They only catered to the budget gamers before because the premium gamers were buying from their competitor. Now AMD are the premium they don’t need these budget users anymore. Both companies are just trying to get as much dollar out of the market for themselves as possible.Nice bump over the 3400G, but if you can't buy it then it's no 'replacement' for anything. And based on the Ebay markup of 4000 series APU's (which were also OEM-only), if this ends up +£160, then it's not a particularly good deal vs either the 5600G or buying an i3-10100F + used 1050Ti. Just a shame AMD have completely abandoned budget gamers.
Wouldn‘t it have been better to do the dGPU tests with e.g. a 6700XT ? I am quite positive nVidia‘s missing hardware scheduler / driver overhead issue will affect the performance of a quad core + dGPU combo very noticeably.
In terms of iGPU, I am still hoping for a Zen CPU with separate CPU + GPU chiplets. That may make offering a strong iGPU cheaper.Whats a 6700XT?
Some kind of GPU?
Who makes that, because I havent seen it on Nvidia marketing materials, you know, the one that that dictates what should be said or done and creates the army of drones that we have today. ;-)
That out of the way, I wonder and wish that AMD would make APUs that have insane GPUs as a way to replace the low and entry level market.
A proper gaming oriented GPU. Lots of graphics cores with perhaps 6 CPU cores. Some kind of variant of the SOC's used in consoles.
I know that by design, they will always be limited by the memory bus, but I think it could be doable.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.In terms of iGPU, I am still hoping for a Zen CPU with separate CPU + GPU chiplets. That may make offering a strong iGPU cheaper.
Much slower than a 3600, and bites the dust against a 5600x. I see no value here
Probably because if your focus is on GAMING, the 5700G really does make no sense - as you can see from this article, the 5600G gives you virtually the same gaming performance, especially if you're using the iGPU. Of course, if you have a mixed workload and want to do some 3d modeling or video editing on a budget while also having a capable GPU for running older/less demanding games, then the 5700G is an interesting value proposition."As discussed in our review, the R7 5700G doesn't make sense at the rather high $360 asking price"
Actually, the R7 5700G makes sense for substantial parts of the gaming market. That $360 price point gets you a fast 8 core and decent integrated graphics. Some people don't want to cram a discrete graphics card into their mini-itx cases.
I'm not sure why Techspot keeps ignoring that fact.
I imported a 4650G for £180 all-in (inc heatsink... ooh) which I think is a fanatastic price ... basically eqiuv to 5600g for quite a bit less money. just need the energy to get it and running. Fits nicely in a asrock deskmini with the amd heatsink shroud shucked off. general htpc use...Nice bump over the 3400G, but if you can't buy it then it's no 'replacement' for anything. And based on the Ebay markup of 4000 series APU's (which were also OEM-only), if this ends up +£160, then it's not a particularly good deal vs either the 5600G or buying an i3-10100F + used 1050Ti. Just a shame AMD have completely abandoned budget gamers.