Specifications:
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5475U | 2022 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.7 | 4.1 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 15 | 95 | 3016 | 12085 | ||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.6 | 4 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 15 | 105 | 2856 | 11462 | 1300 | 4561 | ||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350GE | 2021 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.6 | 4.2 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 35 | 95 | 3115 | 13716 | 6320 | 22601 | ||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G | 2021 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 4 | 4.2 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 65 | 95 | 3113 | 13985 | ||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.5 | 3.7 | 4 | 64 | 16 | 15 | 105 | 435 | 2542 | 149 | 855 | 339 | 1941 | 875 | 5002 | 2353 | 10138 | 4263 | 14840 | 1022 | 3732 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 | 64 | 20 | 35 | 95 | 199 | 972 | 457 | 2230 | 1151 | 5612 | 2563 | 11361 | 5405 | 19589 | 1076 | 4462 | ||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.8 | 4 | 4 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 489 | 2757 | 203 | 1023 | 466 | 2347 | 1174 | 5906 | 2528 | 10811 | 5585 | 21190 | 1095 | 4242 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4200G | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm | 4 | 8 | 3.8 | 4.1 | 8 | 64 | 12 | 65 | 2553 | 11324 | 5516 | 19588 | 1096 | 3957 | |||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200GE | 2018 Q1 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.2 | 3.6 | 4 | 64 | 8 | 35 | 95 | 426 | 1694 | 150 | 572 | 360 | 1430 | 1984 | 5881 | 3688 | 9005 | 819 | 2501 | ||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G | 2018 Q2 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 4 | 64 | 8 | 65 | 95 | 404 | 1612 | 2047 | 6712 | 3724 | 9998 | 848 | 2663 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2100GE | 2018 Q2 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.2 | 3.6 | 4 | 64 | 8 | 35 | 95 | 312 | 938 | 1844 | 4176 | 3443 | 7461 | 802 | 1766 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5425U | 2022 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.7 | 4.1 | 8 | 32 | 16 | 15 | 95 | 2799 | 9632 | ||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5425C | 2022 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.7 | 4.1 | 8 | 32 | 16 | 15 | 95 | ||||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5400U | 2021 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.6 | 4 | 8 | 32 | 16 | 15 | 105 | 478 | 2452 | 2927 | 12099 | 5001 | 17285 | 1152 | 4163 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 2021 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 2.6 | 3.8 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 105 | 464 | 2621 | 201 | 902 | 450 | 2214 | 1119 | 5638 | 2381 | 10028 | 4163 | 12913 | 990 | 3549 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5300GE | 2021 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.6 | 4.2 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 65 | 95 | 692 | 3674 | 1861 | 9482 | 3093 | 13832 | ||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 2021 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 4 | 4.2 | 8 | 64 | 16 | 65 | 95 | 567 | 3036 | 212 | 1126 | 511 | 2713 | 1527 | 7778 | 3091 | 13921 | 7208 | 26811 | 1524 | 5882 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 5125C | 2022 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 2 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 32 | 16 | 15 | 95 | ||||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 4300U | 2020 Q1 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 4 | 2.7 | 3.7 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 105 | 453 | 1782 | 420 | 1570 | 1017 | 4160 | 2349 | 8045 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm | 4 | 8 | 3.5 | 4 | 4 | 128 | 16 | 35 | 95 | 403 | 2324 | 1195 | 5737 | 2555 | 11560 | 4740 | 16639 | 1111 | 4296 | ||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 4300G | 2020 Q3 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.8 | 4 | 4 | 64 | 16 | 65 | 95 | 482 | 2720 | 2537 | 10745 | 4769 | 14808 | 1171 | 4854 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 4100 | 2022 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.8 | 4 | 4 | 128 | 24 | 65 | 95 | ||||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 2020 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.8 | 4.3 | 16 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 517 | 2813 | 200 | 1100 | 490 | 2490 | 1307 | 6775 | 2680 | 12765 | 5556 | 20439 | ||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3300U | 2019 Q1 | 12 nm | 4 | 4 | 2.1 | 3.5 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 105 | 341 | 1413 | 130 | 460 | 1893 | 5841 | 3114 | 8924 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U | 2020 Q1 | 14 nm | 2 | 4 | 2.6 | 3.5 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 95 | 326 | 1032 | 1879 | 4100 | 3738 | 7959 | ||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3250C | 2020 Q4 | 14 nm | 2 | 4 | 2.6 | 3.5 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 105 | 1633 | 2321 | ||||||||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3200U | 2019 Q1 | 14 nm | 2 | 4 | 2.6 | 3.5 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 105 | 134 | 402 | 130 | 320 | 756 | 1772 | 1830 | 3933 | 3054 | 5874 | 598 | 1360 | ||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE | 2019 Q3 | 12 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.3 | 3.8 | 4 | 64 | 20 | 35 | 95 | 431 | 1722 | 2212 | 7417 | 4020 | 10878 | 872 | 2583 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G | 2019 Q3 | 12 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.6 | 4 | 4 | 64 | 12 | 65 | 95 | 429 | 1666 | 982 | 3909 | 2216 | 7204 | 4137 | 11434 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 2020 Q2 | 7 nm FinFET | 4 | 8 | 3.6 | 3.9 | 16 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 465 | 2636 | 180 | 1020 | 440 | 2330 | 1132 | 5845 | 2420 | 11691 | 4620 | 15596 | 1143 | 4903 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 2300X | 2018 Q3 | 12 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.5 | 4 | 8 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 478 | 1919 | 234 | 772 | 2345 | 7455 | 4316 | 12132 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 2300U | 2018 Q1 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3.4 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 95 | 322 | 556 | 80 | 420 | 1722 | 5451 | 3073 | 8180 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 2200U | 2018 Q1 | 14 nm | 2 | 4 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 4 | 32 | 12 | 15 | 95 | 329 | 1007 | 120 | 310 | 1684 | 3681 | 3051 | 5968 | ||||||||||
AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE | 2018 Q1 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.2 | 3.6 | 4 | 64 | 8 | 35 | 95 | 417 | 1692 | 147 | 552 | 353 | 1379 | 1004 | 3577 | 2020 | 6422 | 3532 | 9151 | 737 | 2365 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 2018 Q1 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 4 | 64 | 12 | 65 | 95 | 419 | 1694 | 140 | 585 | 335 | 1402 | 953 | 3637 | 2047 | 6766 | 3922 | 10594 | 835 | 2855 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X | 2017 Q3 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.5 | 3.7 | 8 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 397 | 1533 | 141 | 557 | 333 | 1348 | 931 | 3475 | 2079 | 6877 | 3969 | 11220 | 881 | 2896 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 2020 Q2 | 12 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.1 | 3.4 | 8 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 433 | 1747 | 150 | 570 | 360 | 1370 | 893 | 3536 | 1931 | 6287 | 3765 | 10868 | 870 | 2813 | ||||
