0 GHz to the high end market.
If they sell you an unlocked 2.0 GHz, then you can run it at 4.0 GHz and that is not fair to the guy paying 400$ for their "official" 4.0 GHz CPU.
ADDITIONAL:
Intel was planning to sell a kind of software-hardware upgrade kit.
You buy a 2 GHz or something CPU for cheap. If in 2 years, you want an upgrade, you pay Intel 50$ or something and they send you the software to increase the frequency or unlock cores.
louis tournas makes sense, and intel did pull that on a C2D series didnt take off
Awesome HTPC cpu. Though if you're looking at gaming, still best to bite the bullet and get a 2200g
The first time in a very long time AMD is beating the Intel offerings in game performance AND power requirement...
Next year will be even more exciting!
Just wanted to say that expensive GPUs also have that annoying coil whine tho
needs a a full review on ryzen embedded systems!
Me too. I'm looking at the udoo series.
Point being... This is likely going to be an INCREDIBLE value when looking for a relatively high-performing everyday machine, along with other more niche but lower-demanding things like an HTPC, personal file server, things like that, and is going to crush the Intel equivalent like was shown. Incredible showing from AMD here IMO. And hey, want some light gaming? Dual core is NOT good, but a low-end RX 560 / 1050 or below should get you gaming for almost no money, and that's pretty impressive!
i think this aim directly to the company market, especially with the power consumtion efficiency
AMD locked the athlon 200ge because maybe they want consumers to buy the a320 boards, and it is built for people who don't know anything about computers
My guess is that these are poorly binned Ryzen 3/5 APUs that wouldn't have clocked any higher or the overclocked benchmarks would be so all over the place and people would have too high expectations. Idk. Just playing devil's advocate.
@@Ziddel Probably not, but I can see that conversation happening in wome board room.
@matej nemec Well considering that the 2400GE exists, it's 4c8t, has 11 Vega CUs and is also rated at a 35W TDP while having a base clock of 3.2 and a 3.8 boost. That tells me that it's a silicone piece of significantly higher quality. Not nearly the highest quality, but WAY higher than this Athlon with half the cores and 1/4 the Vega CUs that is still rated at 35W TDP.
Maybe these Athlon chips are just absolute bottom of the barrel which would maybe clock a little higher, but would crash so fast that people would start complaining. idk. Just some thoughts.
im impressed. This APU runs about just as well at my old laptop is a 5200u and a 840m
Your content is always clean and concise. Hands down one of the best PC tech channels on UA-cam. Keep up the great work please, much appreciated.
I reckon it's locked cos it has the bottom-binned chips which probably can't go any higher
Pretty sure it can running at higher clock with added voltage, it only has 35w tdp, so the stock vcore shoudnt be higher than other ryzen cpu.
I guess it should at least do 3.5/3.6GHz with no problem, even if it's on the worst part of the wafer. But it would probably be much less power efficient at higher clocks
Steve plx, isn't it obvious!? Of course AMD planned to unlock the 200GE, but unfortunately they don't find the key to do so anymore. :/
Nah, wouldn't be worth the effort.
What is really interesting as well is how often the 2400G is above the 1030 in gaming tests.
Intel cpu prices have become crazy in my country. Before i3 8100, i5 8400 were 122$ and 202$ (final price, all tax included). Now they've become 163$ and 254$ !!
Before i5 8400 is 40$ cheaper than ryzen 2600 (ryzen cpu is overpriced), now it's become 25$ more.
I mean, who ever is buying a CPU at $55 and is expecting a great productivity or gaming experience does not know what they are getting into. It would be a much wiser idea to save their pennies for a little longer and get something a bit better. These CPU's are made for a market of computers that are going to be used for simple tasks. Why did they lock them then, well I guess it's because they want to show the division between their much more performance driven line Ryzen and the Athlon line, and really do not want the two to have any cross-over or internal competition.
Brutal Fates not a bad setup for some games.. really depends on what games your looking to play. A spot of GTA 5 or something like that probably totally fine.
As for productivity, really depends on your work flow... some Microsoft office it will fly in... but if your editing videos or compressing huge files, obviously not.
Totally agree, I'm pretty sure, you can save up the extra 45$ to get a 2200g, that will certainly be possible for most people, and when you don't use a DGPU, it delivers much better performance.
If you can't afford 45$ more for a decent CPU, then maybe consider buying used parts, as that will probably get you more for your money.
g4560 is pretty decent, even for 1080p gaming and this Athlon is not so far behind. What is useless is the iGPU way too slow for gaming and imho too big for deskop/web usage.
