[ad_1]
Most Intel processors designed for desktop and consumer notebooks incorporate some form of integrated graphics processing, but AMD's Ryzen chips are not. The model we are looking at here, the Ryzen 3 2200G, is one of the few chips in the range (named "Raven Ridge") that has an integrated graphics processor, which means you do not need it to install a discrete GPU. if you use it to build a budget office computer. The main advantage of an integrated graphics processor usually lies in cost savings, rather than in high performance, and at $ 99, Ryzen 3 2200G is definitely the first box. It's also a decent performer for everyday computing and light games, which means it's a great choice for powering an inexpensive gaming PC.
Economical and well equipped
With four cores, four threads and a basic clock speed of 3.5 GHz, the Ryzen 3 2200G is perfectly suited for basic workloads. It's easy to handle anything that can sometimes cause heavy demands on the processor, like uncompressing an archive folder or changing the red-eye of your last vacation photos. Weigh a browser window with dozens of tabs or start a video export in 4K format and you will quickly want you to opt for a processor with a higher number of threads and kernels.
Speaking of hearts and son, the Ryzen 3 2200G is a complement of four that matches what you will find at its main competitor, the Intel Core i3-8100. Most of the other features of this chip also match those of the Ryzen 3 2200G: both are built on a 14 nanometer (14 nm) production process and consume 65 watts of power under normal conditions (called thermal computing power) . Neither is capable of multithreading. The Intel chip has a slightly higher base clock frequency, at 3.6 GHz, and at $ 117, a similar price premium.
A blatant omission on the part of the Core i3-8100 is overclockability, supported by all Ryzen chips. For an overclockable Core i3, you would need to upgrade to the $ 170 Core i3-8350K compatible Hyper-Threading. That's not much to spend on a mainstream processor – the Ryzen 7 and Core i7 high-end chips cost several hundred dollars. But in the budget area where reside these chips, there is a big difference between $ 99 and $ 170, and add more wires and increase the clock speed of a few hundred megahertz will not necessarily improve daily performance with a budget chip, because not designed to support the types of workflows that first require more cores or higher clocks.
Although AMD's simultaneous multithreading technology (SMT, similar to Intel's Hyper-Threading) is not available on the Ryzen 3 2200G, it still includes other key features of the company designed to improve performance . Precision Boost is an algorithm that allows you to use higher frequencies in games and real applications by increasing the clock speed of each heart when needed. The latest version can increase the clock speed in increments of 25 MHz, depending on the needs of the application you are currently running. There is also an Extended Frequency Range (XFR), which monitors processor temperature and can temporarily increase gears if it senses that your cooling system can handle it.
A lot of graphic potential
Besides its low price, the secret weapon of the Ryzen 3 2200G is its Vega integrated graphics processor. The first group of Ryzen desktop chips, introduced in 2017, did not include an integrated graphics processor. This meant that system builders had to associate it with a dedicated graphics card purchased separately and installed in an available slot on the motherboard. This is a good setup for the first Ryzen users, but it's not very convenient for low-cost desktops or all-in-one PCs that do not need to a lot of graphic power. It also does not help AMD's competitiveness in the low-end desktop market, especially when Intel's main alternatives all have embedded graphics.
Thus, in January, AMD unveiled new Ryzen processors integrating Vega graphics processors. Despite the name "Vega", it does not have as complete a graphical experience as that offered by the discrete solutions Radeon RX Vega 56 and Radeon RX Vega 64. cards, which compete with Nvidia's GeForce GTX 10 series game graphics processors. Instead, the Vega 8 processor built into the Ryzen 3 2200G is designed to deliver unparalleled performance between Intel's integrated graphics cards and a more expensive discrete graphics chip. There is also a more powerful Ryzen 5 2400G with Vega 11 graphics, as well as "GE" versions of both processors, which consume slightly less power and offer a basic clock speed easier to install on tiny desktops.
