The Ryzen 7 5700G is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture. It used to be OEM only but it's now landing on retail as well, sporting Radeon integrated graphics. So is it any good?
The Ryzen 7 5700G is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture. It used to be OEM only but it's now landing on retail as well, sporting Radeon integrated graphics. So is it any good?
The fastest in this category is still not fast enough graphics wise. GPU is still too weak. If you don't care about graphics just buy older AMD APU and save money. If you need graphics performance, again, this is too weak. It doesn't do anything good. It is also a bit expensive for what it is. 70/100 is being generous. There might be a very small audience for this kind of APU.Easily fastest 8-core part when CPU and GPU both are considered. And it gets 70/100
WTF is really happening again? I admit this is not for everyone but still: some buyers want 8-core CPU with fast integrated graphics and for that purpose this is easily the best one available. Best available for certain purpose for decent price and 70/100? Oh crap.
It's much faster than anything else in this category graphics wise. Older AMD APU's have much less performance and cores. Again, discrete graphics is not for Every possible usage scenario. Using same logic, integrated graphics always sucks if it's slower than discrete graphics at same time. Means: Integrated graphics is "too slow", no matter how fast it is. Size of potential buyers should never mean anything when it comes to score. If it fits on someone's needs and does it better than any alternative and is not ridiculously priced, it should get pretty high score.The fastest in this category is still not fast enough graphics wise. GPU is still too weak. If you don't care about graphics just buy older AMD APU and save money. If you need graphics performance, again, this is too weak. It doesn't do anything good. It is also a bit expensive for what it is. 70/100 is being generous. There might be a very small audience for this kind of APU.
Not to drag on about this, I think you can get an Intel CPU with an iGPU of similar processing power for less. You will have worse Intel HD graphics, you won't play games on it but you won't on this APU either, unless you like playing at barely 30 FPS at the lowest possible settings. Also it's a bit expensive for what it is IMO.It's much faster than anything else in this category graphics wise. Older AMD APU's have much less performance and cores. Again, discrete graphics is not for Every possible usage scenario. Using same logic, integrated graphics always sucks if it's slower than discrete graphics at same time. Means: Integrated graphics is "too slow", no matter how fast it is. Size of potential buyers should never mean anything when it comes to score. If it fits on someone's needs and does it better than any alternative and is not ridiculously priced, it should get pretty high score.
To put above in perspective:I use mobile phone that has excellent features, very affordable price and is generally pretty much perfect for me. But because it has "pretty small audience", it was bad buy
Pretty much what I'm trying to say.Integrated graphics is "too slow", no matter how fast it is
I agree %100. I play on android emulator or pc games that are usually not very heavy on graphics (ie divinity) and this chip would be all I need. iGPU performance is more or less similar to a Radeon 550 which is plenty for many people.Easily fastest 8-core part when CPU and GPU both are considered. And it gets 70/100
WTF is really happening again? I admit this is not for everyone but still: some buyers want 8-core CPU with fast integrated graphics and for that purpose this is easily the best one available. Best available for certain purpose for decent price and 70/100? Oh crap.
In other words, more speed doesn't matter when it's "not enough".Not to drag on about this, I think you can get an Intel CPU with an iGPU of similar processing power for less. You will have worse Intel HD graphics, you won't play games on it but you won't on this APU either, unless you like playing at barely 30 FPS at the lowest possible settings. Also it's a bit expensive for what it is IMO.
This GPU is quite OK for not so demanding games on low resolutions.Pretty much what I'm trying to say.
That's not the logic at all. CPUs do the job very well.In other words, more speed doesn't matter when it's "not enough".
Using that logic, AMD and Intel should stop releasing new CPU's because new CPU's won't be "speedy enough" compared to previous ones ""
It can run old and undemanding games, would you pay $360 for that? That's straight stupid.This GPU is quite OK for not so demanding games on low resolutions
They have to keep releasing faster versions until one day it becomes good enough to replace lower end dedicated GPUs. They can't just jump 400% in one generation.There is also another question why Intel bothered to release Iris graphics chips with ultra expensive eDRAM. Reason: more GPU speed. Still, "not speedy enough"...
Upcoming CPU's will not offer huge improvement vs current ones. More speed needed to be worthwhile release.That's not the logic at all. CPUs do the job very well.
It's not if you need 8 cores and integrated graphics.It can run old and undemanding games, would you pay $360 for that? That's straight stupid.
eDRAM was so expensive it was very well known Intel won't release much more CPU's using that. Last model was released around 5 years ago. eDRAM versions was just for that time, they had no impact on future releases. Still Intel bothered to release them. Speed for present time, but nothing to use in future. Why?They have to keep releasing faster versions until one day it becomes good enough to replace lower end dedicated GPUs. They can't just jump 400% in one generation.
Like I said above about my phone, lack of usable scenarios should never be reason for low score. If product is best available for scenario I want, I'd give it good score, no matter if anyone else uses it. Simple.In isolation, this is a pretty good product. Maybe 9/10. 8 good CPU cores, 8 decent (for an iGPU) GPU cores. But it's a jack of all trades and master of nothing at a pretty high price. So it doesn't solve a problem that many people have, making it a 7/10 for lack of use cases.