Gavin, if I read this analysis correctly, this expands on your previous article on CPU core scaling of the 2200G and 2400G, both delidded, but not on iGPU overclocking. Since all graphs are in the 3.5 -4 Ghz range, I assume that this is all for CPU speeds, including the IGPU labeled data. If I am wrong, please correct me, but if you managed to overclock the VEGA cores to 4 GHz, it would be quite a feat!
I have a couple of questions: 1. Power and thermals in the various use scenarios? Maybe not for all of them, but some cornerstones to get an idea; if you used the data from the first article, please mention or link to that. 2. What about selective overclocking of the iGPU, especially iGPU only? The key attraction of delidding the 2200 and 2400 for me is a potential to boost the iGPU performance. The stock speed of the CPU is fine IMO. 3. Any information or planned follow-up on undervolting/underclocking the CPU, and boosting iGPU using the stock cooler? If possible, both before and after delidding. The last question relates to another article here on the best gaming CPUs. Now, some of us can afford a $2000+ rig - and power to them. However, the big challenge really is at the other end. The value king of the "best CPU.." in the $ 500 and under group, the 2200G (or 2400G, if you have a PSU and a disk that can be reused for the new build), really have the much better iGPU going for them vs. price-matched Intels. So, any data on iGPU overclocking coming up? I believe I am not the only one waiting - Thanks!
Hey Pete, it's essentially following on, with memory scaling also not far off being published (near future depending on schedules etc). I'm actually setting the test bench back up to finish the iGPU scaling piece off which I intend to answer a lot of questions asked from the overclocking piece.
To answer your questions directly:
1. Power wasn't much of a factor in this piece as the focus is primarily on CPU frequency scaling, with power consumption being touched upon on in the previous articles. 2. iGPU scaling piece is being worked upon currently, with the test bench being set up tomorrow or Friday (just working on some motherboard reviews today as well as balancing a severe hand injury which has hindered me for the last few weeks). 3. I didn't have a planned follow up planned with a stock cooler, as my aim was to essentially show scaling without much limitations on things like cooling; the stock cooler would obviously generate more heat and I didn't want that to be a limiting factor at any stage. 4. I made a post on my personal Facebook page about Ian's Best Gaming CPU Q2 article just published. My first reaction was the $500 system with the Ryzen 5 2400G made me smile inside as I genuinely think the 2400G is a stunner for the price, especially for gamers on a budget with certain limitations.
Hi Gavin, thanks for your response! Firstly, sorry to hear about your hand injury, and wishes for a speedy recovery. Look forward to your iGPU overclocking review. If you can, please try it also while undervolting the CPU, so more thermal headroom is available for the GPU.
I try my best! I fell on a glass and needed 2 and a half hours in surgery to re-attach the tendon in my index finger; was completely severed! - Really appreciate your well wishes! It's on the list, it will be mentioned, don't worry :D
Gavin, I think you should also show the negative scaling in the summary, instead of setting it at 0.00%. What happens is probably that the CPU is eating more into the iGPU power budget at higher clocks, so the average iGPU frequency is reduced.
Good point. A lot of the iGPU data here really suggest that the performance in a number (all?) games is mostly or entirely GPU-limited, so the 11CU 2400 is always a bit ahead of thr 8CU 2200. Plus, your point on iGPU throttling due to the overclocked CPU cores using up thermal headroom is born out in some of the data, where frame rates show a slight drop at maximum CPU speed.
I am still hoping for an article that looks at bclk (base/bus clock) overclocking with the 2200g/2400g. I still think that optimum performance can be had from them by getting the iGPU just past the clock hole between 1300-1500Mhz, then overclocking the ram to 3200-3333 Mxfr, and then nudging the bclk up as high as it can go without causing instability or turning off turbo boost.
2400G turbo disabled 3200 CL14 1500Mhz+ igpu Undervolt cpu (just the cpu part) as this APU's lets you undervolt cpu and gpu independently. CM Hypeer 212 EVO/X is more than enough for the system, even better if delidded.
Delid+metal just to get good temps with the OCed igpu
I kinda wish APU reviewers were less focused on comparisons with the nearest price dgpu PC (garbage no one would actually buy if they went the dgpu route - they would spend hundreds more), and accepted there are many who, having decided on the apu route, sensibly want to do it properly and spend the small premium that takes.