This isn't really intended for gamers or enthusiasts. For someone who just wants to run MS office and browse the internet, this is plenty and the extra $45 makes no sense because the extra performance is completely unnecessary. This is especially true of a buisness that has to get 500 systems so all their accountants have a workstation or something. That completely unnecessary $45 adds up quick when you need to pay it a few hundred times. This is cheap, low power (again, important when you need to power 500 of them), performs well enough to run office and a browser, and is new and comes with a warranty (if you believe a business is going to have someone go out and build 500 systems out of used parts with no warranty, share whatever it is you are on), making it perfect for buisness applications. This is a product with a clear purpose, just not a purpose that is useful to the youtube tech channel audience (unless they want to build an htpc/nas/minecraft server etc.).
Cooper, as I said, such an iGPU is not useful for the usage you describe. Intel's GPU are enough to perform those and for lowpower workstation there are Ryzen Embedded series.
Since FM1, I don't get what AMD APU are tailored for.
This is a good CPU for a beginner gaming PC though, You can get all the necessary components for around $250 that will allow for total upgrade-ability.
$55-AMD Athlon
$60-Asrock B-450M Pro4
$70-G.Skill Aegis 1x8gb DDR4 3000mhz
$20-Thermaltake Smart 500w PSU
$26-Inland Professional 120gb Sata 3.0 SSD
$20-Atx/Micro atx case
$13-Windows 10 Pro OEM key
= $264
1×8? Why not 2×4?
For upgrade-ablility purposes. Why not have a choice of going with 16-32gb of RAM and a Ryzen 7 in the future? Just add another stick( or 3) and a new CPU. Should only be a 1-3% difference in performance between single and dual channel anyways.
Alright, Then go with 2x4gb. It's up to you. My point is you can get all parts for a future Beast of a PC for around $250. Intel currently has nothing on it.
It's not 1-3 difference dude you lose *half* of your performance using single channel memory
ua-cam.com/video/HLzxNPUFtgg/v-deo.html
Who cares. You wont be gaming on 3 CU's anyway. I think 1x 8gb is the better option.. Which i shouldve done for my 2200g because I now have 4x 4gb which made my asus tuff b350m memory support go from 3200mhz to 2933mhz.
I miss those days todo, my first CPU was a Duron 600 @ 1000Mhz right during the GHz race.
For $60 that is a smoking deal on a nice APU. It is even more attractive with its AM4 platform that will allow easy upgrades in the future!
It's nonsense to overcloak a 2/4 CPU, if you need more CPU power just skip these and get a better CPU.
That's sort of my opinion, I got myself a 2200G w/ an A320 mobo. However, I think these chips wouldn't be able to sustain those OCs.
Consider the Ryzen 1200 as being cannibalized. They are still in stock, cheaper than a 2200G and purchasing them would make no sense if you could oc the 200GE.
Not trying to be trolling or anything. If anyone can shed some light on the matter it would be great.
as a note, it does depend on the market. in my case there is a 15USD difference.
wtfuredead
2 cores 4 threads ≠ 4 full cores.
@@forza1sra look at the simulated oc performance for 200GE. consider the price and the target customer for R1200
wtfuredead Considering the G5400 isn't cannibalizing the i3 8100, I don't see why a unlocked 200GE would cannibalize the R3 1200 / 2200G. The i3 7100 was being cannibalized so hard because it was a 2c4t exactly like the Pentium, it's only advantage was slightly higher clock speeds for a considerably higher price, it just wasn't worth it to pay so much more for a marginally higher performance.
That isn't the case here, both the 1200 and 2200G are quad cores, and the 2200G also has a vastly superior iGPU, the 200GE is just a dual core with SMT activated and has a weak iGPU not really capable of gaming, even at 3.9GHz it wouldn't offer the same as a R3.
@@stargazer162 200GE oc would offer better single thread performance compared to the R1200 oc, as the second gen ryzen has better ipc. Other than that what you say is spot on.
One mistake i am doing is comparing those 2 cpus, one of which is not even in production anymore.
Love it that yout put the AMD 7950 in your benchmarks, this gpu surved me so well for 5 years, my best gpu ever, i will never forget it, puts a smile on my face everytime i see it in your benchmarks :)
I'm really intrested in its htpc performance (hdmi 2.0,hdr,4k bluray,4k netflix)...you have to step up to the Pentium 5600 to get a 4k htpc with intel(uhd 630 I think supports everything) plus Intel's hdmi 2.0 implementation is really weird(dp to hdmi internally). $55 for a entry level 4k htpc would be really sweet.
Yeah , AMD locking these chips makes ZERO sense. AMD could in fact go the Intel route IF the 240GE is unlocked.
Primarily for business, I doubt that consumer side sales are a big priority with this chip. Also helps with shifting the mass amount of A320 Boards.
Budget chips like g4560 can be overclock either that who there competition is
Imagine using it in office. You don't want your worker messing up with the bios and break the cpu. Yes you can also put protection on the bios but it will take a long manual labour and the benefit won't justify the expense
China's demand for the A320 is so HUGE that ASUS and GB cant make enough , locking these chips for that reason is nonsensical.
