1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Unannounced AMD Ryzen 3 2300X and Ryzen 5 2500X Make An Appearance

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 17, 2018.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,635
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
  2. djelectric

    djelectric New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Palit GTX 1080
    Price assumptions are out of whack there HH, 2500X would be somewhere below the 2400G at about 140$ while 2300X around the 100$ mark, i'd assume.
     
  3. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,716
    Likes Received:
    1,642
    GPU:
    MSI RX 480 ARMOR 4G OC
    coffee lake i3 is cheaper/ much faster...just saying.
     
    typhon6657 likes this.
  4. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,635
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    These are initial MSRPs, street prices are always lower after a while. We'll follow MSRP for now.
     

  5. djelectric

    djelectric New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Palit GTX 1080
    MSRP for R5 2600 is 199$, while street price is 189$. pricing a quad core 10$ below a hexa-core is kinda weird. You sure about this?
    Also, if we have to be brutally honest, with a 99$ price tag for 2200G, it would only be fair to ask 85-90$ for a 2300X
     
  6. user1

    user1 Master Guru

    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    117
    GPU:
    hd 6870
    I dunno , the 8100 at 120$ can't go higher than 3.6ghz and cant use faster memory without a z370 board,
    10$ more for the 2300x (that can be overclocked)doesn't seem that bad , the 8300 isnt any better has a max clock of 3.7ghz and is more expensive.

    The i3 cpus seem pretty crusty to me, they should really have a 4ghz single core boost, but they dont.
     
    schmidtbag likes this.
  7. Texter

    Texter Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,790
    Likes Received:
    36
    GPU:
    Club3d GF6800GT 256MB AGP
    Some people's decisions are affected by all the Intel vulnerability hype so I'm sure AMD will sell enough CPUs...until the next wave of AMD specific hypotheticals comes along...maybe abacus sales will go up again, I don't know...
     
  8. huilun02

    huilun02 Master Guru

    Messages:
    315
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI R9 290X Lightning
    Just to put it out there...
    R3 2300X is 4c/4t, boosts to 4Ghz
    R5 2500X is 4c/8t, also boosts to 4Ghz
    Both unlocked and the 2300X looks to have good OC potential due to no HT
    Seems more appealing than a more expensive Intel 4c/4t thats stuck at 3.7Ghz if you ask me...
     
  9. Jagman

    Jagman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    57
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1070
    The 2200G and 2400G make the most sense for a nippy budget build from my point of view. No graphics card to buy and the AM4 platform is easily more upgradeable anyway.
     
  10. fry178

    fry178 Master Guru

    Messages:
    785
    Likes Received:
    35
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 X@2GHz
    @Texter
    hype? guess my definition of the word isnt identical to yours.
    last time i checked they had those problems, most others/amds dont or only limited number compared to intel.
     

  11. nz3777

    nz3777 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    132
    GPU:
    Gtx 980 Strix
    Is there a Major diffrence between the 2 apus other then 4/4 and 4/8 thread? Its $50 more but iam curious how much faster is the graphics in the 8 thread one ? Thanks guys.
     
  12. jortego128

    jortego128 Active Member

    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    AMD RX 580 4GB
    About 10% faster. It contains 11 CU's instead of 8, but in reviews Ive seen the real world diff is only ~10%. OC'ing the 2200G can match or even slightly exceed the stock 2400G in graphics in most cases.
     
    nz3777 likes this.
  13. [ZoNk]Kostas007

    [ZoNk]Kostas007 Master Guru

    Messages:
    232
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    7850 1GB
    I would go for the 2400G if i was worried about performance. Since it's the fastest possible apu, and i cannot get anything better, it looks like you will get stuck with it for a long time
     
    nz3777 likes this.
  14. Agonist

    Agonist Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    112
    GPU:
    R9 Fury CFX
    I wouldnt touch an i3 quad unless it was a general use computer. I still laugh at people who buy locked quad i5s in 2018.
    I was gonna do a cheap i3 HTPC 4k build but the Ryzen APUs are just bad ass for the price.
     
  15. pimpineasy

    pimpineasy Member Guru

    Messages:
    149
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    1050ti
    i like amd apu bundle but there is like this weird grey line price vs performance with their lower end cpu line up vs intel. Currently the intel non k sku lock parts are still out performing in games though like the i3 8100. depending on workload some applications just run better on intel cpu. the i5 8400 is in a pretty strong price bracket and any sale prices would solidify the purchase more so if you already got like a 1060 1050ti rx 480 460. Id like to see benchmarks vs some these OC ryzen 2 but if only saving $20 and it is not out performing why buy it? They either gotta add some cores to these low end bracket or seriously reduce price. the i3 8100 is $120 without sale price and offer upgrade up to top tier k series when it goes somewhat legacy an all the 5ghz chips start hitting the resale used market.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2018
    airbud7 likes this.

  16. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,975
    Likes Received:
    360
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    They're either cheaper and slower or faster and more expensive. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but that's rather "uninteresting". The 8100 is cheaper than what the 2300X will be, but it won't be faster in most cases. The 8350K meanwhile is definitely faster than the 2300X, but it's also more expensive than even the 2500X. The 8350K will obviously be better in single-threaded tasks due to the significantly higher clock speeds you can achieve, but the missing threads puts it at a disadvantage.

    So as I usually say - get what suits your needs. Both product series are equally good but in very different ways.
     
    Aura89 and airbud7 like this.
  17. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,975
    Likes Received:
    360
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    The 2200G has a Vega 8, while the 2400G has a Vega 11. The Vega 11 is roughly 15% faster, in practice. In theory I'm sure it's even better. Due to how starved for memory bandwidth these APUs are, I would argue the 2200G is more efficient, despite being slower.
     
    Killian38 and airbud7 like this.
  18. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,757
    Likes Received:
    519
    GPU:
    -NDA +AW@240Hz
    Well, as they are Zen+, they clock bit higher and eat bit less energy (deliver higher value). Fact, that they cost bit less to make does not dictate MSRP, otherwise you would have reasonably priced intel's chips long time before Zen came.
     
    sykozis likes this.
  19. Killian38

    Killian38 Member Guru

    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    34
    GPU:
    1060
    The 1600 chips still sale at around the price of the 2600/2600x. I find that odd. But I love my 1600.
     
    airbud7 likes this.
  20. airbud7

    airbud7 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,716
    Likes Received:
    1,642
    GPU:
    MSI RX 480 ARMOR 4G OC
    per core performance. ...a coffee lake core @3.7 is faster ....see gaming benchmarks.

    8700k has only 6 cores yet is still king over any ryzen 8 core.
     

Share This Page