For your forthcoming APU memory OC review, IMO, stock cooling on the majority of 2400 ApuS is not real world. Stock is a false economy.
You are getting a ~free (minimalist, but cutting edge vega ecosystem) GPU, and luckily, can better cool both processors with a single improved cooler. $30- $50 doesn't seem too much to budget for decent air cooling. Nor does $220-240 for decent 16GB ram.
The game changing dynamic automatic overclocking that comes with APUs (also on a new process to zen1, which AMD call 14nm+) and Zen+ CPUs, is wonderful, but only as good as the thermal envelope your cooling allows it.
Further, what seems to get overlooked in the fuss about latency trumping clock speed for memory perf, is that mem clock also sets Fabric bus clock speed.
The effects of improving this vital and fundamental zen metric may well go un-noticed by benchmarks for some time, but as the zen/fabric/vega APU ecosystem beds down, Fabric bus speed ~will matter a lot. ~everything must pass through this control point, so its inevitably a bottle neck.
"I kinda wish APU reviewers were less focused on comparisons with the nearest price dgpu PC (garbage no one would actually buy if they went the dgpu route - they would spend hundreds more),"
A GTX 1060 is "garbage no one would actually buy"? I'm not into games any more, but back in my younger days I was...and didn't have a lot of money to spend. The graphics aren't really important for my work so I would choose a CPU based on my work requirements and then indulge myself a little on a graphics card that was affordable to me. I used to set a $150 to $200 limit on how much I would spend on graphics and get whatever seemed to be the most bang for the buck in that range. At $230 (cheapest GTX 1060 on New Egg) the 1060 would actually be a bit above my range. Anyway integrated graphics weren't an option then, at least in my situation.
so what if I was a gamer today but didn't have much cash and wanted the best I could get with a small amount of money? Well, Looking at Microcenter which is my go to place for CPU's and motherboards, The 2200G is the cheapest Ryzen CPU available at $80 while the 2400g is $150. In the test results, the 2200g + GTX 1060 performs better than the 2400g with integrated graphics. So in order of price/performance you get (from highest performing to lowest performing):
If you want the ultimate in cheap, the 2200G is the way to go. If you want something better than the 2400G you could move up to the 2200G + 1060. The 2400 + 1060 combo doesn't make any sense because for the same price I can get an R51600 and add the 1060 to that. Now if it were me (which it isn't :) ), for cheap gaming, i'd probably consider something like a 2200G over clocked as high as I could get it combined with a GTX1050 or similar for $80+$140 = $220. I'd be using the 2200G not for its integrated graphics but because its the cheapest Ryzen I can get right now and its over clockable.
Yeah, I currently have a 1050Ti because it's all I could afford. I game quite a lot. If I had a little more flexibility I'd have pushed to a 1060 and been very happy.
Not everyone's highest financial priority is a GPU, even when games are their main source of leisure.
Or if you REALLY want to increase your performance and run 60 fps games at maxed out settings, you could take the 300$ you want to spend on a cooler and "decent" 16GB RAM, and instead get an Nvidia 1050 and 8 GB RAM.
And you'll have cash left over for a good game or two.
Nvidia 1030 (or a 750TI) costs less than 100$ on Newegg. Nvidia 1050 costs around 150$
I find the big differences in the CPU results between both APUs at the same clock speed quite surprising. It seems that for some benchmarks SMT (aka Hyperthreading) gives substantial benefits after all. So thanks for the good work and I wish you a speedy recovery.
Concerning iGPU overclocking, Computerbase (German) recently had a piece https://www.computerbase.de/2018-06/raven-ridge-ap... on that. One thing worthy of not is that 1350-1450MHz did not work on their iGPUs, but higher overclocks (1500MHz, and, with more voltage, more) worked. Their explanation was that voltage was set too low for the middle frequencies.
Come what may , these are still budget solutions , adding 16gb of expensive fast ram and best quality Coolers defeats the purpose ... and remember Dgpu are available on the 2nd hand market , esp things like gtx960,970 so adding one doesn't need to break the bank. that's where your upgrade money should go .
