Posts: 37 +39
Because the price step up and the performance difference are relatively small. The next step up from a 5600g graphics performance wise is a decent graphics card which then in turn means doubling the price of the entire system.That being said, I'm not sure how a 5600G at about $250 being actually beaten for real by the 12400(f) while being much cheaper too, would actually make this any better... On the contrary, it would make it worse for AMD.
The 5600g became interesting simply because of how the market is. It's good enough to play pretty much all of the most popular games at 1080p with medium or even high settings. That's where Intel falls short and as they're trying to sell dedicated cards soon I'm not sure how inclined they are to keep improving in this area with future intergrated graphics.
Imo if AMD wants to play it smart they'll do all they can to get DDR5 RAM prices in check and get APU performance with Zen 7xxx to such a level that it will play any 1080p game at 60fps high settings, even the newest ones. We don't know if Intel can compete at the highest level of graphics cards for 4k high/ultra settings but AMD definitely can so they could focus on that. Basically just split the market in two, APU's for 1080p. Dedicated (and thus extremely expensive, thanks to miners and scalpers) graphic cards for 4k (and or high refresh rate WQHD). Leaves WQHD 60fps in limbo but the market has largely ignored that since forever anyway.
Then they'll have a solid grip on the low end gaming market and can massively increase their market share amongst gamers. For productivity they should be able to compete as well by simply having very high core count.
Till they're there imo drop prices of the 5600x and 5600g and they're plenty competitive until then.