Assuming that the worker will do it or even know how to do it. There is a easy fix for that , lock the BIOS.
They obviously locked the chip because the boost in performance would probably affect the other chips if I can get a 55 dollar chip and over clock it to perform like the higher end chips why would I buy the 100 or 150 dollar chip
Da Chop Up You obviously did not listen to what Steve said.
There were ryzen 'PRO' locked chips, they just weren't retail
This is like a Athlon 5350 without the need for a special motherboard. I like it
I'm sure it will be mentioned in other comments, but the biggest usage is going to be in area of noise requirements. A capable CPU, with very low power, passive heat sink with no noisy fan, will be fantastic in a Home Theatre and in my case, a sound booth.
It seems obvious that these CPU's are Ryzen CPU's that didn't pass quality. They are at 35W's CPUS's because that's the cutoff they can handle.
People are entitled to their opinion, but the "tech press" comments are very speculative and a bit whiny to be honest
What is successful is the ability to get the most yield from their production line.
On that line, I've seen some very reasonable thoughts on why people think AMD locked the CPU's. "making excuses" and calling people "fanboys" kills the convo, and is just rather stupid.
In terms of... I can get a $55 2 core/4 thread low power, low temp CPU that is locked, or pay $75 for the same part unlocked , I'll take the $55 one , thanks.
I'm not going to overclock my Sound Booth system ffs.
If you want to spend $45 bucks more, buy the far more capable processor and go mad to your hearts content. God damn, it's $45. Stop whiny!
I'm glad you called out the AMD fanboys towards the end of the video. I've got a Ryzen 5 1600 which I'm very happy with and its great that AMD is competitive for the first time in about a decade, but just because Intel has pulled some shady shit over the years doesn't mean AMD should get a free pass. As consumers we should hold all companies accountable for anti-consumer practices like this so we in the end benefit and don't get screwed over. Again I love AMD but this is definitely a shitty move on their part.
Vyacheslav Ivanov he is right though, I been watching the scene for years and nothing new from AMD. They always locked their white box APUs. Sometimes back in FM2 days they had unlocked CPUs but locked GPUs. Like the A8-7600 I have laying here somewhere... it had unlocked multiplier of the CPU but the GPU was no official way to overclock it. And A8-7600 wasn’t a white box either
Cuzeg Spiked black editions were different from white box models.. and some black edition models that didn’t even have unlocked iGPU... talk about shitty... look back at FM2/FM2+. AMD was all over the place stepping on their own toes.
It’s way better than it used to be actually and makes sense....Atleast right now assuming they don’t pull an intel and have 5000 pentium equivalents
The 2200G isn't the unlocked version of this processor though, it has superior Vega 8 integrated graphics and it has 4 real cores as opposed to 2 core with SMT enabled. In my eyes at least, the 200GE is essentially the Ryzen replacement for the Athlon 860K, which was an unlocked part. Even with AMDs low end APUs like the A6-6400K, that was also an unlocked part. The only APU I can remember being locked was the A8-7600. We shouldn't be giving AMD a pass on this, as Steve has discussed there is no real reason to lock these parts other than to segment the market.
The trend with their older processors is whilst they did have locked SKUs, they also had an unlocked version. If they had a slightly more expensive 220GE that was a fully unlocked part then I doubt people would complain. I really don't understand why people are defending this move.
theyre releasing 2 extra versions of this, the 220g and 240g (if im correct) those will be unlocked and cost 5 dollsrs more for the 220g and 10/15 dollars more for the 240g, theyll also have extra vega cores. it wouldnt make sense for amd to unlock this processor if theyre bringing unlocked versions of it out that perform better for just a little more cash just after. they would be killing their own market
also this is an E model, E stands for efficiency in which it makes sense that they locked it
also amd didnt have to release this at all, they created an entire new market for 50 dollar apus that are actually insane value for money.
but hey its all amds fault right?
Awesome I've been stoked for this cpu. I need to build a home theater build for my parents and a light gaming build for my sister.
Thanks for the review Steve!
Yes. I'll be buying several too.
I have been considering building an AMD machine, this is a neat little guy that might be a good starting place given how much the RAM is going to cost. I already have a case, PSU, SSD, keyboard and mouse laying around so all I need is mobo, CPU, and RAM (I would like at least DDR4-3200, preferably 16GB for using with a later APU).
I bet the old school Phenom II are faster than this....
At 125W sure...
"Segmentation".
It's sucks!.
Lucurous its half price of a ryzen 3
200GE, 220GE and 240GE, they all are the same other than the clock speed. But to be honest, i'm kinda okay with it because it's the lowest of the low, and also it's a far cry compared to Intel
Having cheap stuff sucks?
@@samiraperi467 market segmentation on basically the same product or die specially.