I hear your point. What worries me about buying second hand GPU especially nowadays is that there is no way to know whether it was used to mine crypto 24/7 for the last 2-3 years or not. Semiconductors can wear out if used for thousands of hours both overvolted and at above normal temps; both can really affect not just the GPU, but especially also the memory. The downside of a 980 or 970 (which wasn't as much at risk for cryptomining) is the now outdated HDMI standard. But yes, just for gaming, they can do.
A CM Hyper 212X is cheap and it's one the best bang for buck coolers. 16GB of ram is expensive if you want 2400 o 3000 CL15. 8GB is just too low, the igpu needs some of it and many games (2015+ already need 6GB+ of system memory)
Thanks for the link! Yes, those results are REALLY interesting. They used stock 2200G and 2400G, no delidding, no undervolting of the CPU, and on stock heatsinks, and got quite an increase, especially when they also used faster memory (to OC memory speed also) . Downside was notable increase in power draw and the stock cooler's fan running at full tilt. So, Gavin's delidded APUs with their better heatsinks should do even better. The most notable thing in that German article was that the way to the overclock mountain (stable at 1600 Mhz stock cooler etc.) led through a valley of tears, i.e. the APUs crashed reliably when the iGPU was mildly overclocked, but then became stable again at higher iGPU clock speeds and voltage. They actually got some statement from AMD that AMD knows about that strange behavior, but apparently has no explanation for it. But then - running more stable if I run it even faster - bring it!
A R3 is not really an amazing feat. It's a defective R7 with core, lane, fabric, pinout defects. The rest of the chip is run at low speed because the integrity is affected. Not sure anyone is getting their money worth here.
I don't get this nonsense articles on an APU were the MAIN STAR IS THE IGPU. On some builds there mixed results when the gpu frequency jumped around 200-1200Mhz (hence some funny low 0.1-1% lows in benchmarks).
It's all about OC the igpu forgetting about the cpu part and addressing/fixing igpu clock rubber band effect, sometimes disabling boost for cpu, increase soc voltage, etc.
I'm going to question the results a little bit. For me it looks like that the only ”jump” in performance you get in games occurs whenever you hit an OC over the standard boost clock, e.g. 3700 MHz on the 2400G. I would suspect that you are simply preventing some core parking or some other aggressive power management feature while applying the OC. That would explain the odd numbers with when you increase the OC.
That being said I would say a CPU OC doesn't really make sense. An undervolting test to see where the sweet spot lies would be nice though.
Frankly, the result of all these tests seems to be that overclocking isn’t doing much of anything useful, at least, not the small amounts we see here with AMD.
5% is never going to be noticed. Several studies done a number of years ago showed that you need at least an overall 10% improvement in speed for it to even be noticeable. 15% would be barely noticeable.
For heavy database workloads that take place over hours, or long rendering tasks, it will make a difference, but for gaming, which this article is overly interested in, nada!
The 2200G makes sense for an absolute budget system.
(Though if you're starting from rock bottom and also need to buy a cabinet, motherboard, RAM, etc. you'll probably be better off taking that money and buying a used computer. You can get some really good deals for less than 500$)
The 2400G however? Not so much. The price is too high and the performance too low to compete with an Intel Pentium/Nvidia 1030 solution.
Or if you want to spend a few dollars more and find a good deal: An Intel Pentium/Nvidia 1050.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
29 Comments
Back to Article
eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
Gavin, if I read this analysis correctly, this expands on your previous article on CPU core scaling of the 2200G and 2400G, both delidded, but not on iGPU overclocking. Since all graphs are in the 3.5 -4 Ghz range, I assume that this is all for CPU speeds, including the IGPU labeled data. If I am wrong, please correct me, but if you managed to overclock the VEGA cores to 4 GHz, it would be quite a feat!I have a couple of questions:
1. Power and thermals in the various use scenarios? Maybe not for all of them, but some cornerstones to get an idea; if you used the data from the first article, please mention or link to that.
2. What about selective overclocking of the iGPU, especially iGPU only? The key attraction of delidding the 2200 and 2400 for me is a potential to boost the iGPU performance. The stock speed of the CPU is fine IMO.
3. Any information or planned follow-up on undervolting/underclocking the CPU, and boosting iGPU using the stock cooler? If possible, both before and after delidding.