As confirmed by the PCMag test results below, the addition of Vega graphics means that the Ryzen 3 2200G is significantly better than its Intel counterparts for PC games that require a lot of graphics. In simple terms, future owners of Ryzen 3 2200G should expect daily computing performance equivalent to, or slightly lower than that of Intel Core i3 unlocked, while enjoying significantly better results and less impact on their portfolio.
Drop it into the socket (existing)
Although the Ryzen 3 2200G comes with an integrated graphics processor, it uses the same AM4 socket and chipsets as the rest of the Ryzen family (with the exception of the ultra-high-end Ryzen Threadripper). As long as you have an AM4 motherboard and motherboard with HDMI or DisplayPort outputs, the Ryzen 3 2200G is suitable and allows you to use on-chip graphics, although you need to update the BIOS after installation.
I did my evaluation tests on the PCMag Ryzen B350 chipset test bench, the same computer that we used to test a host of other recent AMD processors. It is equipped with a Gigabyte AB350-Gaming 3 motherboard, 16 GB of Corsair DDR4 memory and a Toshiba OCZ Vector 150 boot drive.
A Noctua AM4 compatible air cooler has controlled the temperature, but a high-end air cooler may be excessive for a $ 99 processor like the Ryzen 3 2200G with a 65-watt TDP. If you are building a system from scratch and do not plan to overclock, the standard Wraith Stealth cooler provided by AMD in the box should be suitable. The Wraith Stealth does not have programmable LED lighting, like the Wraith Prism coolers, which come with mid-range and high-end Ryzen chips, but you should not expect it at this price either.
Enough power for basic productivity tasks
Once the Ryzen 3 2200G was operational, I submitted it to a series of evaluation tests to assess its performance in everyday tasks, as well as in specialized applications such as rendering video and file compression.
For an overview of the theoretical performance of the chip, the Cinebench R15 test provides a proprietary score based on the use of four cores of the processor, as well as on a single core. This distinction between one and more cores is important because many older applications are not optimized to work on multiple cores. If you are trying to save money on your processor, you are probably also hoping for several more years. software that you may have been using for a few years.
On the single-core Cinebench test, the Ryzen 3 scored 149, about the same as its brother, the Ryzen 5 2400G, but significantly lower than the Intel Core i3-7350K. (I'm using this older Intel chip for comparisons instead of the latest Core i3-8350K, in part because motherboards that support the latest Intel processor tend to be more expensive, which decreases somewhat appealing to budget builders, although recent B360 cards are changing this dynamic.)
In the real world, this could mean worse performance for well-known resources like iTunes, Apple, tested here in a single-threaded version that does not take advantage of the latest processor advancements. With the old iTunes 10.6, it took 2 minutes and 3 seconds for the Ryzen 3 2200G to encode a group of commonly used AAC audio files. The Intel Core i3-7350K processor completed this task in just 1h40.
On the other hand, if you frequently use up-to-date software that takes advantage of multiple threads and cores, the Ryzen 3 2200G should be much better. Its all-in-one Cinebench score of 582 is better than the Intel Core i3-7350K processor (439) and two first-generation Ryzen 3 chips, the Ryzen 3 1200 (473) and the 1300X-compatible Ryzen 3 (550).
In reality, this means that the Ryzen 3 2200G will serve as a low-cost, decent platform for multithreaded applications like Handbrake, an open-source utility for converting videos between different formats. Generally, the higher the number of threads and cores in your processor, the better the handbrake likes it. Indeed, the Ryzen 3 2200G took 15:19 to convert a 4K video file of 12 minutes to 1080p. The Core i3-7350K performed the same task in 22:59, while the Ryzen 3 chips of the previous generation took more than 16 minutes.
The story of multi-core and multi-threaded performance is pretty much the same as 7-Zip, another widely used application, which allows you to compress files that take advantage of the largest number of cores and threads that your processor can offer. The Ryzen 3 2200G achieved a score of 15,810 on the built-in reference of the app, surpassing its previous generation predecessors and the Core i3.
