LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksToday apparently.Originally Posted by Ozaron
My main concern is whether 300 see boards will work out of the box with them.
Today apparently.
My main concern is whether 300 see boards will work out of the box with them.
They're both showing on scan in stock, £150 for the 2400G and £90 for the 2200G - that's a great exchange rate for RRPs of $170 and $100!
ASrock got bios updates out a few days ago:
Is it possible to ask your e-tailer to flash the new bios before they ship?
Ozaron (12-02-2018)
I dunno but I never understood why motherboards needed a CPU to update a BIOS?? It seems something from 20 years ago.
But I am seriously impressed by these APUs. The Ryzen 5 2400G in main games is not far off a GT1030 and even beats it in some games.
Plus,Hardware Unboxed overclocked the Ryzen 3 2200G IGP to 1.6GHZ,and it was not far behind the overclocked Ryzen 5 2400G IGP.
With all the various licenced ARM cores already in the CPU (security etc.) and with the AM4 'chipset' being outsourced, wouldn't it also make sense to have a simple ARM core which can do a simple task of looking on an attached USB stick for a Magic filename from which to update the BIOS?
Some high-end motherboards do offer this as a feature (presumable using some cheap ARM or similar microcontroller), but it would be nice if it became standard by being in the chipset.
Exactly!
WTF,is happening here:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-raven-ridge-overclocking
A weird bug feature has appeared during our testing of the Ryzen 5 2400G Raven Ridge APU that means our chip overclocks a by huge amount when you put it to sleep. You may have seen some leaked benchmarks appear online, and yes... they're true, it can hit 4.56GHz on air.
Check out the full review of the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G.
This bug feature is either in the darling little MSI B350I Pro AC motherboard that came as part of the Raven Ridge test kit, or the Ryzen 5 2400G APU itself. It sees one of them automatically overclocking the chip far beyond what I’ve been able to do in the BIOS, or with the Ryzen Master utility.
In my testing I’ve only been able to push the top Raven Ridge APU up to 4.05GHz using simple multiplier tweaking. I have been able to get the chip booting into Windows, and running some light gaming workloads, at 4.2GHz, but putting any serious CPU load onto it the chip falls over.
But, with the bizarre sleepy overclock, that same APU is able to top 4.56GHz and remain completely stable under full gaming and CPU testing loads.
AMD Raven Ridge overclocking
I discovered it completely by accident while testing the stability of my earlier overclock. I left the test bench to do something probably super-important, and when I came back it had put itself to sleep. On waking it up I noticed CPU-Z was reporting a much higher clockspeed because of the new BCLK setting.
Normally the 2400G runs at a base 100MHz with the multiplier helping to then create the 3.6GHz and 3.9GHz stock clockspeeds of the chip. Where it gets really weird is that neither the Ryzen Master utility, nor the MSI motherboard BIOS, allow you to tweak the BCLK.
Initially I assumed it was a mistake. Pre-release platforms often display weird results in monitoring apps - part of the fun of putting together launch day reviews - so I figured there was nothing to it. But after testing and retesting it became obvious the overclock had stuck and this mighty chip was overclocking like a hero.
It's potentially down to the C-state settings in the BIOS I've disabled due to some issues I had getting 3DMark to run on the AMD test platform at the beginning. It's also quite possible it's the old Ryzen sleep timer bug appearing again.So,potentially with BCLK overclocking you could get decent overclocks,but it seems BCLK is locked down.But it’s completely repeatable. Every time I reboot and drop it into sleepy time mode for a heartbeat the BCLK setting pushes itself up to a heady 112.50MHz. With the x40.5 multiplier I had in place that meant it was sitting pretty at 4.56GHz when it woke up.
At that speed the performance numbers are incredible. The 2400G hits around 1,000 and 187 for Cinebench's multi and single-threaded tests, making the $100 more expensive Intel Core i5 8600K look a little foolish. And, with a healthy 1.5GHz clockspeed on the Vega 11 GPU, the gaming performance gets mighty playable at the top 1080p game settings. You do need some speedy, pricey DDR4 memory to get the most out of the graphics cores - this Vega chip has no HBM2 to call its own - so that does affect the overall platform costs.
But it's also possible to use the overclock with a discrete GPU in place too. That gives it a heroic level of graphics support from such a budget slice of silicon.