The last question relates to another article here on the best gaming CPUs. Now, some of us can afford a $2000+ rig - and power to them. However, the big challenge really is at the other end. The value king of the "best CPU.." in the $ 500 and under group, the 2200G (or 2400G, if you have a PSU and a disk that can be reused for the new build), really have the much better iGPU going for them vs. price-matched Intels. So, any data on iGPU overclocking coming up? I believe I am not the only one waiting - Thanks!
gavbon - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
Hey Pete, it's essentially following on, with memory scaling also not far off being published (near future depending on schedules etc). I'm actually setting the test bench back up to finish the iGPU scaling piece off which I intend to answer a lot of questions asked from the overclocking piece.To answer your questions directly:
1. Power wasn't much of a factor in this piece as the focus is primarily on CPU frequency scaling, with power consumption being touched upon on in the previous articles.
2. iGPU scaling piece is being worked upon currently, with the test bench being set up tomorrow or Friday (just working on some motherboard reviews today as well as balancing a severe hand injury which has hindered me for the last few weeks).
3. I didn't have a planned follow up planned with a stock cooler, as my aim was to essentially show scaling without much limitations on things like cooling; the stock cooler would obviously generate more heat and I didn't want that to be a limiting factor at any stage.
4. I made a post on my personal Facebook page about Ian's Best Gaming CPU Q2 article just published. My first reaction was the $500 system with the Ryzen 5 2400G made me smile inside as I genuinely think the 2400G is a stunner for the price, especially for gamers on a budget with certain limitations.
The crux is, iGPU scaling is coming, sit tight :D
eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
Hi Gavin, thanks for your response! Firstly, sorry to hear about your hand injury, and wishes for a speedy recovery.Look forward to your iGPU overclocking review. If you can, please try it also while undervolting the CPU, so more thermal headroom is available for the GPU.
gavbon - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
I try my best! I fell on a glass and needed 2 and a half hours in surgery to re-attach the tendon in my index finger; was completely severed! - Really appreciate your well wishes! It's on the list, it will be mentioned, don't worry :DSpunjji - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
Ouch! Heal up well! :)MrSpadge - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
Gavin, I think you should also show the negative scaling in the summary, instead of setting it at 0.00%. What happens is probably that the CPU is eating more into the iGPU power budget at higher clocks, so the average iGPU frequency is reduced.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
Good point. A lot of the iGPU data here really suggest that the performance in a number (all?) games is mostly or entirely GPU-limited, so the 11CU 2400 is always a bit ahead of thr 8CU 2200. Plus, your point on iGPU throttling due to the overclocked CPU cores using up thermal headroom is born out in some of the data, where frame rates show a slight drop at maximum CPU speed.lightningz71 - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
I am still hoping for an article that looks at bclk (base/bus clock) overclocking with the 2200g/2400g. I still think that optimum performance can be had from them by getting the iGPU just past the clock hole between 1300-1500Mhz, then overclocking the ram to 3200-3333 Mxfr, and then nudging the bclk up as high as it can go without causing instability or turning off turbo boost.Lolimaster - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
Best combo:2400G turbo disabled
3200 CL14
1500Mhz+ igpu
Undervolt cpu (just the cpu part) as this APU's lets you undervolt cpu and gpu independently.
CM Hypeer 212 EVO/X is more than enough for the system, even better if delidded.
Delid+metal just to get good temps with the OCed igpu
boozed - Wednesday, June 20, 2018 - link
WinRAR: "it would seem that other factors came into play with the 2200G"Okay... so what are they?
koekkoe - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
Improvements beyond 15% are probably anomalies.msroadkill612 - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
I kinda wish APU reviewers were less focused on comparisons with the nearest price dgpu PC (garbage no one would actually buy if they went the dgpu route - they would spend hundreds more), and accepted there are many who, having decided on the apu route, sensibly want to do it properly and spend the small premium that takes.For your forthcoming APU memory OC review, IMO, stock cooling on the majority of 2400 ApuS is not real world. Stock is a false economy.
You are getting a ~free (minimalist, but cutting edge vega ecosystem) GPU, and luckily, can better cool both processors with a single improved cooler. $30- $50 doesn't seem too much to budget for decent air cooling. Nor does $220-240 for decent 16GB ram.
The game changing dynamic automatic overclocking that comes with APUs (also on a new process to zen1, which AMD call 14nm+) and Zen+ CPUs, is wonderful, but only as good as the thermal envelope your cooling allows it.