Lucurous GE vs. Ryzen: you don't know that and stop acting like you do. 200GE vs the coming SKUs: you don't know that either. Also, you are implying that AMD should sell Ryzen 3s for what a 200GE costs, because that's *the only reason* you would have *any* case, *assuming it's the same die*. Which it quite likely isn't because desktop Ryzen 3 doesn't have a GPU. What a 200GE is is likely a desktop version of a laptop Ryzen 3.
Also, are you familiar with the term "yield"?
I just can imagine a small, really tinny tinny PC case with this beast inside. Perfect super mini build for internet and media.
And I fully agree on overclock missing part...
Maybe overclock is hidden! For fun of users! Like in '90s!
Fingers crossed.
I'm not sure if this is a happy or sad fact. My FX 4170 that is still kicking in 2018 @ 4.9 GHz OC gets 370 in Cinebench R15, the CPU in this video got 360 in Cinebench R15.
One of the initial reasons given back in the old days for locking CPUs was third party vendors were selling systems with mislabeled systems.
It actually makes a lot of sense to lock these chips. They have fewer cores, so they’re going to overclock higher-around 200ghz higher. Trying to push that much frequency through such a small area would most definitely create a black hole, cannibalizing the 2200g.
would like to see those 200ghz xD
(I know it's a typo)
I think the Athlon 200GE is an astoundingly good product. The 720p gaming performance is very consistent and widely compatible, at that insanely low power consumption and that insanely low price. Imagine what this product tier looks like in another 2 generations, we might see 1080p 30 fps gaming on $50 APUs on like 40W system power. AMD is really crushing it. I personally buy much bigger CPUs, I preordered R7 1700, but products this good and this cheap are so helpful.
Agreed on the lockout issue; it's a strategic decision to maximise margin over the whole product portfolio.
We need price / performance charts again, it's the most important value consumers want. (and what limits your buy)
I still think that there is room in the market for a similar and slightly higher priced AMD CPU with higher/unlocked clocks and possibly more graphics cores. That is a product I think would really help them get in the budget market for those needing a bit better performance.
They don't allow overclocking, because they need that space for the other two Athlon models (220GE and 240GE) announced for Q4. For resp. $15 or $30 more you can buy an "overclocked" 220GE or 240GE.
Maybe they made it locked to make it cheaper, but it seems to be a great entry level CPU especially with that price tag and Vega 3 GPU. Great video as always man, really appreciate it :)
locking wouldn't make it cheaper, but it is so cheap, they probably get very little profit from selling that CPU (after packaging, etc.). So they will also bring a 220GE and 240GE, both clocked a bit higher and for 5-10$ more. It is the same as with Intel Pentium G5400/5500/5600. But I would really like the 240GE to be unlocked (or even have 5 Vega CUs)
Very good points in this video. There's simply no excuse for locking cpu multipliers. It's not like it's magically going to break spec and oc itself..
great review, thanks for the quality work on a very compressed schedule. based on info I read about this CPU, I did feel it was business-oriented and felt enthusiasts would not be happy with it. I appreciate the time taken to rant about the CPU & encourage other AMD supporters to encourage many of the points brought up to dissuade AMD from following an Intel-like path.
i was thinking the same thing about binned chips, maybe they are on the edge of not being able to be overclocked, but your right about maybe later this year they can release one that can be overclocked, the AMD 200GX
the way i look at it, is that AMD have released what is mainly a commercial grade chip to the domestic consumer market and an even cheaper transitional cpu from those not on the newer chipset
Thanks that athalon in a cheap 320 motherboard adds up to a nice budget set up
For those complaining about ram prices you can get team vulcan 2x4GB of 2400mhz CL14 for £56 brand new.
The cheapest i can find at CEX (second hand retailer) is £60.
You could get this cpu, A320 board & 8GB ram for
Unlocked 220GE will follow in November for 70$
I remember the fun I had overclocking my first gen Athlon back in the day, back then AMD was king and Intel were trying to cook the Pentium 4 with this newfangled hyper threading. Oh those rose tinted days playing Soldier of Fortune 2 or the original Max Pain
Hey Steve! Don't call me a basement dweller, my room's in the 2nd floor! ;)
Makes sense that its locked, a motherboard that would allow it to overclock would have costed more than the CPU. BUT, it would be nice to have the option.
That homework comment got me since I'm procrastinating from doing my own ATM lol
The only possible legitimate reason for locking the multiplier that I can think of is that these parts are binned fairly precisely. They might not have any headroom at all, so allowing overclocking would gain nothing but a bunch of reviewers pointing out that the chips don't overclock well.
I haven't convinced myself this is the case, but it's plausible.
I liked your locked/unlocked rant very much!
Amd is killing it
Nice, surprised with the Cinebench scores.
Athlon 200GE + A320 mobo = Low power Minecraft machine for my 5yo!