Gadgetory

welcome back to our unboxed now today after much waiting much hype we can finally bring you our AMD desktop APU review on Hana for testing is the Rison 520 400 g and arisin 322 energy and before we enter the benchmarks I'm going to go over what it is that each of these processes has to offer AMD's introducing these new AP use to better support their entry-level to mid-range product lines and this means that the 2400 g and 22 energy will be replacing the arisin v 1400 and verizon 3 1200 though i think it's fair to say they'll likely make the r3 1300 X and r5 1500 X somewhat pointless as well but we'll look into that before reviews end so these new AP use codenamed Raven Ridge are built using these same 14 nanometer processes of the original rise and CPUs they're aimed ease marketing it as a 14 nanometer plus process much like what Intel does basically what this means is the process is matured to the point where they can dial up the clock speeds a little more and this is exactly what they've done but we'll talk about the clock speeds in a moment one of the more notable changes is to the CPU design which sees Raven reducing a single CCX module this design approach means that we are limited to 4 cores naturally there are positives and negative aspects to this design the key advantages of the latency penalty seem when moving data between the CCX modules this is effectively eliminated though based on our own testing that didn't really appear to be a big issue anyway the big advantage here for AMD is that they fit the same amount of cores that you'll see in a rising 3 CPU but they've done it while taking up half the space the disadvantage being that you get well less CPU the l3 cache gets cut down from potentially 16 megabytes to 8 megabytes but AMD decided to have it again and now the Raven Ridge models come with just 4 megabytes so this means while the Rison 5 1400 has an 8 mega byte level 3 cache the 1500 xpac 16 megabytes the 2400 g and 2200 G will offer just 4 megabytes now that sounds pretty bad but anybody believes they'd be able to offset that reduction with higher bass boost and average clock speeds another event helps offset their reduction in capacity is reduce cache and memory latency and this is actually a result of having less cache so it's not all bad news AMD believes that overall this will be a net positive performance improvement for productivity workloads in a particular games that you're more sensitive to memory latency there's more corner-cutting to reduce production costs Raven Ridge only packs 8 PCI Express lanes not 16 like the first generation rise in CPUs aim DS made this sacrifices they don't believe it will impact the performance of mid-range discrete graphics cards it's unlikely those rocking an AP you'll be upgrading to a GTX 1082 anytime soon so it makes sense AMD says the reduction in PCIe lanes also helps contribute to a smaller and more efficient uncor as well for those of you wondering the uncor is a term first used by Intel described aspects of the CPU that are not within the core but are closely connected to it for maximum performance things such as the level 3 cache andand a memory controller for example Ami's also saved money by using a nonmetallic Tim for the 2400 G in 2012 G we're not sure if Lea using the same tooth paste as Intel but we'll of course investigate load temperatures this though does confirm what we pretty much already knew Intel's been doing this to save on production costs and therefore maximize profits because well AMD is doing the exact same thing now with their most affordable CPUs the difference though is that they're admitting that this is why they're doing it they've also revised the CPU package and AMD says this has allowed them to officially support ddr4 2933 memory that's a very important feature for these AEP users memory performances of the utmost importance for integrated graphics like the mobile parts the desktop Raven Ridge CPU support precision boost to technology which is basically a more aggressive version of what was featured in the original Rison processors of course the most notable change is the inclusion of the Vega graphics connected to the CPU using the Infinity fabric is a Vega GPU featuring 11c use for the 2400 G at 8c use for the 2200 G and advantage to using the Vega architecture over Polaris is clock speed both versions operated over 1,000 megahertz and can in fact be pushed to over 1.5 gigahertz so let's just quickly go over the specs of these new APIs before jumping into benchmarks both the quad cores using a single CCX but the risin 5 model gets SMT support for 8 threads the 2500 G is also clocked higher with a base frequency of 3.6 gigahertz and a maximum boost of 3.9 gigahertz the 2200 G meanwhile operates at a base frequency of 3.5 gigahertz but can boost as high as 3.7 gigahertz the only other major difference is the Vega GPU which as I said a moment ago the 2400 G gets 11 C's which gives it 704 stream processors or cores which operate at 1250 mega Hertz the 2200 gene has been downgraded to 8 C use for 512 cause now operate at 1100 megahertz both are 65 watt parts but can be configured down to 45 watts they also both support dual channel ddr3 933 memory well that about covers everything you need to know for now it's time to see how they perform for testing I'm using a be 350 motherboard with sixteen-year bytes of ddr4 3200 memory first we'll check application performance before moving into gaming with and without a discrete graphics card along with some memory scaling