Further, what seems to get overlooked in the fuss about latency trumping clock speed for memory perf, is that mem clock also sets Fabric bus clock speed.
The effects of improving this vital and fundamental zen metric may well go un-noticed by benchmarks for some time, but as the zen/fabric/vega APU ecosystem beds down, Fabric bus speed ~will matter a lot. ~everything must pass through this control point, so its inevitably a bottle neck.
Ratman6161 - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
"I kinda wish APU reviewers were less focused on comparisons with the nearest price dgpu PC (garbage no one would actually buy if they went the dgpu route - they would spend hundreds more),"A GTX 1060 is "garbage no one would actually buy"? I'm not into games any more, but back in my younger days I was...and didn't have a lot of money to spend. The graphics aren't really important for my work so I would choose a CPU based on my work requirements and then indulge myself a little on a graphics card that was affordable to me. I used to set a $150 to $200 limit on how much I would spend on graphics and get whatever seemed to be the most bang for the buck in that range. At $230 (cheapest GTX 1060 on New Egg) the 1060 would actually be a bit above my range. Anyway integrated graphics weren't an option then, at least in my situation.
so what if I was a gamer today but didn't have much cash and wanted the best I could get with a small amount of money? Well, Looking at Microcenter which is my go to place for CPU's and motherboards, The 2200G is the cheapest Ryzen CPU available at $80 while the 2400g is $150. In the test results, the 2200g + GTX 1060 performs better than the 2400g with integrated graphics. So in order of price/performance you get (from highest performing to lowest performing):
2400g + 1060 $380
2200G + 1060 $310
2400G + Integrated $150
2200g + integrated $80
If you want the ultimate in cheap, the 2200G is the way to go. If you want something better than the 2400G you could move up to the 2200G + 1060. The 2400 + 1060 combo doesn't make any sense because for the same price I can get an R51600 and add the 1060 to that. Now if it were me (which it isn't :) ), for cheap gaming, i'd probably consider something like a 2200G over clocked as high as I could get it combined with a GTX1050 or similar for $80+$140 = $220. I'd be using the 2200G not for its integrated graphics but because its the cheapest Ryzen I can get right now and its over clockable.
Spunjji - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
Yeah, I currently have a 1050Ti because it's all I could afford. I game quite a lot. If I had a little more flexibility I'd have pushed to a 1060 and been very happy.Not everyone's highest financial priority is a GPU, even when games are their main source of leisure.
V900 - Friday, September 28, 2018 - link
Nothing wrong with a 1050 or 1060.PC Gamers have just been spoiled by massive performance jumps every generation, and been taught that new=doubleplusgood and old=slowgarbage.
In reality we reached "good enough" a few generations ago.
Heck, look at consoles: I don't see any PS4 gamers complain that their 5 year old GPUs are slow and "garbage".
V900 - Friday, September 28, 2018 - link
Absolutely right! Its been a few years since you could reasonably describe a low end GPU as 'garbage'.If you play games that arent very demanding in terms of graphics (or if youre fine with 30 fps) you can get an Nvidia 1030 for 80-100$
Nothing garbage about that card.
Spend an extra 50$ and you can buy the Nvidia 1050 (130$-150$) and run pretty much any game at 1080p with high settings.
And of course, 100$-200$ can also get you really far if you dont mind a used GPU. Ive seen GTX 970s and 980s in that price range.
boozed - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
I just wish an article entitled "An Analysis" included some analysis.V900 - Friday, September 28, 2018 - link
Or if you REALLY want to increase your performance and run 60 fps games at maxed out settings, you could take the 300$ you want to spend on a cooler and "decent" 16GB RAM, and instead get an Nvidia 1050 and 8 GB RAM.And you'll have cash left over for a good game or two.
Nvidia 1030 (or a 750TI) costs less than 100$ on Newegg.