Unfortunately I haven't been able to replicate the overclock in any other motherboard. The only one we have that allows manual overclocking of the BCLK is the Asus Crosshair VI Hero, and the pre-release BIOS update doesn't seem to allow any sort of overclocking on our Ryzen 5 2400G sample.
Now, the likelihood is that the sleepy overclock will get patched out of the platform, but please, AMD, give us the tools to tweak the BCLK ourselves across the board, it potentially makes a massive difference to the chip’s performance.
Also in stock* at ebuyer, £86 and £147Those are near as makes no difference the direct currency conversions + VAT @ 20%.
https://www.ebuyer.com/824255-amd-ry...-yd2200c5fbbox
https://www.ebuyer.com/824253-amd-ry...-yd2400c5fbbox
*EDIT: sorry, the 2200G is in stock, the 2400G is on pre-order...
It seems the AMD CPU division marketing is right on the money. They compared the Ryzen 5 2400G GPU performance to the GT1030,and it really does seem in that class. I am quite impressed since even with 3200MHZ DDR4,its sharing bandwidth with the CPU section too,and even in some games it can push ahead of the GT1030. That indicates that Vega bandwidth utilisation is quite efficient - it makes me wonder how a consumer focussed Vega discret card will fare??
The IGP was overclocked using the stock cooler. Fortnight is very popular BTW.
Given AMD have basically said no new desktop-targeted GPUs for 2018, I wonder if Vega Mobile would be competitive in a discrete card? I guess it would have to both beat Polaris 10 and not have lower production margins due to HBM for them to consider it? Then again, they're possibly already fairly HBM-constrained at the moment...
It just seems a bit strange to release a die exclusively for mobile; I don't recall AMD or Nvidia doing that. Maybe with some bottom-end stuff before APUs were a thing but lately everything apart from top-end gets binned for both mobile and discrete.
Looks like 8GB of RAM should be more than enough for system memory.
Even if you only select 512MB,performance is not much lower.
Well AMD will need to do something as Nvidia will be releasing something this year,and if they do Polaris 10 is going to get hammered in anything other than mining sales.
Miners are still buying them?
Weird, I couldn't find these by searching. Their site is a little funny, methinks.Also in stock* at ebuyer, £86 and £147
*EDIT: sorry, the 2200G is in stock, the 2400G is on pre-order...
Ah, thanks! Yeah, they started popping up not long after 2pm, Amazon and Scan first IIRC.
OFC they are! AMD cards are very popular for mining and since they keep selling out people shifted to Nvidia ones and they sold out.Miners are still buying them?
My main concern is the GPU in the GTX1060 is only 200MM2,and Nvidia is moving to an improved 16NM process,ie,TSMC 12NM.
So if they enlarge the GPU,add some uarch improvements and can get clocks even higher,they can easily leave behind the RX580 as that is more on the edge with regards to clockspeeds.
Its not like the GTX1060/RX480/RX580 have special performance in the first place. There is plenty of room for performance to grow.
I'm just going on their announcements: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12233...-vega-on-7nm/9
Not that it can't change, indeed the roadmap has changed a few times lately e.g. skipping 12nm GPUs. Having said that, it just says 14nm Vega so that doesn't rule out the possibility of other 14nm Vega products in the meantime...
Well I hope they do,since it must easy as anything for Nvidia to up performance of the GTX2060 by even 20% to 40% by now,as 12NM should be more denser than bog standard 16NM. Nvidia also have enough of a TDP and power budget to play with too - the RX580 is not an efficient graphics card as it was essentially an overclocked RX480.
My guess if a new part appeared it must have 1792 shaders,since for a long time that part for Intel was rumoured to be have that number but released with 1536 shaders. Apparently Intel says that the top Vega M SKU is competitive with the low power GTX1060 Max Q.
So,if it can do that,it must point to some big improvements,since it takes 2304 Polaris shaders to compete normally. OFC,it could be Intel talking utter nonsense.
Yeah, it's just that with AMD card prices so high, value of blockchain currencies falling like mad across the board and NVidia GPUs so much more efficient (not to mention that if you could pick a card, it'd be Vega not Polaris) I didn't imagine people would still be interested. Grats to AMD, then.
AMD efficiency with mining is not bad as you can downclock the core,as mining tends to be more memory bandwidth dependent. Its also why I won't get a secondhand mining card as the memory has probably been pushed very far.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 12-02-2018 at 11:22 PM.
There are currently 20 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 20 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
