Is The Ryzen 5 2400G All You Need For Budget PC Gaming??

Is The Ryzen 5 2400G All You Need For Budget PC Gaming??


AMD’s newest APUs, the Ryzen 3 2200G and
Ryzen 5 2400G, might be the greatest gift to budget gaming we’ve had in quite a while. Howdy howdy guys ponchato here, and today
we’re taking a look at AMD’s Ryzen 5 2400G. First, a bit of background. It’s what AMD calls an “APU” or “Accelerated
Processing Unit”, which just means that it’s a CPU with an integrated graphics processor,
similar to most Intel CPUs. The big difference is the 2200G and 2400G
are meant to actually be usable in real-life gaming, rather than just basic web browsing
and general computer use, or running League of Legends at 12 fps. That’s the idea, anyway, and we’ll test
that out later in the video. The 2400G, part of the Raven Ridge series,
was released in February of 2018 at a launch price of $169 USD. It’s a 4 core, 8 thread processor utilizing
the AM4 socket and runs at a base frequency of 3.6GHz with boost up to 3.9, and like all
Ryzen processors, it is unlocked. That means you can overclock it even on relatively
inexpensive B350 chipset motherboards along with the higher end X370 boards. It comes with 2MB of L2 cache, 4MB of L3,
and it’s on the 14nm node. The integrated GPU has 11 RX Vega compute
units running at 1250MHz, and the processor supports memory speeds up to DDR4-2933, a
slight increase from the Ryzen 1000 series. An interesting thing to note on the 2400G
is that it only has 8 PCIe lanes compared to, for example, Intel’s i5-7500 with 16
lanes or the Ryzen 3 1200 with 20. AMD probably figured that people wouldn’t
be putting this CPU in a multi-GPU setup, and 8 lanes won’t bottleneck any consumer-level
GPUs anyway. Finally, in terms of cooling, the 2400G comes
with AMD’s very capable Wraith Stealth cooler, which should easily handle its TDP of 65W. First we’ll take a look at the CPU benchmarks. In Cinebench, the Ryzen 5 2400G scored 157
in the single core benchmark and 817 in the multicore, compared to the i5-7500 at 164
and 603. The 2400G’s SMT, which gives it 8 threads
instead of just four, seems to help multicore performance quite a bit. In the CPU-Z benchmark, single core performance
hit 427.6 and multicore scored 2291.5; again slightly behind the i5 in single threaded
performance but ahead in multi-thread. Next up is 7-Zip’s compression and decompression
benchmark, a more real-world test, where the 2400G hit 16.7 MB/s in compression and 266
MB/s in decompression. That’s about 6% faster for compression and
over 50% faster in decompression vs the i5-7500. Next we’ll look at memory bandwidth with
the Sandra benchmark test – 28.2 GB/s vs the i5’s 24.9, and keep in mind both CPUs
were using the same 2x4GB kit of DDR4-2400 memory. Finally for the content creation benchmark,
I render a small slice of video with plenty of effects and transitions using Sony Vegas
CPU rendering. The 2400G finished in 1:03 while the i5 finished
in 1:04. It looks like the 2400G’s multithreading
doesn’t make much of a difference when dealing with video rendering. Now we’ll look at the 1080p gaming benchmarks. First up, Battlefield 1. Performance on low settings was actually pretty
good, at just under 50 FPS average and lows around 30. Medium settings were still playable at 33
FPS average and lows in the mid-20s, but high and ultra were a bit rough; 24 and 22 FPS
respectively. I was actually kind of surprised how well
the 2400G played on low settings, which was pretty close to the performance of discrete
budget GPUs. Next, CSGO. The interesting thing here is how low the
lows are compared to the average FPS: 148 vs 54 on low, 64 vs 11 on high. That’s a pretty steep drop. I expect that limiting the frame rate might
help make gameplay more consistent, though low settings certainly run well enough for
an enjoyable experience. I don’t think I’d push the graphics settings
to max though, considering this is a competitive shooter and the frame drops might get you
killed. Third is Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. As you can see, the 2400G can’t handle it
at all when running at 1080p. To be honest, I didn’t really expect it
to, since Deus Ex is a very graphically intensive game. A discrete GPU would serve you much better
for a game like this. Next we’ll look at GTA 5. There’s actually very little difference
in average FPS between low, medium, and high settings; 31 vs 29 vs 27. Even the lows don’t change very much between
the graphics settings. GTA 5 is usually very forgiving, but apparently
not in this case. Low settings do work the best, and actually
aren’t too bad considering how consistent the frame rate is. It never runs much above 30 FPS, but it essentially
never stutters, either, which isn’t often the case. Now we’ll look at Just Cause 3. On low settings, average FPS hits 44 with
lows around 22 FPS, while medium settings were almost identical at an average of 41
and lows again around 22. High settings just barely drop it into unplayable
territory with an average FPS of 27. Overall in Just Cause 3, it looks like medium
settings are the best pairing for the 2400G. Next up is Overwatch. Another usually forgiving, except in this
case, e-sports title. Low settings had bizarrely rough lows, but
things leveled off at medium settings; 55 FPS average, 47 FPS 1% lows, and 43 for the
0.1%. High settings again had weird frame rate drop
offs, but bumping it up to ultra leveled it off again. Like Just Cause 3, the game just barely dips
into unplayable territory on max settings with an average FPS of 27. I would stick to medium or high settings,
unless you really want prettier graphics in which case Ultra settings are playable in
Overwatch. Next is PUBG. Anything above very low settings is unplayable,