Nvidia 1050 costs around 150$
AntonErtl - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
I find the big differences in the CPU results between both APUs at the same clock speed quite surprising. It seems that for some benchmarks SMT (aka Hyperthreading) gives substantial benefits after all. So thanks for the good work and I wish you a speedy recovery.Concerning iGPU overclocking, Computerbase (German) recently had a piece https://www.computerbase.de/2018-06/raven-ridge-ap... on that. One thing worthy of not is that 1350-1450MHz did not work on their iGPUs, but higher overclocks (1500MHz, and, with more voltage, more) worked. Their explanation was that voltage was set too low for the middle frequencies.
dromoxen - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
Come what may , these are still budget solutions , adding 16gb of expensive fast ram and best quality Coolers defeats the purpose ... and remember Dgpu are available on the 2nd hand market , esp things like gtx960,970 so adding one doesn't need to break the bank. that's where your upgrade money should go .eastcoast_pete - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
I hear your point. What worries me about buying second hand GPU especially nowadays is that there is no way to know whether it was used to mine crypto 24/7 for the last 2-3 years or not. Semiconductors can wear out if used for thousands of hours both overvolted and at above normal temps; both can really affect not just the GPU, but especially also the memory.The downside of a 980 or 970 (which wasn't as much at risk for cryptomining) is the now outdated HDMI standard. But yes, just for gaming, they can do.
Lolimaster - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
A CM Hyper 212X is cheap and it's one the best bang for buck coolers. 16GB of ram is expensive if you want 2400 o 3000 CL15. 8GB is just too low, the igpu needs some of it and many games (2015+ already need 6GB+ of system memory)eastcoast_pete - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link
Thanks for the link! Yes, those results are REALLY interesting. They used stock 2200G and 2400G, no delidding, no undervolting of the CPU, and on stock heatsinks, and got quite an increase, especially when they also used faster memory (to OC memory speed also) . Downside was notable increase in power draw and the stock cooler's fan running at full tilt.So, Gavin's delidded APUs with their better heatsinks should do even better. The most notable thing in that German article was that the way to the overclock mountain (stable at 1600 Mhz stock cooler etc.) led through a valley of tears, i.e. the APUs crashed reliably when the iGPU was mildly overclocked, but then became stable again at higher iGPU clock speeds and voltage. They actually got some statement from AMD that AMD knows about that strange behavior, but apparently has no explanation for it. But then - running more stable if I run it even faster - bring it!
808Hilo - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
A R3 is not really an amazing feat. It's a defective R7 with core, lane, fabric, pinout defects. The rest of the chip is run at low speed because the integrity is affected. Not sure anyone is getting their money worth here.Lolimaster - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
I don't get this nonsense articles on an APU were the MAIN STAR IS THE IGPU. On some builds there mixed results when the gpu frequency jumped around 200-1200Mhz (hence some funny low 0.1-1% lows in benchmarks).It's all about OC the igpu forgetting about the cpu part and addressing/fixing igpu clock rubber band effect, sometimes disabling boost for cpu, increase soc voltage, etc.
Galatian - Friday, June 22, 2018 - link
I'm going to question the results a little bit. For me it looks like that the only ”jump” in performance you get in games occurs whenever you hit an OC over the standard boost clock, e.g. 3700 MHz on the 2400G. I would suspect that you are simply preventing some core parking or some other aggressive power management feature while applying the OC. That would explain the odd numbers with when you increase the OC.That being said I would say a CPU OC doesn't really make sense. An undervolting test to see where the sweet spot lies would be nice though.
melgross - Monday, June 25, 2018 - link
Frankly, the result of all these tests seems to be that overclocking isn’t doing much of anything useful, at least, not the small amounts we see here with AMD.5% is never going to be noticed. Several studies done a number of years ago showed that you need at least an overall 10% improvement in speed for it to even be noticeable. 15% would be barely noticeable.
For heavy database workloads that take place over hours, or long rendering tasks, it will make a difference, but for gaming, which this article is overly interested in, nada!
Allan_Hundeboll - Monday, July 2, 2018 - link
Benchmarks @46W cTDP would be interestingV900 - Friday, September 28, 2018 - link
The 2200G makes sense for an absolute budget system.(Though if you're starting from rock bottom and also need to buy a cabinet, motherboard, RAM, etc. you'll probably be better off taking that money and buying a used computer. You can get some really good deals for less than 500$)
The 2400G however? Not so much. The price is too high and the performance too low to compete with an Intel Pentium/Nvidia 1030 solution.
Or if you want to spend a few dollars more and find a good deal: An Intel Pentium/Nvidia 1050.