New leak reveals upcoming Ryzen 5000G APU specifications

nanoguy

Posts: 793   +12
Staff member
In brief: AMD's Ryzen 5000 family wouldn't be complete without the launch of a few APUs for system builders, but the company has yet to make an official reveal. The leaks so far show these chips might be a good option for people who don't need a graphics card or as a stop-gap solution in case they simply can't find or afford the one in their wishlist.

After revealing the much-anticipated Ryzen 5000 series of desktop and laptop processors, AMD's next step is likely to unleash some Zen 3 APUs. These often come as lower-cost CPU alternatives with integrated graphics for system builders, OEMs, and people on a budget. At present they might even soothe some low-spec gamers' hearts during an ongoing GPU drought that will likely extend into next year.

Earlier this week, one pre-built PC merchant started offering a new line of "No GPU" gaming systems for people that happen to have a graphics card but wish to upgrade the rest of their system. But some people looking to build their first gaming PC have had little luck finding a good entry-level graphics card, and Nvidia's efforts to release stocks of older models have done little in the grand scheme of things. And since AIB partners like Asus, EVGA, and Zotac have made their cards more expensive, integrated graphics could be a good option for people who are casual gamers.

The Ryzen 5000 APUs leaked a few months back, revealing the specifications and benchmark results of the Ryzen 7 5700G. In short, it uses a Cezanne chip with 8 cores and 16 threads, 16 MB of L3 cache, and should only be a tad slower than the Ryzen 5800X while also drawing less power. However, there are two other APUs on the way: the Ryzen 5 5600G and the Ryzen 3 5300G, and now we have a more complete picture on what to expect from them, thanks to Twitter leaker momomo_us.

All three APUs are rated for a 65 W TDP, and will feature the same core counts as their Ryzen 4000 predecessors, while also benefiting from higher clocks along with the IPC improvements afforded by the Zen 3 architecture. This means that even the entry-level Ryzen 3 5300G with its 4 cores, 8 threads, and 8 MB of L3 cache should allow for some 1080p gaming at low settings.

If we are to believe an enterprising eBay seller that tested and sold some engineering samples of the new Ryzen 5000 APUs, the Ryzen 3 5300G should be able to play games like Battlefield 4 and Battlefield V without melting under a standard Wraith Prism cooler. The CPU has a base clock of 4 GHz and a boost clock of 4.2 GHz, and the Vega 8 iGPU could also sport higher clocks than it did with the Ryzen 3 4300G.

The Ryzen 5 5600G is a 6-core, 12-thread part with 16 MB of L3 cache, which is double the amount found in the Ryzen 5 4600G. This APU has a base clock of 3.9 GHz and a maximum boost clock of 4.4 GHz, while the 8-core 5700G has a base clock of 3.8 GHz and can boost up to 4.6 GHz. These also use Vega 8 graphics, possibly working at slightly higher clocks than the Ryzen 4000 counterpart, so we don't expect any significant performance differences.

We don't know when or if the Ryzen 5000G APUs will be made available to the general public, but it probably won't be long before system builders integrate them into their base PC configurations.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 692   +1,226
Again the #1 Specification needs to be retail availability. And yes I've heard good arguments as to why it might not be feasible for AMD to do so right now. However, there's a big chance to just get people an alternative to wait out a year (Or maybe even more) for GPU prices and availability to level out.

Yes even something like a used 1050 would be better but at this point even a used 1050 is still too expensive (For what it is anyway): If we're going to wait things out with a sub-par option then I'd be nice if it came in the chip.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,858   +2,035
TechSpot Elite
Still Vega, no Navi. How long are they gonna keep beating that dead horse? Intel has finally caught up with their Xe iGPU, even if they're still woefully behind in mobile CPU performance. Learn the lesson Intel is getting battered with on Rocket Lake right now - don't sit back and let the competition catch up and pass you.

Because better choices from all players in the market benefits me.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,132   +724
Still Vega, no Navi. How long are they gonna keep beating that dead horse? Intel has finally caught up with their Xe iGPU, even if they're still woefully behind in mobile CPU performance. Learn the lesson Intel is getting battered with on Rocket Lake right now - don't sit back and let the competition catch up and pass you.

Because better choices from all players in the market benefits me.
Any fact that RNDA (not 2, IGP's won't need RT yet) is better for IGP than Navi? If RDNA needs more memory bandwidth (that is always in demand on IGP solutions) than RDNA, that's alone more than good enough reason to stick with Navi.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,858   +2,035
TechSpot Elite
Any fact that RNDA (not 2, IGP's won't need RT yet) is better for IGP than Navi? If RDNA needs more memory bandwidth (that is always in demand on IGP solutions) than RDNA, that's alone more than good enough reason to stick with Navi.
Vega 64 had a little more memory bandwidth (484 GB/s) than the 5700XT/Navi/RDNA1 (448 GB/s) and also more cores (4096) than the 5700XT (2560) yet the 5700XT was 25% faster. Unknown if those advantages could translate into an iGPU as it hasn't been done yet.

Now those cores may be bigger for Navi and maybe more complex to tape out and integrate into an iGPU so Vega is a much easier design to keep around? And it still isn't really beat by Intel yet. But AMD better not wait around until they are beaten, you'd think they'd be sick enough of that by now not to let it happen again.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,132   +724
Different architecture, different "cores". Also Vega used GBM2 and had much higher clock speeds. Too many unknowns on equation to say Navi would be better IGP for sure. It Might be but console chips used RDNA2, not RDNA.

And perhaps Navi is already tested many times on IGP side and would not cause too much problems. RDNA2 on other hand was perhaps too late for Zen3 APU's. I'm not surprised if AMD skips RDNA entirely on IGP side.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,339   +1,874
I would like to see them move past vega for these parts too but my gut says we won't see that until these are on DDR5 platforms.
 

Gus Fring

Posts: 62   +19
I thought the graphics component was "vega" and the numeral indicated how many units .. so vega 8 would be 8 vega graphics units? In which case I doubt that the 5300G has 8 , more like 3?
Navi would be good too, for that much needed leg up into playable 1080p
I might prise my welded shut wallet open for these , as I've struggled with intel j3450 for too long ...
And my Bitcoin has come real good (£700, x6)
 

jpuroila

Posts: 344   +195
Vega 64 had a little more memory bandwidth (484 GB/s) than the 5700XT/Navi/RDNA1 (448 GB/s) and also more cores (4096) than the 5700XT (2560) yet the 5700XT was 25% faster. Unknown if those advantages could translate into an iGPU as it hasn't been done yet.

Now those cores may be bigger for Navi and maybe more complex to tape out and integrate into an iGPU so Vega is a much easier design to keep around? And it still isn't really beat by Intel yet. But AMD better not wait around until they are beaten, you'd think they'd be sick enough of that by now not to let it happen again.
It's not the same Vega that was in Vega 64, it's been tweaked and optimized. There just isn't much point going for a different architecture when DDR4 already bottlenecks Vega 8. And if rumours are to be believed, DDR5 APUs will indeed use some version of RDNA.