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 | 2017 Q3 | 14 nm | 4 | 4 | 3.1 | 3.4 | 8 | 64 | 20 | 65 | 95 | 367 | 1385 | 132 | 482 | 314 | 1148 | 886 | 3541 | 1909 | 6267 | 3728 | 10508 | 955 | 3450 | ||||
AMD Athlon 3000G | 2019 Q4 | 14 nm | 2 | 4 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 4 | 128 | 6 | 35 | 95 | 346 | 1076 | 140 | 400 | 320 | 837 | 1063 | 2683 | 1980 | 4454 | 4130 | 8624 |
Performances:
CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 5673,036 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 5172,813 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 4892,757 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300G | 4822,720 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 4652,636 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 4642,621 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 4352,542 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 4032,324 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2300X | 4781,919 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300U | 4531,782 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 4331,747 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE | 4311,722 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200GE | 4261,694 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 4191,694 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE | 4171,692 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 3461,076 |
Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 2121,126 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 2001,100 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 2031,023 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 1801,020 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 199972 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 201902 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 149855 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2300X | 234772 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 140585 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200GE | 150572 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 150570 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X | 141557 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE | 147552 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 | 132482 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300U | 130460 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 140400 |
Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300GE | 6923,674 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 5112,713 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 4902,490 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5400U | 4782,452 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 4662,347 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 4402,330 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 4572,230 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 4502,214 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 3391,941 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300U | 4201,570 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2200GE | 3601,430 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 3351,402 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE | 3531,379 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 3601,370 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X | 3331,348 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 320837 |
Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300GE | 1,8619,482 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 1,5277,778 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 1,3076,775 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 1,1745,906 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 1,1325,845 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 1,1955,737 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 1,1195,638 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 1,1515,612 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 8755,002 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300U | 1,0174,160 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G | 9823,909 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 9533,637 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200GE | 1,0043,577 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 | 8863,541 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 8933,536 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 1,0632,683 |
PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G | 3,11313,985 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 3,09113,921 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300GE | 3,09313,832 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350GE | 3,11513,716 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 2,68012,765 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5400U | 2,92712,099 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5475U | 3,01612,085 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 2,42011,691 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 2,55511,560 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U | 2,85611,462 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 2,56311,361 |
AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4200G | 2,55311,324 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 2,52810,811 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300G | 2,53710,745 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 2,35310,138 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 1,9804,454 |
Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 7,20826,811 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350GE | 6,32022,601 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 5,58521,190 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 5,55620,439 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 5,40519,589 |
AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4200G | 5,51619,588 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5400U | 5,00117,285 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 4,74016,639 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 4,62015,596 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 4,26314,840 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300G | 4,76914,808 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 4,16312,913 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2300X | 4,31612,132 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G | 4,13711,434 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X | 3,96911,220 |
AMD Athlon 3000G | 4,1308,624 |
Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score | |
---|---|
AMD Ryzen 3 5300G | 1,5245,882 |
AMD Ryzen 3 3100 | 1,1434,903 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300G | 1,1714,854 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U | 1,3004,561 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350GE | 1,0764,462 |
AMD Ryzen 3 4300GE | 1,1114,296 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4350G | 1,0954,242 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5400U | 1,1524,163 |
AMD Ryzen 3 Pro 4200G | 1,0963,957 |
AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U | 1,0223,732 |
AMD Ryzen 3 5300U | 9903,549 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 | 9553,450 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X | 8812,896 |
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 8352,855 |
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 AF | 8702,813 |
Informal Gaming Tests
We benchmark the games above in a precise manner for accurate comparisons between multiple CPUs. As both a techie and a gamer at heart, however, I like to run a few extra game tests to see how well these low-end parts can handle games from my personal Steam library.
First up, I tested one of my all-time favorite games, Fallout: New Vegas. Configuring the game to run at 1080p, I tried the preset Ultra and High graphics settings. I also retested the game with these settings with AA turned off, as that is typically quite taxing on integrated graphics processors. Starting with a new game, I performed the test while wreaking havoc on the town of Goodsprings with the ever-useful Mercenary’s grenade rifle.
Ultimately, I found the best settings to use were the High graphics preset with no AA. In this mode, I achieved a fairly steady 60fps. The game did occasionally dip below 60fps, but not frequently. I could also run the game with the Ultimate graphics preset and AA off, but at a slower speed of around 42fps to 45fps with considerable fluctuation. Turning 4x AA on with either of these graphics settings resulted in an drop of roughly 15fps across the board.
The next game I tried was State of Decay, an addictive zombie game released in 2013. The game is demanding, however, and proved a greater challenge for the Athlon 3000G and its Vega 3 muscle. Testing at 1080p and medium settings, I saw an average of only 30fps when standing still, which would dip when a lot of action erupted onscreen. Dropping to a resolution of 1,366 by 768 boosted me to close to 50fps, and I was able to reach 60fps by dropping the resolution a bit more, to 1,280 by 720.
I tried pushing the graphics up to the max at this resolution, and the game remained quite playable, though the frame rate fluctuated between 48fps and 60fps as I moved around shooting zombies.
Conclusion
All things considered, AMD’s Athlon 3000G is neither the fastest nor the cheapest low-end CPU on the market, but it nevertheless serves a niche well. Selling for $65, the Athlon 3000G is currently $10 less than the Athlon 200GE. The Pentium Gold G5600 doesn’t appear to be on the market anymore, but the slightly slower Pentium Gold G5500 currently sells for an uncompetitive $92. I’d argue that for its price the Athlon 3000G is a significantly better option than either of these solutions. The Pentium Gold G5500 may offer slightly better performance in some tests, but for $90, if you shop around, you can also get a quad-core AMD Ryzen 3 3200G that offers all-around significantly better performance.
Going in the opposite direction, the Celeron G4920 goes for a little over $50, but its performance when multiple threads are employed is so much lower than the Athlon 3000G’s that the AMD chip is easily worth the extra $10 to $15 more.
You can take a good-size step up in performance with the Ryzen 3 3200G if you can spend $90 to $100, but if your budget is hard-limited at $70 or so for an IGP and CPU together, the Athlon 3000G seems to be the best-value current CPU below that mark that you can currently buy.
AMD Athlon 3000G
4.0
(Opens in a new window)
See It
$61.44 at Newegg
MSRP $49.99
Pros
- Two cores, four threads, 3.5GHz clock speed
- Integrated GPU capable of running older games
- Overclockable
- Reasonable price point
View More
Cons
Just $30 below superior AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3
The Bottom Line
Offering solid performance (and decent on-chip graphics silicon) right out of the box, AMD’s Athlon 3000G is a worthwhile AM4-socket processor solution for anyone who can’t quite afford a Ryzen 3 or Core i3.
Like What You’re Reading?
Sign up for Lab Report to get the latest reviews and top product advice delivered right to your inbox.
This newsletter may contain advertising, deals, or affiliate links. Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe from the newsletters at any time.
Thanks for signing up!
Your subscription has been confirmed. Keep an eye on your inbox!
Sign up for other newsletters
Intel
Десятое поколение Интел — это явно проходное поколение, выпущенное только для того, чтобы хоть чем-нибудь ответить АМД с их Zen2. Всё те же, пусть и улучшенные, 14 нанометров, всё та же, пусть и доработанная-переработанная, архитектура Skylake. Вот только при этом новый сокет LGA 1200. То есть предыдущие поколения проапгрейтить на 10-е не получится, а следующее выйдет на новых чипсетах и снова с другим сокетом. То есть апгрейдить его на что-то более новое тоже не выйдет. И хотя во все процессоры добавили Hyper Threading, выбирать любой 10XXX процессор от Интел стоит только при условии острой необходимости обновляться в 2021 году и если покупать AMD не позволяют убеждения.
Core i3 10100
4 ядра и 8 потоков, частота от 3600 MHz до 4300 MHz в бусте. Есть и Hyper Threading, и Turbo Boost — именно такими были все i7 до 7-го поколения включительно. Задел на будущее, конечно, минимальный, но вытянуть сможет практически всё. Цена около 10 тысяч рублей и встроенное видеоядро делают его неплохим вариантом, если обновиться нужно сразу, но средств на видеокарту не хватает.
Core i5 10400
За версию с индексом «K» и возможностью разгона придётся доплатить около 10 тысяч рублей. Стоит ли оно того. Наверное нет, ведь это не доплата за покупку бескомпромиссного топового камня — на выходе покупатель получит всё те же 6 ядер и 12 потоков.
Core i7 10700K
С i7 обратная ситуация: платить более 30 тысяч за не топовый процессор с базовой частотой в 2,9 ГГц и без разгона, как минимум странно. 8 ядер и 16 потоков — это почти разумный максимум, который можно выбрать от представителей синего лагеря в 2021. 8 ядер и 16 потоков — более чем достаточно для всех текущих задач и игр. Базовая частота в 3,8 GHz и автообуст до 5,1 GHz — это практически все соки, выжатые из текущего поколения. Горячо, но больше и не нужно. И этого точно хватит до следующего апгрейда, который у Интела будет уже на более тонкий техпроцесс и новую архитектуру.
Что касается Intel Core i9 — это определённо не стоящая того переплата. В 16-поточной системе дополнительные 2 ядра в ближайшие годы погоды не сделают, но температуры будут зашкаливать даже на самых совершенных системах охлаждения.
Basic Specs for a Basic CPU
Just like all of AMD’s other Ryzen-based Athlon processors, the 3000G features two SMT-enabled CPU cores. (SMT, or simultaneous multi-threading, is the technology that allows each CPU core to operate on two threads at a time.) This reduces processor stalls and leads to better utilization of the CPU’s resources, which in turn results in a significant increase in performance in multi-threaded tasks.
The cache on this processor is also untouched compared to the other Athlon CPUs, which means it comes with 192K of L1 cache, 1MB of L2, and 4MB of L3. It’s also still based on AMD’s first-gen Ryzen architecture and built on a 14-nanometer process, as opposed to the «Zen 2» 7nm process used by AMD’s latest higher-end desktop CPUs. Clock for clock, the CPU portion of the processor is identical to that of the Athlon 240GE, with both parts operating at the same 3.5GHz base clock.
Only a little has changed about the integrated graphics processor (IGP) built into the chip. The Athlon 3000G’s Radeon Vega 3 graphics silicon features three compute units with a total of 192 pixel shaders, a dozen TMUs, and four ROPs. This matches the IGP found in the other desktop Athlons, but the 3000G operates its Vega 3 IGP at a slightly higher clock speed of 1,100MHz (versus 1,000MHz for the Athlon 240GE).
Similar Products
This chip, like other Ryzen desktop chips, is designed for use in AMD AM4 motherboards. You’ll want to check for compatibility (some very high end AM4 boards with AMD’s top-end chipsets may not support Athlons), but we expect that most buyers will pair a budget chip like this with a budget AM4-socket motherboard, such as those based on the B450 and A320 chipsets.
As mentioned in the intro, the key differentiating feature with the Athlon 3000G is overclocking support. This means you should be able to push the processor to work at higher clock frequencies to gain a bit more performance. AMD’s Ryzen CPUs haven’t shown to overclock particularly well in the past, but those also operate at significantly lower clock speeds than the Athlon 3000G. With a base clock of 3.5GHz, the 3000G is likely to have a bit more headroom. I’ll experiment with overclocking the chip a bit later, but first let’s get into some benchmarks at stock speeds.
GPU Benchmark Results
The Athlon 3000G may struggle to best the Pentium Gold G5600 in CPU benchmarks, but it runs circles around competing Intel chips when testing the processor’s IGP. Although it’s not up to the task of running modern games, it can run games with a few years on them reasonably well, especially if you don’t mind dropping the graphics detail a bit.
Starting with Far Cry 5 set to its lowest graphics settings, the Athlon 3000G was unable to hit playable frame rates even with the resolution turned down to 720p. If you really want to run games this new without buying a game console or a graphics card, then it’s worth paying the extra for the likes of an AMD Ryzen 5 3400G.
The Athlon 3000G performed, if anything, too well while running Rise of the Tomb Raider with the lowest graphic settings. Seriously, with a score of 34fps at 720p, the 3000G showed a 55 percent performance increase over the Athlon 200GE with a mere 10 percent bump in clock speed. This is another test in which the numbers were likely affected by something outside the normal course. It’s likely that the 3000G benefited from some sort of driver or software update that pushed up performance even more, though it could also be that the extra processing power helped to relieve an IGP bottleneck. Either way, you won’t have a particularly enjoyable experience with all the graphics settings turned down, but you could run this game on the Athlon 3000G if you really, really wanted to.
CS:GO is getting on in years and is a perfect example of how the Athlon 3000G can deliver an enjoyable gaming experience on older titles. With settings tuned to medium, the iGPU achieved 86fps at 720p and 45fps at 1080p. Overall, the game proved perfectly playable at both resolutions, though you may want to downgrade the graphics slightly to achieve a steady 60fps at 1080p.
Rainbow Six: Siege is another game that is perfectly playable on the Athlon 3000G’s integrated graphics. Hitting 26.6fps at 1080p resolution with medium settings isn’t ideal, but it wouldn’t take much tweaking to hit a solid 30fps.
Overclocking the Athlon 3000G
Overclocking can be a highly rewarding process, especially with low-end parts such as the Athlon 3000G. Unfortunately, my attempts to overclock the Athlon 3000G ended at a frustrating clock ceiling. At first, overclocking the Athlon 3000G was going quite easily. Figuring this CPU would likely hit 4GHz like most of AMD’s other Ryzen CPUs, I started off the overclocking process by pushing it straight from 3.5GHz to 3.8GHz without any increase in voltage.
The system booted just fine with this overclock, and sure enough CPU-Z and Task Manager both reported a new max clock speed of 3.8GHz. Naturally, the next step I took was to place a load on the CPU to make sure it was stable. At the same time I opened up CPUID’s hardware monitor to track the CPU’s temps to ensure it wasn’t overheating. The CPU proved to be stable and the temps unchanged, but during this test I also discovered the CPU wasn’t running at 3.8GHz as it should: Task Manager showed the chip topping out just above its base clock at 3.57GHz.
Going back into the BIOS, I tried to find some explanation for this odd performance, but couldn’t. Just to be thorough I upped the processor’s voltage a bit and retested to see if perhaps it was hitting a power limitation, but this changed nothing. Not finding any answers in the BIOS, I opted to give AMD’s Ryzen Master overclocking tools a try, but here too I ultimately was unable to get the CPU to run above 3.57GHz.
I suspect that the issue I’m encountering may be due to the X470 motherboard I used for the test, but at the moment I don’t have any other way to test the board to find out (I’ve got half a dozen X570 motherboards sitting around from past reviews, but none of those supports Athlon processors).
Testing the Athlon 3000G: Our Testbed Setup
First, a look at a few of the key competing CPUs for the 3000G…
Note: I’m listing the price for the 3000G at $65 rather than $49, as $60 to $65 seems to be, in the real world, by far the most common pricing for this CPU these days. (It’s almost as if AMD underpriced it at launch.) Also note that in the last generation, I tested the Athlon 200GE, not the 240GE mentioned above. That one-step-down chip is clocked slightly lower, at 3.2GHz, than the 3000G and 240GE. Note that the two Intel chips mentioned here are now previous-generation, but they are the newest low-end Intel chips we have tested. Intel just a few weeks ago debuted its 10th Generation Pentium, Celeron, and Core CPUs on a new platform.
For testing purposes, I paired the Athlon 3000G with an MSI X470 Gaming Pro Carbon motherboard. Ordinarily, I would have tested this CPU with the same B350 motherboard that I used to test the Athlon 200GE that I reviewed in February (the B350 and B450 chipsets are a more likely match for a cheap chip like this), but due to the COVID-19 lockdown and access to certain of PC Labs’ hardware, this wasn’t an option. This shouldn’t affect the performance testing, though, as motherboards typically don’t affect base performance much; they’re more a factor in overclocking. I also used different RAM modules, but the RAM was set identically in both test systems. Two 8GB sticks of DDR4 were used in each system for a total of 16GB, and the RAM was operated with a clock speed of 3,000MHz and timings of 14-14-14-34.
To keep the CPU cool, I opted to stick with the stock cooler that AMD supplies with the Athlon 3000G. This is a smaller cooler than the various AMD Wraith coolers(Opens in a new window) supplied with its desktop Ryzen chips…
As this is a budget CPU, not many people are likely to shell out for an aftermarket cooler for an Athlon (or a Celeron or a Pentium, for that matter). Testing with the stock cooler, therefore, provides the most accurate look into the processor’s real-world performance. To check for thermal throttling, I ran a couple of the benchmark tests below over again with CPUID’s hardware monitor(Opens in a new window) open to keep an eye on temps and see if the CPU down-clocked.
Overall, the processor’s temps plateaued at around 63 degrees C, and I didn’t see the clock speed drop while the test was running. This leads me to believe that the stock cooler provided by AMD is perfectly adequate to cool this CPU and that there isn’t any real need to pay out for anything better except maybe when overclocking.
Intel Core i5-7400
Первый в нашем списке — представитель от Intel’а. Intel Core i5-7400 является оптимальным вариантом для тех, кому не хватает мощности i3 и при этом нет денег на i7. В процессор встроен графический чип HD Graphics 630 (9-го поколения). Это ядро работает на базовой частот 350 МГц, но может разгоняться до 1000 МГц. Поддерживает подключение до трех экранов, все актуальные компоненты для игр Directx 12 и OpenGL 4.4.
Процессор Core i5-7400 позволяет без проблем смотреть фильмы в формате 4K, редактировать видео и фото, погружаться в игры на средних настройках. Однако стоит отметить, что в тяжелых сценах возможны просадки до 30-40 FPS. Поэтому если вы собираетесь играть в последние игры и чувствовать себя комфортно, лучше приобрести видеокарту.
Функции
1.использует многопоточность
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Технология многопоточности (такая как, Hyperthreading от Intel или Simultaneous Multithreading от AMD) обеспечивает более высокую производительность за счет разделения каждого физического ядра процессора на логические ядра, также известные как потоки. Таким образом, каждое ядро может запускать два потока команд одновременно.
2.Имеет AES
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
AES используется для ускорения шифрования и дешифрования.
3.Имеет AVX
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
AVX используется, чтобы помочь ускорить расчеты в мультимедиа, научных и финансовых приложениях, а также для повышения производительности программы Linux RAID.
4.версия SSE
4
4.2
SSE используется для ускорения мультимедийных задач, таких как редактирование изображений или регулировка громкости звука. Каждая новая версия содержит новые инструкции и улучшения.
5.Имеет F16C
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
F16C используется для ускорения задач, таких как настройки контраста изображения или регулировка громкости.
6.биты, передающиеся за то же время
Неизвестно. Помогите нам, предложите стоимость. (AMD Athlon 3000G)
Неизвестно. Помогите нам, предложите стоимость. (AMD Ryzen 3 3200G)
NEON обеспечивает ускорение обработки мультимедийных данных, таких, как прослушивание MP3.
7.Имеет MMX
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
MMX используется для ускорения задач, таких как, настройки контраста изображения или регулировки громкости.
8.Имеет TrustZone
AMD Athlon 3000G
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Технология интегрирована в процессор для обеспечения безопасности устройства при использовании таких функций, как мобильные платежи и потокового видео с помощью технологии управления цифровыми правами (DRM).
9.интерфейс ширина
Неизвестно. Помогите нам, предложите стоимость. (AMD Athlon 3000G)
Неизвестно. Помогите нам, предложите стоимость. (AMD Ryzen 3 3200G)
Процессор может декодировать больше инструкций за такт (IPC), а это означает, что процессор работает лучше
+ Показать больше +
Сравнение характеристик
AMD Athlon 3000G | AMD Ryzen 5 3400G | |
---|---|---|
Название архитектуры | Zen+ | Zen 2 |
Дата выпуска | 7 Nov 2019 | 7 July 2019 |
Цена на дату первого выпуска | $49 | $149 |
OPN PIB | YD3000C6FHBOX | YD3400C5FHBOX |
OPN Tray | YD3000C6M2OFH | YD3400C5M4MFH |
Место в рейтинге | 726 | 876 |
Применимость | Desktop | Desktop |
Family | Ryzen | |
Base frequency | 3.5 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
Кэш 1-го уровня | 192 KB | 384 KB |
Кэш 2-го уровня | 1 MB | 2 MB |
Кэш 3-го уровня | 4 MB | 4 MB |
Технологический процесс | 14 nm | 12 nm |
Максимальная температура ядра | 95 °C | 95 °C |
Количество ядер | 2 | 4 |
Number of GPU cores | 3 | 11 |
Количество потоков | 4 | 8 |
Разблокирован | ||
Максимальная частота | 4.2 GHz | |
Поддержка ECC-памяти | ||
Максимальное количество каналов памяти | 2 | 2 |
Максимальная пропускная способность памяти | 47.68 GB/s | |
Максимальный размер памяти | 64 GB | |
Поддерживаемые типы памяти | DDR4-3200 | DDR4-2933 |
Supported memory frequency | 2933 MHz | |
Количество исполняющих блоков | 3 | |
Graphics base frequency | 1100 MHz | 1400 MHz |
Количество ядер iGPU | 3 | 11 |
Количество шейдерных процессоров | 192 | |
Интегрированная графика | Radeon Vega 3 Graphics | Radeon RX Vega 11 Graphics |
DisplayPort | ||
HDMI | ||
Максимально поддерживаемое количество мониторов | 3 | |
DirectX | 12 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Максимальное количество процессоров в конфигурации | 1 | |
Поддерживаемые сокеты | AM4 | AM4 |
Энергопотребление (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Configurable TDP | 45-65 Watt | |
Количество линий PCI Express | 20 | |
Количество USB-портов | 4 | |
Ревизия PCI Express | 3.0 | 3.0 |
PCIe configurations | 1×16+1×4 | x8 |
Общее количество SATA-портов | 4 | |
Ревизия USB | 3.0 |
CPU Benchmark Results
Cinebench R15
In our first test, using Maxon’s Cinebench R15, the Athlon 3000G performed exactly as expected compared to its competition…
The 3000G’s higher clock speed and SMT technology gave it a clear leg up over Intel’s Celeron G4920. At the same time, the Athlon 3000G wasn’t quite able to catch Intel’s Pentium Gold G5600, which maintained a healthy lead (especially on the single-core test) thanks to its 3.9GHz operating frequency.
POV-Ray
Next up, the AMD Athlon 3000G turned in mixed results in POV-Ray, which streses the chip by performing on-CPU ray-tracing calculations…
Benchmarking using all cores returned results that were similar to what we observed from Cinebench R15, with the 3000G sitting squarely between the Celeron 4920 and Pentium Gold G5600. With just one CPU core in use, however, the Athlon 3000G fell slightly behind the Celeron. The Intel Core-9100 outpaced it by a fair bit on both POV-Ray and Cinebench, but bear in mind that that chip costs approximately twice as much.
Blender
Testing with Blender showed little deviation from the last few benchmarks. The Athlon 3000G came close to matching the Pentium Gold G5600 in this test, but it wasn’t quite able to.
iTunes Encoding Test
Taking a full 2 minutes and 17 seconds, the Athlon 3000G performed rather poorly in our iTunes 10.6 encoding test. This was predictable, as this is an old, legacy program that doesn’t leverage modern SMT/multi-threaded resources well…
The slower-clocked Celeron was able to surpass it by 4 seconds, and the Pentium by nearly half a minute.
Handbrake
The situation was completely reversed when testing with Handbrake 0.9.9…
It took the Athlon almost 26 minutes to transcode our 4K video sample to 1080p, but that was more than two minutes quicker than the Pentium Gold G5600 and Athlon 200GE. As for the Celeron G4920, well, at 41 minutes it’s clearly a painful solution for transcoding video.
7-Zip
Our last test, using 7-Zip, appeared to run into a glitch that skewed the test results. I ran this test multiple times and tried to diagnose the cause of the Athlon 3000G’s slow performance by trying a couple of different RAM kits and checking through the settings in BIOS. No matter what, however, the Athlon 3000G continued to deliver slower-than-expected performance in this test.
You may think that this is merely a sign the 3000G is slower than the competition, but it’s essentially identical to the Athlon 200GE but with a 10 percent bump in clock speed across the board. Both use the same CPU core, architecture, and manufacturing technology. As such, the 3000G should slightly outperform the 200GE in every test, but alas, that’s not what happened here. Overall, I’m inclined to downplay these 7-Zip results and focus on the bigger picture.
Скорость числовых операций
Athlon 200GE Athlon 3000G |
Athlon 200GE Athlon 3000G |
Athlon 200GE Athlon 3000G |
Для разных задач требуются разные сильные стороны CPU. Система с малым количеством быстрых ядер и низкими задержками памяти отлично подойдёт для подавляющего числа игр, но уступит системе с большим количеством медленных ядер в сценарии рендеринга.
Мы считаем, что для бюджетного игрового компьютера подходит минимум 4/4 (4 физических ядра и 4 потока) процессор. При этом часть игр может загружать его на 100%, подтормаживать и фризить, а выполнение любых задач в фоне приведёт к просадке ФПС.
В идеале экономный покупатель должен стремиться минимум к 4/8 и 6/6. Геймер с большим бюджетом может выбирать между 6/12, 8/8 и 8/16. Процессоры с 10 и 12 ядрами могут отлично себя показывать в играх при условии высокой частоты и быстрой памяти, но избыточны для подобных задач. Также покупка на перспективу — сомнительная затея, поскольку через несколько лет много медленных ядер могут не обеспечить достаточную игровую производительность.
Подбирая процессор для работы, изучите, сколько ядер используют ваши программы. Например, фото и видео редакторы могут использовать 1-2 ядра при работе с наложением фильтров, а рендеринг или конвертация в этих же редакторах уже использует все потоки.
Данные получены из тестов пользователей, которые тестировали свои системы как в разгоне (максимальное значение в таблице), так и без (минимальное). Типичный результат указан посередине, чем больше заполнена цветная полоса, тем лучше средний результат среди всех протестированных систем.
Introduction
It may not be as exciting as AMD’s Renoir announcement recently, but at least you can buy this APU in online and retail stores right now at an incredibly low price. We are talking about the AMD Athlon 3000G APU which was released in the Fall of 2019, almost now one year ago. You can buy this CPU with integrated Radeon Vega 3 graphics right now for only $49 on B&H. It was also $49 on Amazon just a few days ago, if you click the Other Sellers you will see it is still $49 sold by Amazon. Prices are fluctuating at the moment by other sellers, you can track the prices at PCPartPicker. The APU launched at $49. Though it is now almost one year old, this APU is still relevant today as it provides an incredible entry-level PC build option with combination CPU and GPU built-in and it’s widely available. This CPU and GPU combo negates the need for purchasing a dedicated GPU, thus saving you even more money and allowing for an incredibly affordable build if you just need a computer, but want to save the absolute most money. What’s more, this CPU and graphics are fully overclockable for enthusiasts.
Best Performance
Reviewing this CPU, a year later, also ensures that we are now testing and showing the absolute best performance that is possible out of this APU. Over the past year, there have been many BIOS updates plus AMD AGESA code updates. Testing on the best motherboard today we are able to benefit from a years’ worth of BIOS and AGESA code updates, also including OS updates and software updates. That means this APU is operating at the peak of its performance potential, it is providing the best performance today that it is ever going to give.This APU also offers something special, it is completely unlocked and you are allowed to overclock it! This gives it even more potential for better performance. Considering this APU is only $50, and it can overclock means it provides a great value for pushing that entry-level system as fast as possible. Back this CPU with a solid motherboard, and you have a really great little system to play around with, and so that’s exactly what we have done today.
Two Reviews
To focus on the features better, we are going to break this up into two reviews. The first review you are seeing today focuses on the CPU side of the APU. We are going to test its CPU performance and overclock the CPU to see how that improves performance. Then, in our second review, we are going to focus on the Radeon Vega 3 graphics built-in.
We will test gaming performance and we will even overclock the Radeon Vega 3 graphics to see how that improves game performance. In this way, you’ll get a good idea of how this little APU provides CPU and GPU performance for all types of workloads, including gaming.
Заключение. Сравнение Celeron G5900 и Athlon 3000G – из двух зол…
Какой напрашивается вывод? Помимо того, что это самые хилые процессоры у обоих производителей. На мой взгляд, Celeron G5900 может быть интересен, если его будут раздавать даром. Ну или хотя бы за чисто символическую сумму. В плане производительности AMD интереснее.
Для сборки, например, компактной системы для работы или иных «ненапряжных» целей лучше подойдет Athlon 3000G. Подозреваю, что любой самый дешевый кулер, купленный отдельно, будет работать как минимум не хуже штатного. Этого CPU хватит даже немного поиграть, хотя о каких-то претензиях на качество картинки речи нет.
Говоря про Intel Celeron G5900, то выбрать его можно разве что в ситуации, когда все комплектующие куплены, система уже собрана, осталось только приобрести CPU, а в наличии лишь 3 500—4 000 руб. Если уж и останавливать выбор на самом дне продуктовой линейки, то все же предпочесть хотя бы Intel Pentium G6400. Видеокарта у него та же, но хотя бы потоков четыре, и его быстродействие уже на уровне 3000G.
Говоря о ценах, то Celeron G5900 оценивается примерно в 3 500-4 000 руб. за боксовую версию (OEM рублей на 200-300 дешевле). Athlon 3000G стоит примерно столько же. Самая дешевая материнская плата под интел – это MSI H410M-A PRO, которая стоит на Амазоне 67.99$. В нашей рознице самая доступная — ASRock H410M-HDV(HVS), цена на которую начинается с 5 300 руб.
Использовавшаяся в тесте плата ASRock A320M-HDV стоит от 3 800 руб., причем есть варианты и подешевле. В результате, CPU + материнская плата в обоих случаях обойдется менее, чем в 10 000 руб., но интел будет на тысячу-две дороже. Использование же этого камня в более серьезных материнках, например, на топовом Z490, можно расценивать, как глумление.
Хороших покупок!