As decent as the multi-core performance of the Ryzen 3 2400G however is not up to par with a mid-range desktop processor like the Ryzen 5 2600X, which scored a total of 1,349 hearts in the Cinebench test , and also beat the rest of the market. the chips on 7-Zip and Handbrake tests. Unsurprisingly, this more expensive chip, which includes multithreading, has also excelled in niche tasks such as rendering a complex photo-realistic image using ray tracing in the POV-Ray benchmark, or the Rendering a basic rendering in Blender.
In the end, all the results of the productivity tests come down to three points: if you use simple and up-to-date applications, such as Handbrake, the Ryzen 3 2400G is an excellent choice. If you use older applications or do not take advantage of multiple processor cores, an Intel chip such as the Core i3-7350K might be a better choice. And if you're looking for a chip that can handle complex tasks like 3D rendering, you'll have to spend a lot more on a midrange processor.
Not a dedicated GPU, but acts as such
The Ryzen 3 2200G is not a rocket in terms of productivity, but it is even more competent when it comes time to relax with a gaming session. On the venerable title but always demanding of Sleeping Dogs in average quality, I saw the Vega graphics processor generate an average of 72 frames per second (fps) using the in-game reference. This result should be extremely appealing to low-budget players, who probably buy a few games a year and have 60Hz monitors that can not display more than 60 frames per second.
Even when I tried the more demanding (but still older) reboot of Tomb Raider in 2013, the Ryzen 3 2200G did not disappoint me, recording a frame rate of 60 frames / second on the quality setting. Normal at 1080p. Parameter numbering for Ultra quality has resulted in 37 frames per second, making it a less enjoyable experience but staying above the minimum of 30 frames per second that I consider acceptable for smooth gaming.
To get an idea of the quality of these benchmark results in the game, consider that even low-end discrete GPUs like the Nvidia GeForce MX series typically offer no more than 50 frames per second in similar conditions. Meanwhile, the Intel Core i3-7350K's integrated graphics chip reached 31 frames per second on the Tomb Raider Normal test and only 16 frames per second on Ultra.
It is remarkable that AMD can integrate as much graphics power into a chip under $ 100 that also serves as a processor. The only drawback is perhaps that you will be tempted to buy the latest AAA games – or maybe a 4K monitor – with the money you will save on the Ryzen 3 2400G, and these would certainly too expensive for this chip.
Like all Ryzen processors, you can overclock the Ryzen 3 2200G and AMD facilitates the adjustment of many parameters such as clock speed, power and speed of memory clock with the help of the Ryzen Master application (see below). It runs on Windows and many settings can be applied without rebooting, which further simplifies testing. Since your ability to overclock depends on your skill level and the quality of your chiller, food and other components, many buyers of Ryzen 3 will be better served by letting the optimization technician AMD manage the performance of the processor.
If you are interested in overclocking, you can read the review Ryzen 5 2600X from PCMag to learn more about how the process works.
Hard to beat on the value
If you choose one Ryzen 3 2400G, you can not only skip the purchase of a separate GPU, but even the cheapest AM4 motherboards will suffice, which means additional savings. However, if you're looking for a tight budget that can run older productivity software, an Intel Core i3 processor might be a better choice. However, you will have to shell out more for the processor and the motherboard if you opt for the latest version. Generation of Coffee Lake.
Another option on the AMD side is to upgrade to $ 169 Ryzen 5 2400G, which includes an even more powerful Vega 11 graphics chip, multithreading, and twice as many threads as the Ryzen 3 2200G. (Our review of the Ryzen 5 2400G is forthcoming.) But if you want to experience a nice gaming experience on PC for as little money as possible and are ready to stick to the 1080p game at normal quality settings, the Ryzen 3 2200G is a safe bet.
Source link