performance of course we'll also touch on things like power consumption overclocking and temperatures starting with the memory bandwidth performance we see in the 2400 G and 2200 G are very similar to the original rise in 3 and risin 5 processors this though was expected and it should provide the integrated Vega GP with enough bandwidth to deliver reasonably good performance but we'll look into that shortly next up we have some Cinebench r15 results and here the new Raven Ridge apu is very good narrowly beating the X versions of their own product lines in fact the 2400 G was just 6% slower than the core i5 8400 which is impressive particularly given that it can still be overclocked meanwhile the 2012 G was only slightly slower than the core i3 8100 the last synthetic benchmark we're going to look at is PC mark 10 and this generally favors clock speed over call counters the applications that users for testing only utilized 2 to 4 threads performance wise the 22 energy was a fraction slower than 1300 X while the 2400 G basically matched the score of the 1500 X so this then aligns with what we saw in testing with Cinebench r15 moving on to the Excel Monte Carlo simulation we fought the 2400 G is 16% slower than the 1500 X perhaps this is a result of having less cash oddly however the 2200 G was 7% faster than 1300 ex though of course the 1300 X does have half as much l3 cache as the 1500 X in any case the Raven Ridge APIs provided strong performance in this test performance was much the same between the Raven Ridge AP use and the rise in 3 and Rison 5x models when testing with veracrypt the 2200 G was slightly ahead of the 1300 X while the 2400 G was slightly behind the 1500 X when testing with 7-zip we see that the 2020 G is slightly ahead of a 1300 X making it slightly sold in the core i3 8100 meanwhile the 2400 G was fast in the 1500 X for the decompression test but quite a bit slower for the compression test testing with Premiere Pro CC shows a very small improvement in performance for the 2422 energy over the 1500 X and 1300 X so it's good to see another application where the massive reduction level 3 cache has no performance impact and if anything it's actually helped to increase the performance due to the improved latency both the 2400 G and 22 energy are able to slightly improve upon the X models though them Hudgins were slim the 2400 G for example is just 2 percent faster than the 1500x it was her over 8% fast and the core i3 8350 K then when testing with Corona we do see a similar thing here the Raven Ridge ApS are basically able to match the X models making the 1500 X and 1300 X somewhat pointless now the 2200 G also matched the core i3 8100 while the 2400 G was just a fraction slower than the core i5 8400 the last application benchmark that we're gonna be looking at is Pomeroy and here the 2020 G was 8 percent faster than the 1300 X while the 2400 G was just a single percent fast and the 1500 X that said though I should note the Raven Ridge parts were noticeably slower than the similarly priced Intel processors in this test ok so that's all the boring productivity stuff out of the way it's time to play some games this next batch of results were again recorded with the Raven Ridge ap use using ddr4 3200 memory the pentium g 4560 now that was tested with ddr4 2133 memory because this is the fastest memory speed at the H 110 motherboard users and that's the motherboard we'll be using for all the pricing comparisons at the end of the video but of course it will be paired with a geforce GT ten-thirty graphics card as well because that onboard intel graphics isn't particularly great then we also have the core i3 8180 350k and the a12 9800 and again they will all be using their integrated graphics solutions starting with csgo at 720p we see the 2400 is able to roughly match the G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo meanwhile the 2200 G manages the same 1% lower result but is 12% solid for the average frame rate that said it was almost 70% fast in the core i3 8350 Kane 71% fast in the 80 100 moving to 1080p we again find the 2400 G matching the G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo while the 22 energy was 18% slower still an average of a hundred and 38 FPS is remarkable and this meant the 2020 G was 90% faster than the a12 900 almost a hundred percent faster than any of the 8th gen core i3 models next up we have pub G which isn't a title that is particularly kind to AMD hardware and as a result the 2400 G does slip behind the G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo still with 57 FPS on average it's a very playable so there's at least that the 2200 G was 12% slower on average but 27% solve for the one percent low result and this meant that it wasn't quite as smooth still compared to the a12 900 which was completely unplayable it was a massive step up the 1080p resolution though that proved to be a little too much in this poorly optimized title and while some might find the 2400 G playable here it wasn't by my budget PC standards even the G 45 60 and GT 1030 struggled though the experience was noticeably better unlike pub G fortnight is quite good on the optimisation front and although the G 45 60 and GT 1030 were faster the 2400 G offered exceptional performance that was very playable never dipping below 70 FPS in our tests the 2200 G also had a little trouble delivering playable voice with almost 60 FPS on average and this man it was over 30% faster on the a12 900 and well over twice as fast as the 8th gen core i3 processors the 2400 G was still able to the playable performance at 1080p and remember we are using the medium quality settings here so there is still room to improve performance further the G 45 60 and GT 10 30 combo was just 10% faster so an impressive result for the 2400 G that was won in a game at 1080p with the 2200 G we'll need to look at how it performs with the low quality settings next up we have our overwatch and this is a great game for stressing both the CPU and GPU as you can see the 2400 G match the G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo with 98 FPS on average but was 14% faster for the 1% lower result in fact the 2200 G was able to deliver a better 1% low result as well not only that but when compared to other integrated solutions the 2200 G proved to be an absolute beast delivering a hundred and thirty-eight percent more performance than the a 12 900 158 percent more than the 83 50 K the Raven bridge AP use were again able to deliver playable performance at 1080p and the 2400 G edged at the Pentium G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo for what was a truly impressive result those wanting to play rocket League at 720p can do so using the highest possible in-game quality settings and still achieve over 60 FPS at all times using either of these ap use and that's pretty awesome in fact both beat the GT 1030 by a comfortable margin Ramos twice as fast as the a12 900 that said at 1080p we've seen here running into a bandwidth issue as performance fell by 45% for the APS whereas the Pentium G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo only took over 30 percent performance here still even at turn DP with the visual quality settings maxed out the game was very playable using these new ap use moving on we have dota 2 and again the Raven Ridge ap use allow for the visual quality settings to be maxed out at 720p the pentium g 45 60 did maintain a better 1% low performance but still overall the aps were mighty impressive the 2200 g in particular is a standout here with almost 70 FPS on average once again though things do start the car apart a little bit of 1080p and the discrete GPU pair with the g 45 60 now offers noticeably better performance still when compared to the a12 900 which was world's better than any of the 8th gen core i3 processors the 2200 g was 35% faster next up we have Rainbow six siege and although we're only using the low quality so that 1080p I was still blown away by the results a 2400 G beat the penny mg 45 60 and GT 1030 combo with relative ease while the 2200 G was right up there as well when compared to the a12 900 the 2200 G was a whopping 56% faster and a hundred and fifty-four percent faster than the core i3 80 350 K even at Tahlia P the Raven bridge AP's hung in there and in fact it did exceptionally well the 2200 G matched the pentium g 45 60 and GT 1030 combo while the 2400 G was almost 20% faster not only that but was 75 FPS on average with a minimum of 62 fps the result was silky smooth gameplay this right here shows us just how poorly optimized pub G is even with the low quality settings battlefront looks great and it plays great with either of these ap use the game really requires four cores but if you can feed it eight threads well that's even better much better in fact because of this the 2400 G was able to crush the G 4560 delivering 87% better performance for the one percent low result even at 1080p the Raven Ridge AP use do very well though here the 2200 G does start to fall behind the G 45 60 and GT 1030 combo for the one percent low result but still overall exceptional performance this CPU intensive game cripples the a 12 9800 and reduces it to the same miserable performance seen from the core i3 processors finally the last game tested is Wolfenstein - unlike pub G this title loves AMD Hardware here we see the 2400 G spinning at an incredible 95 FPS on average with a 1% lower result of 88 fps and that's pretty amazing the 2200 G might have been around 15% slower but it was just as impressive and beat the penny mg 45 60 and GT 1030 combo by a 56% margin it's odd how well the a12 9800 does for the average frame rate but how slow it is for the 1% low needless to say the experience wasn't smooth we see very similar margins eternity pian here it was really only the 2200 G and 2400 G that were able to deliver smooth playable performance so that's a great result for AMD ok so here's how the 2400 G + 22 energy performed with the integrated Vega GPU disabled and replace with the Radeon rx 550 here we see if the 2200 G is just 8% faster with the discrete graphics card installed so that really speaks to how impressive the 8cu integrated Vega GPU is the 2400 G meanwhile is improved by just 4% so stock the Vega 11 cu GPU is basically an rx 550 as we suspected that said at Tempe we see the benefits of local GPU memory the rx 550 starts to pull ahead still the Raven breh GPUs do do remarkably well it's interesting to note that the 1% lower results with the rx 550 are noticeably better with the 1300 X and 1500 X opposed to the new ap use that'll be something that I'll look into in the future with a wider selection of games remember overwatch is a very CPU intensive title and running the bot match test rather than dig through all the data for the other out games I've tested I'm just gonna move on to something that I feel is a bit more important for would-be buyers and that is overclocking power consumption temperatures and the all-important memory scaling so let's start by taking a quick look at the overclocking I'm only gonna be showing the results for a single game right now I know there is much more testing be done but I only had so much time to put this video together so yeah one game it is for now this should though give us a pretty good idea of what's possible but as I said there will be a future video dedicated solely to overclocking please note that all the overclocking in this video was done so with the stock box cooler it's really only possible to overclock the GPU using this cooler especially if you'll want to go to the frequency that we have so yeah I don't believe you better do CPU and GPU overclocking with the Box cooler it's not really a big deal as most of the gains will be seen when GPU overclocking by default the 2200 G runs it's very good cause at one point one gigahertz and the 2400 G at one point to five gigahertz both tho had been pushed to 1.6 gigahertz using a 1.3 volts and here are the results here are the 720p results and interestingly I was only able to boost the fortnight result for the 2400 G by 8% I mean that's not bad but we did increase the GPU clock speed by 28% so you should be able to extract better performance what we're seeing here in fact we see that with the 2200 G which for some reason responded to the overclocking much better here we're able to boost the performance by a massive 29% and now the 2200 G is able to match the stock 2400 G in this title similar margins were seen at Tony P though this time the 2200 G performance was boosted by 35% though that wasn't quite enough to match the stock 2400 G this time still overall great results and I'm keen to spend much more time playing around the overclocking capabilities of these new AP use now this first lot of power consumption figures includes a GTX 1082 I installed this is how we typically test desktop processors but I've conducted some extra testing for these new ap use and we'll get to that in a moment so with the gtx 980ti installed we see that under loading the corona benchmark the 2200 g consumes slightly more power in the 1300 X while the 2400 G also consumed slightly more than the 1500 X what's interesting to note here is that both consumed less when at idle and I should point out that the same motherboard and power supply was used for this testing okay so these power consumption results are more representative as they are recorded using the integrated graphics only for all the CPUs tested here we see the 2200 G consumes slightly less power in the core i3 8350 K and slightly more than the core i3 8100 not bad but it was 11% sold in the 8100 in this test the 2400 G on the other hand was 8% fast in the 83 50k but only consumed 5% more power so SMT really helps to improve efficiency here I've also included the overclocking results for the 2400 G with the Vega GPU running at 1.6 gigahertz and this increased the power draw in this application by 27% then when it came time to game the 2200 G again found itself positioned between the core i3 a 183 50k despite delivering considerably better performance and overwatch thanks to the Vega GPU the 2400 G consumed almost 30% more power than the 2200 G making the cheaper apu the more efficient option for gaming finally we see when overclocking the 2400 G the power drill was increased by 23% using the included Wraith stealth box cool of these are the temperatures we saw with an ambient room temperature of 21 degrees under maximum load in the blender test we hit 67 degrees for the CPU and GPU on the 2200 G and 74 degrees for the 2400 G gaming temperatures were lower playing overwatch for the 22 energy hit a peak CPU temperature of 60 degrees and a GPU temperature of 57 degrees the 2400 G on the other hand was very similar hitting 59 degrees for both the GPU and CPU as a side note I should just mention that overclocking the Vega GPU to 1.6 gigahertz did push the temps with both the CPU and GPU to around 90 degrees with this stock cooler but I'll cover this in more detail and an overclocking video soon for now it's time to check out memory scaling performance first up we have the dual channel results using the 2200 G and these figures were recording the csgo benchmark at 720p so all the previous testing was done using ddr4 3200 memory and here we can see that certainly optimal I was able to get this kid to 3466 but I had to lower the timings and this reduce the performance benefits of operating at this higher speed what we can quite clearly see here is that dropping down from 3200 to the official 29:33 spec reduced the average frame rate by 6 percent then we saw a further 6 percent reduction when going from 29 33 to 2666 and then 8% from 2666 to 2400 if you were to use the ddr4 2400 memory and a dual channel configuration you stand to lose 20% performance when compared to what we've shown in this video some of you suggested to me that you'd like to run these new Raven Ridge APs with a single 8 gigabyte memory module because that's a cheaper option at the moment given these results I strongly recommend you stick to dual channel memory operation here is a better graph showing the real performance impact using ddr4 3,200 memory you'll see a massive 33 percent reduction in frame rate using a single memory module and this figure continues to increase as the memory speed is reduced so please stick with the dual channel memory mode well that's what four days of solid testing and almost no sleep looks like and that's forgetting the week's worth of testing I did for all the comparison data before even getting to the AP use but I think it's all been worth it we now have a really good idea of what the Raven Ridge ap use have to offer so let's talk about that performance wise the 2400 G + 22 energy are impressive both the CPU and GPU performance is exceptional irrespective price points additionally they can be paired with existing B 350 and 370 motherboards which is obviously great news for consumers they're also excellent when it comes to performance per watt particularly in 3d workloads the 2200 G is coming in at just $100 us and the 2400 year one hundred and seventy dollars us both appear to be exceptionally good value now let's talk a bit more about that the pentium g 4560 currently costs $80 can be installed on a $50 h 110 motherboard and paired with a GT 1030 for about $90 so all up a two hundred and twenty dollar u.s. combo the risin 5 2400 G offers a similar gaming experience and vastly superior productivity performance it cost just $20 more so $240 us with a be 350 motherboard the 2200 G on the other hand is slightly slower overall but comes in around $50 cheaper at 170 dollars us including a motherboard it's also much better for proximity workloads so if the game was on a tight budget the Rison 320 200 G certainly seems like the way to go then when compared to the pentium g 45 60 the Rison 5:24 energy really makes more sense and should prove to be a far better investment over time the core i3 8100 comparison is more difficult as we're stuck with said 370 boards for now and they cost at least 110 dollars us but I'm gonna pretend that's not actually the case and you can get a B 360 board for $70 and hopefully that will be a reality in the not-too-distant future even so with a $70 motherboard and the GT 1030 you're looking at a total bill of almost $300 u.s. and that makes the 2400 G considerably better value as you're not just paying less for the combo but you're also getting a more powerful CPU so this looks like a solid win for AMD across the board there is however a slight hitch here that needs to be addressed memory pricing of course memory prices are high across the board but they are particularly high when looking at high-speed Rison friendly memory the ddr4 2400 16 gigabyte kit used for testing the core i3 8100 for example cost $160 u.s. and this is for a pair of 8 gigabyte modules that's mighty expensive by 2016 s memory prices but today it's just the norm the G skilful rx ddr4 3200 16 gigabyte kit that AMD provided for testing and I also use them Rison rig costs 250 dollars u.s. that means you're paying a little over 50% more for the horizon optimized memory I'm yet to figure out which ddr4 memory will work at 29 33 and faster with the Raven Ridge APU so it is possible that there's cheaper memory but I can't confirm that at this point that said I should note the ddr4 3,200 memory does start at $225 us for a 16 gigabyte kits that's still a 40% price premium though this margin is at least half with the 8 gigabyte kits so that's something what this means though is that right now it's the ddr4 memory prices that are really killing the value of these in your AMD APU 's whether discrete graphics card memory speed really doesn't matter if you throw a G 45 60 unlock is dead 270 motherboard and pair it with ddr4 4000 memory you look best see a few extra frames with the gtx 1050 1050 Ti or even a 1060 this means giving current memory prices you possibly better off going with a discrete graphics card which is a real shame that said though the Rison 320 200 G combo with 8 gigabytes of ddr4 30 ton of memory that cost $275 as you're faced with 105 dollar u.s. bill for the memory still as I said 8 gigabytes of ddr4 2,400 memory isn't that much cheaper and you're paying at least $85 u.s. anyway for the memory so that makes the total bill for the pentium g 4560 combo about three hundred and five dollars u.s. it really also depends on what you want from the system if you want to build the smallest possible gaming rig than the Raven Ridge ap use or for something unique that said though even if you want to build a micro ATX or even a standard ATX system though 2400 G has a legs and in the future when you can afford a GTX 1060 or rx 580 it'll be able to extract maximum performance from those graphics cards I still can't work out which APU I prefer they're both just so bloody good in their own right initially I thought it would be all about the Rison 520 400 G but I've shifted away from that thinking and I really like what the Rison 322 energy has to offer budget gamers this APU motherboard and memory combo for well under $300 u.s. simply can't be beat and for that reason I think it's going to be a hot item for gamers on a budget it's also worth noting when I started testing these EP use last week the Vega drivers that were quite buggy anybody has since released an updated version that pretty much solved all the stuttering issues I was seeing so that's great they also say that further driver optimizations are coming and performance will get better and we'll give an aim DS history I believe them one thing to remember when buying a Raven Ridge apu is that memory speed matters it really really matters you gotta want at least ddr4 memory capable of running at 2933 for them to really make sense and well that's going to do it for this one I hope you enjoyed the video and if you did be sure to hit the like button subscribe for more content and if you appreciate the testing we do here at Harvard unbox then consider supporting us on patreon thanks for watching I'm your host Steve I'll see you next time