but to be honest, I was kind of surprised how well very low settings worked. PUBG is (still) far from optimized, so I was
imagining performance down in the 20s even on very low. But it really wasn’t that bad, and I didn’t
have any trouble with frame drops or lag in game. I didn’t expect it, but if you can deal
with the lowest graphics settings, the 2400G actually can handle PUBG. Last but not least is Rocket League. Low settings will net you 135 FPS average
with lows at 95 and 68, medium settings drop that considerably to 69 FPS average with lows
at 55 and 47, and finally high settings average 39 FPS with lows around 30. If you’re shooting for 120 or 144Hz gaming,
low settings are the way to go, but if 60 FPS is all you’re looking for, the 2400G
can handle Rocket League at medium settings just fine. Now for an overview of gaming performance,
we’ll take a look at multi-game averages. First, the e-sports titles. Low settings average about 120 FPS with lows
at about 60 and 40, medium settings average 84 with lows at about 50 and 40, and maxed
out the average FPS dropped to 44 with lows around 20. If your primary games are e-sports titles
like CSGO or Rocket League, low settings should be your target for 120 or 144Hz gaming, and
performance on medium settings should be more than enough for standard 60Hz monitors. Next, the non-esports average. These are combined results from games like
PUBG and GTA 5. Low settings averaged 36 FPS with lows in
the mid-20s, while medium settings and above were mostly below the level of being playable;
29 FPS on medium and 20 FPS when maxed out. It looks like the 2400G will be limited to
low settings in regular games if you’re playing at 1080p. Then again, if you’re really concerned about
your graphics settings, you probably aren’t looking at APUs for gaming anyway. Now, some of these game results are pretty
strange – GTA 5 is typically one of the most forgiving non-esports titles, except
with the 2400G, Just Cause 3 is typically much lower in performance, except with the
2400G, and Overwatch is almost always playable when maxed out, except with the 2400G. I have a feeling that performance will become
more consistent with future driver updates, as AMD irons out all the quirks with these
APUs. As a last note on gaming performance, we’ll
look at the FPS per dollar. At first glance this is really low – an
average GPU hits around .6 to .8, but you have to keep in mind that this is for an entire
CPU and GPU built in, not just a standalone GPU. If you included the cost of an equivalent
CPU (something like an i5-7500) with most GPUs, you’d get results somewhere around
.2 to .4, similar to the 2400G. Finally we’ll look at temperatures and power
usage. These tests were performed with the stock
cooler, so these temperatures are what you can expect if you’re building a computer
with the 2400G for yourself. Using my standard test setup of a 2x4GB kit
of DDR4-2400 memory and an RX 550 (so non-CPU power draw is the same for all systems), at
idle the 2400G hit a delta of 5.4 degrees Celsius and had a power draw of just under
50W. For reference, the i5-7500 hit a delta of
9.9 C but only drew 37W. Under load with Prime95, the 2400G hit a delta
of 58.6 C and drew 117W from the wall, compared to the i5’s 43 degree delta and 88W. To be completely fair, AMD doesn’t really
have a great reputation for power efficiency, but for most people power usage is basically
a non-issue. As I’ve done with CPU reviews before, I
didn’t include the overclocking results in this video because there are plenty of
people out there who don’t overclock at all. If you want to see the OC results as soon
as they’re up, be sure to hit subscribe now. The 2400G will run you about as much as an
Intel Pentium G5400 and Nvidia GT 1030 and, I expect, give you pretty similar gaming performance. There are a few major benefits to the 2400G
though. The first is overclocking, since it’s unlocked
whereas the G5400 (and all non-K processors from Intel) isn’t. Second, the AM4 socket is going to be supported
through 2019 or 2020, so you’ll have a much longer usable lifespan of your motherboard
and memory since later generation Ryzen CPUs will still be supported. Finally, the 2400G is a quad core with 8 threads;
the cheapest current-gen quad core from Intel is the i3-8100, which runs about $120 and
that’s before you even get a GPU. Overall I think the 2400G tackles its market
well. I think AMD was really targeting couch gamers
with this APU – people who just want a small, simple, console-like PC they can have next
to their TV in the living room to play games like Rocket League without being locked into
one or the other console’s ecosystems. For non-gamers, the 2400G doesn’t make much
sense since you’re wasting a lot of money on gaming performance you don’t need. But, if you don’t play any games at all,
you probably aren’t going to be watching this video to begin with. For more serious gamers, I think the value
proposition is mainly in the upgradability department; this gives you an unlocked 4 core,
8 thread processor and decent gaming performance for under $200, and maybe most importantly,
will let you keep the same platform for the next two to three years while still having
new upgrade options for both the CPU and GPU. I think the Ryzen 5 2400G is a pretty great
option for gamers on a tight budget, who still want to leave upgrade options open (and easy)
for the future. Click the link in the description to pick
one up for yourself. If you want to get notified of new videos
as soon as they’re up, hit subscribe then click the bell icon to enable notifications. So guys if you liked this video hit the like
button, if you want to see more hit subscribe, and if you have any questions on the 2400G
or any of these benchmarks, leave them in the comments below. Thanks for watching, I hope I helped, and
I’ll see you in the next video.

