Marrying Vega and Zen: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400G Review
by Ian Cutress on February 12, 2018 9:00 AM ESTBenchmark Overview
For our review, we are implementing our latest CPU testing benchmark suite, using automated scripts developed specifically for our CPU reviews. This means that with a fresh OS install, we can configure the OS to be more consistent, install the new benchmarks, maintain version consistency without random updates and start running the tests in under 5 minutes. After that it's a one button press to start an 8-10hr test (with a high-performance core) with nearly 100 relevant data points in the benchmarks given below. The tests cover a wide range of segments, some of which will be familiar but some of the tests are new to benchmarking in general, but still highly relevant for the markets they come from.
Our new CPU tests go through six main areas. We cover the Web (we've got an un-updateable version of Chrome 56), general system tests (opening tricky PDFs, emulation, brain simulation, AI, 2D image to 3D model conversion), rendering (ray tracing, modeling), encoding (compression, AES, h264 and HEVC), office based tests (PCMark and others), and our legacy tests, throwbacks from another generation of bad code but interesting to compare.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
A side note on OS preparation. As we're using Windows 10, there's a large opportunity for something to come in and disrupt our testing. So our default strategy is multiple: disable the ability to update as much as possible, disable Windows Defender, uninstall OneDrive, disable Cortana as much as possible, implement the high performance mode in the power options, and disable the internal platform clock which can drift away from being accurate if the base frequency drifts (and thus the timing ends up inaccurate).
*Please note that due to time constraints, the data in this review does not take into account any effect from the Meltdown and Spectre patches.
Web Tests on Chrome 56
Mozilla Kraken 1.1
Google Octane 2.0
WebXPRT15
System Tests
PDF Opening
FCAT
3DPM v2.1
Dolphin v5.0
DigiCortex v1.20
Agisoft PhotoScan v1.0
Rendering Tests
Corona 1.3
Blender 2.78
LuxMark v3.1 CPU C++
LuxMark v3.1 CPU OpenCL
POV-Ray 3.7.1b4
Cinebench R15 ST
Cinebench R15 MT
Encoding Tests
7-Zip 9.2
WinRAR 5.40
AES Encoding (TrueCrypt 7.2)
HandBrake v1.0.2 x264 LQ
HandBrake v1.0.2 x264-HQ
HandBrake v1.0.2 HEVC-4K
Office / Professional
PCMark8
Chromium Compile (v56)
Legacy Tests
3DPM v1 ST / MT
x264 HD 3 Pass 1, Pass 2
Cinebench R11.5 ST / MT
Cinebench R10 ST / MT
Gaming CPU Tests
For this review, we have taken two angles with our testing: integrated vs integrated, and integrated vs low-end discrete. To this end, we purchased an MSI GT 1030 2GB graphics card to compare against the integrated offerings, as well as testing AMD and Intel's integrated options. For our gaming tests, we ran the 1080p version of all of our benchmarks:
- Civilization 6 (1080p Ultra)
- Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation*
- Shadow of Mordor (1080p Ultra)
- Rise of the Tomb Raider #1 - GeoValley (1080p High)
- Rise of the Tomb Raider #2 - Prophets (1080p High)
- Rise of the Tomb Raider #3 - Mountain (1080p High)
- Rocket League (1080p Ultra)
- Grand Theft Auto V (1080p Very High)
*Ashes recently had an update which broke our script, and it is not an easy fix, so we have removed this game from our testing
These games are a cross of mix of eSports and high-end titles, and to be honest, we have pushed the quality settings up higher than most people would expect for this level of integrated graphics: most benchmarks hit around 25-30 FPS average with the best IGP solutions, down to 1/3 this with the worst solutions. The best results show that integrated graphics are certainly capable with the right settings, but also shows that there is a long way between integrated graphics and a mid-range discrete graphics option.
177 Comments
View All Comments
SSNSeawolf - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Wonderful, that's understandable. Always appreciate the time you take to slog through the comments, Ian.HStewart - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
It might be me - unless you are really serious gamer and need high end performance, I see no reason to use a desktop CPU and GPU in todays world.Holliday75 - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
That appears to be the case. This CPU would be my go to option for any family member wanting a PC these days. The flexibility it offers is remarkable.B3an - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Mistake on the Blender benchmark. The latest version is 2.79 but you've put "2.78". Being as you also have a nightly build you might even have 2.8 if you've got it from the 2.8 nightly branch. Either way you will have at least 2.79.milkod2001 - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Looks like decent but still 720 gaming at the best. How far away are we from 40-50fps 1080p gaming from APU?richardginn - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Depending on the game you are going to play you will need low settings to get 40-50fps 1080p gaming from this APU,.Yaldabaoth - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Great article. However, because I am a pervert, I would LOVE to see some heterogeneous GPU action going on. "Does an AMD 2400G and a nVidia 1050 make a baby that is like a 1050 TI? What about if it mated with a Vega 56 or 580?" Know what I mean? [Nudge-nudge] Know what I mean?Threska - Wednesday, February 14, 2018 - link
Heterogeneous would be an APU, not crossfire. Far as AMD's plans with HSA who knows? They're not doing much talk about it since Zen came out. Maybe they don't need it now that their single thread performance is competitive?Pork@III - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Core i7-8809G will smash easily Ryzen 5 2400Ganactoraaron - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
If cost is no concern, then yes.