62 thoughts to “Is The Ryzen 5 2400G All You Need For Budget PC Gaming??”

  1. The $99 version is amazing for non-gaming PCs. This one is probably overkill for most office builds, but I wouldn’t say that AMDs goal with these APUs is just cheap gaming

  2. This APU is hard to recommend for me because of the 2200G at $99. I feel like if you're interested in getting an APU, the additional threads that you get with the 2400G won't be that necessary for you and the graphics performance is pretty similar. It makes more sense to save the $70 and put that towards buying a graphics card in my opinion.

  3. Did you turn the video memory limit to 2 gb in the bios? And which memory clockspeed do you used in the benchmarks?

  4. Overclocking the cpu and the ram will boost the fps significantly! If yu can do a video with overclocking i'd appreciate it a lot! Like for this vid as well 👍

  5. You're really holding the APU back with (presumably) single channel 2400mhz ram.
    It sees absurd performance gains with dual channel and higher speeds.

  6. If this the apu are stopgaps for GPU pricing what would be a good pairing GPU would work well without bottle necking?

  7. Thanks for the review but I can't understand the budget of this build. I know a 250GB SSD is on the small size but you can uninstall and reinstall games on Steam without any great difficulty; why did you go for a larger capacity SSD and not put money saved on a 250GB SSD onto faster 3200Mhz memory that the integrated graphics part of the APU really needs to hit higher frame rates? I think without it, it's probably not worth building around an AMD APU. Or you could have partnered that faster 3200Mhz memory with the much cheaper 2200G and easily beaten the above setup in fps, though obviously for productivity apps the 2400G is the better choice. I would urge you to re-do this test to show what a big difference faster memory makes in games. <3

    I'm told the MSI Mortar board is the best one to go with, for overclocking the 2400G, according to Hardware Unboxed, though that's anecdotal as I haven't had a chance to try it and I think MSI is one of their sponsors, judging by the frequency with which they use MSI motherboards in their builds.

  8. Can somebody tell me if this APU is compatible with my motherboard? I have the Biostar A68MD pro is it compatible?

  9. Ram price is so high now
    maybe
    budget ram + 8th Intel processor >> Ryzen 5 2000 series + budget ram?

  10. I am bad with computers but aint the fps from the graphics card videos the real fps and so no then pls explain

  11. With dual channel 8gb ( 2×4 ) the FPS goes up! Don't use the APUs with single channel if you not be using a dedicated vídeo grafics

  12. Nur 42 Watt im Windows IDLE-Betrieb, an der Steckdose gemessen, trotz 650W Netzteils. 70…120 Watt im Gaming-Modus, je nach Game. Wenn APU des Ryzen 5 2400G auf 1500MHz übertacktet wird, dann sind es 145W. Ein 150W Netzteil würde also ausreichen 😉 Ich bin echt zufrieden mit der Gaming-Leistung der Ryzen 5 2400G APU. Meine GTX 1060 6GB liegt jetzt nur noch ausgebaut neben dem PC, als Deko. 😉 Klar ist die besser, aber die brauch auch ein Haufen mehr Strom…

  13. I have this CPU paired with 2x4GB 3200 CL 16 16 RAM KIT.
    CPU is overclocked to 4.0 GHZ @ 1.38 volt using P-state
    GPU is overclocked to 1500Mhz @ 1.168 volt

    I got way better numbers than what you're showing my friend
    For example: CB R15 I got 904 Multi score and 169 single score
    Though overclocking the CPU portion wont help in games when using the Vega 11 but using faster RAM will definitely do !!

  14. … I am researching a shoestring budget build of a dedicated Ableton Live! 10 DAW .
    … I need at least 2 monitors (or three) at 1080p60 …  I have a 2560 x 1080 …. might go with one, huge 4K HDTV as a 2nd monitor …  I do have big plans to acquire VEGAS PRO video edit sw next year, so an affordable expansion path is desired.   … I'm gonna go research   the onboard video out connectors on various X370 MOBOs, now.  …. THOUGHTS ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *