There are a few comments with timestamps after the video ends which leads me to believe he cut something out at the end of the video after uploading through youtube's editor.
8:05 The 8700G is already basically exactly that though (price aside; I'm assuming you're talking purely hardware/performance here). As far as I'm aware, the Z1 Extreme is using the same chip as the 8700G, just with some of the AI stuff disabled.
cant be same chip because laptop/portable variants have certain architectural changes that make them run worse at higher power and better at lower power when compared to desktop counterparts
Not necessarily. Architecture wise 8700G, 7840H as well as Z1 Extreme are all based on the same Phoenix die. The main differences are how much power they are allowed to draw. So more or less both statements are true.
@@Arxgxmi nah, all APUs (besides the new zen4c one) are same just silicon lottery and laser disable some feature. AMD does not have enough resources to design a new base chip for a small desktop market.
The pricing of these are awful $330 is simply too expensive for sub GTX 1650 performance. If you are looking for the best gaming performance for $330 buy an i3-12100F + Arc A750 or RX 6600. If youre looking to spend even less, get an Arc A580, any of these three options will be 2-3x the performance of the 8700G gaming performance.
well, the performance is not sub 1650, it's better than the 1650 actually - however still somewhat a bit behind the likes of something like a 1650 super. They more or less match the performance of a 1060.
New 3050 is amazing. It is cut even compared to regular one, but is still much faster then 8700G, and not really that much power hungry (about 2 times more watts, which is still laughable for a standalone card).
I don't hate the 8600G. Pretty capable CPU with _some_ graphics that can play _something_ alright. It's like the ideal cheap shitbox family PC APU that can run pretty much any software you throw at it well enough, and still enables the kids to play Fortnite without investing in a discrete GPU.
I was just watching the rtx 4080 super review by hardware unboxed, got this notification and was super confused why it said hardware unboxed in the thumbnail
Honestly can't see what these processors are for outside SFF builds. Betting AMD releases an 8400GT with 12CUs for $160 a year or two after it has the chance to be relevant.
You don't get it, they only make these because they are laptop rejects, they'd need to make a whole ass chip for what you are saying, just wait for them to discount this one to 280-250
I bought my i7-12700K for 330 dollars years ago, i can't believe that the 8700G has the same price. Back then, AMD didn't have powerful CPUs with integrated graphics, Intel was my only choice.
the 5600/5700G MSRP used to be super expensive, it could be viable option when they finally dropped these SKUs price.. as of stand rn, you're quite right that the MSRP is kinda bad
Some ignore that point, the previous gen APUs were more expensive at launch and then dropped after a while, which gonna happen the same with the new ones. Still, I always found the 6-core model has the best price/perf.
I rarely upgrade my PC, but I do love watching your videos. So even though I'll never buy, or look at this stuff for at least a couple years, I enjoy your voice, personality, and in depth analyses of all this nerdy stuff
@@AMIRTHECYRILLICMAN ah, i just mean, i wouldnt normally watch videos on budget tech or new options to upgrade when I know im not gonna upgrade anytime soon.
If then ryzen 3 8300g had 780m graphics with a bit higher price...that would've been a killer apu....but with 4 cu rdna graphics it's doa as it is slower than 1050 Ti....
8:16 I don't think this will ever happen again. Especially with $200 in 2024 being worth more like $150 from when the RX 480 was launched and silicon, copper, aluminium and R&D all getting considerably more expensive each year.
Yeah. Especially since TSMC is going to use the new lithography machine which took ASML 30 years and cost 250.000.000.000€ to develop… Moore‘s Law is hindered by economy. 😅
@@LawlessNate yeah, but somehow people seem to really like to ignore all them other prices (and salaries) that changed over last years and people in comments (sometimes even in videos) compare prices like "hey, bsx 1730 pi was 130 ducks in 201x and new ppx 3730 supper is gonna be 220 ducks, which is more than it should be with 3% inflation (that must be equal is flat 3% price increase of everything in this magic world of magic prices) and also it's bus is half the size so it also should be called ppx 3720 lunch or even ppx 3710 second breakfast"
Heyo Philip! I just wanted to ask for recommendations since I'm really inexperienced with current hardware stuff. My country's situation is horrible, but considering my current setup anything slightly modern seems to be x10 more powerful. (Argentina, South America. ~1000ARS is just 1USD) I'm looking for something that can run old games good and modern ones decently. i.e Roblox at solid 60 (+100 uncapped) and some demanding game at ~50s on medium-ish. I don't mind if you don't see this but some recommendation would really help. My brother got himself a Ryzen 5 5600G with no GPU. Right now I have an AMD Athlon 5150 APU with 12gb ~600MHz
@@2kliksphilip My bad, I should've mentioned more popular games. Basically most source games comfortably, stuff like TF2, GMod, etc. (I can't think of modern examples since I haven't been able to play modern stuff lol). As for FB marketplace, I think not many people around here sell hardware stuff there, or if they do it's 80% a scam or something like that. What do you think about APUs? I thought about getting a Ryzen 3200G based on your videos, but maybe it's too old for nowadays, got anything like it but slightly more modern?
damn bro i had an amd athlon 5350 and it sucked so much, maybe you can try to find an older 4th or 5th gen i5 or something similar as far as i remember even 1st gen i5 or i3 will outperform the athlon u have.
@@smacc1319 Ryzen APUs seem to be what I'd need, since I don't mind high graphics in games, but I would want some breathing room. And their GPU side look capable. And getting a CPU AND GPU is gonna be a pain here, even if they're "cheap" ones
@@kognak6640 Having a net loss doesn't mean your product costs more to produce than it is sold for, it means people haven't bought your products, or perhaps your marketing/financial/distribution pipeline isn't effective. If there is demand, CEOs will price-gouge as much as they can. They don't sell cheap out of the goodness of their hearts.
@@generalfishcakeofc not. They gouge where they can, or where they must. I guarantee prices on 8000 series mobile will fall extremely quickly in-line with demand. Who at amd would assume selling 8000 desktop apus at anything but a significant profit would be a good idea in the current used gpu market. Yall are building gaming pcs, certainly u can go out of ur way not to overpay, lol. Amd wants to ensure they can grab the mobile apu market by the balls, not beat the unbeatable current used market, and its not like Intel is really putting up enough fight in the desktop space to worry them. I agree they could've done better, but their focus is on mobile this gen.
recently picked up an used 4300ge for 40$. all i had to do to remove the 35w limit was to change ppt limit on bios, now i have an apu-ified 3300x for almost free (this is one ccx like 3300x, 3100 is two ccd)
My first SFFPC was with that chip. It was OK in a 2.2 liter case. The real value was in the AM4 platform, eventually upgraded to a 3700X before I gave that PC away. I do plan to build another tiny system with the 8700G. That chip should be here Monday.
My POV of those APUs was always that you could use them to put together a pretty capable system that you could upgrade with a good GPU later, but game in them in the mean time anyway
It's completely justified to criticise AMD for there marketing. Intel may never live down the 'snake oil' bs, but AMD isn't the small underdog anymore either. Both should be held to a similar standard. Hopefully AMD starts to try harder again, with Intel's next generation of CPUs and GPUs coming.
Thing is. These and laptops ones (so Z1 too) are from one chips designed for laptops. And well there computing performance takes priority still over GPU. They still could release from that something on 6CU and even less cores, probably almost everything would already bin for that, so it can really be too much of segmentation with disabling down to 4CUs. Wonder what future APUs will bring, cause most of AMD graphics performance for APUs seems to be focused on Strix Point to be released in H2 2024. Maybe if handheld market with grew and AMD will prepare special chips like for Steamdeck / Magic Leap 2 and then reuse them for desktop apus, then maybe we would get something purely graphics focused on budget.
I still think the 5600G is a great processor intended for computers that rarely game, but if they do, they can get by with low settings and still have a good time. I'm thinking of using it for my parent's PCs.
I have a 5600g in a small form factor case that i attached a laptop screen to, and a handle, to make it a very small, portable, gaming capable pc to take to lanparties with my friends. The screen resolution is 768p. I can run Spiderman Remasterd at normal settings with easy and fluid. or High Settings at 30fps locked. Just keep in mind to use good ram with high frequency and low latency. I am using 16 gigs of 3600mhz cas 16 ram. But you can get by with cas 18 or so as i had that kind of ram earlier.
i got mine for ~110€, its a great budget cpu - never wanted to use the gpu part for gaming, but as a fallback, for expirments with gpu switching and for later use someday. paired it with a rx6600.
Part of my issue with modern APUs is that they are too much CPU and not enough GPU. I looked over the die shot of the 7840HS a little while ago, and found that dropping 2 CPU cores would save as much die area as is technically needed to make a 16CU "790M" variant. There is something to be said for the bandwidth issues of feeding 16CUs, but there would still be some gain in performance above the current 12CU setup. Dropping CPU cores may also seem like a hit against it for some folks, but the games that run well on an APU aren't going to be the type to hammer a bunch of CPU threads either. Cyberpunk is going to run no worse on a 8700G with 2 cores disabled for example.
Gamers Nexus says cost to performance per watt is good, good 1080p - 1440p graphics performance and when tested with a 4090 without the iGPU it's on par with the other zen 4 CPU's.
was thinking the same like why can''t there be a APU that is balanced in CPU and GPU performance like as powerful gpu as a 6600 and a cpu as powerfull as i3 12100f in one APU even if that costed not less then both of these it till will be a killer option and bring new form factors to PC gaming
I think the RAM speed is limiting the possible GPU performance even if it had more units. Consoles have faster RAM. But I wish the 8600G had e.g. 10 units.
@@2kliksphilip The reason consoles can manage good GPU performance is that they have soldered ram vs replaceable DIMM slots. Soldered ram chips means a shorter path from gpu to ram means lower latency and more bandwidth. In 2024 memory bandwidth is the main limiting factor for computing performance (see amd x3d cpus)
Even if they make APU with 4 cores + big GPU, it will not perform much faster than 8700G because you are still stuck with DDR5 in dual channel Maybe if they put some 64MB infinity cache, it might help a bit with memory bandwidth but APU will be expensive to make
I agree, the more powerful GPU should be paired with the lower cost product so that it creates a market segment that only it will fit and nothing else. If done right, it can set a new standard for steam box and media PCs
can i ask something? Why does 8700g and the 8600g have the same TDP if the latter is less powerful that the former? As a matter of fact why do they all have the same TDP
Because they all limit at the same wattage which results in lower clocks on the 8700G under full load but due to +2c/4t in a higher overall multicore performance than the 8600G.
I would say maybe this would be good for like a cheap home theatre / Plex setup without needing a dGPU, but I think even the older Ryzen APUs would be just as capable of say decoding 1080p video / blurays.
I think if it was £150 or so it would be a steal but any more then that and people will just look at a dedicated GPU and a pure CPU. The thing is you can get a 7800X3D for not much more and that's pretty much the best CPU for gaming at the moment.
APUs always skimp on the GPU and go overkill on the CPU. If you are in the market for cheap and or power efficient gaming you want 4 decent cpu cores or 6 at the most with at least 8 preferably 12+ CUs. Why else put a half decent gpu in? It's not like people are buying AMD if they want quicksync features! People who just need a display output want way less and people who want to use gpu horsepower want way more. They're just frustrating products designed not to cannibalise sales from the rest of the AMD lineup. Imagining the steam deck with 12 rather than 8 CUs is very attractive even if they would be clocked slightly lower. edit. having watched more of the video large chunks of my comment are redundant.
I feel like these APUs are meant for people who want to get on the AM5 platform rn so they can game and futureproof, and then save up money to get a really good GPU. I'm probably wrong lol.
I’m just thinking off the top but I don’t think this chip is actually for consumers. I think the point is throwing it into a handheld PC at a future date.
My i7-12700K has more CPU power and higher memory bandwidth that any of these APUs anyways, i bought it new for 330USD years ago, it's a 2021 batch with AVX512 instructions.
@@saricubra2867 The memory bandwidth is dependent on the used memory and the amount of memory channels. All those desktopcpus/apus run 2 channels. Your i7 does not have more bandwidth. Besides that the comparison to be made is bandwidth available to the apu to the bandwidth available to a gpu plus whats available to the cpu. After all the apu uses the bandwidth for both parts.
A 2+4c cores with 12CUs for $170 would be the sweet spot. It segments itself off from higher end CPUs while still providing enough for any game. Also 8CUs isn't enough.
so basically buy msi claw for a better igpu and when u can later connect a large gpu to it if you really aim for the portability other than that get a proper pc or mini itx that fits graphics card and buy proper cpu and graphics card
The 2200G/3200G were never as fast as any $100 CPU was though. Even The normal 1200/1200AF were considerably faster and the Intel options like the 10100F were much faster on the CPU side. Although I agree the 8700G is priced way too high and I believe that's because of the AI processing power with its NPU. For me, the 8600G is the sweetspot as it costs $250 and brings 6c/12t and decent iGPU perf
And that's why I ignore youtubers like Hardware Unboxed today... "Oh the 6500 XT is faster" But totally forgets that APU memory is variable, you can set 16gb of vram on the bios while the 6500 XT is physically locked to 4gb and will need caching on the ram while rely on the 4x PCIe. What this means? This APU can easily play these newer games that need 8gb of vram while the 6500 XT can't or will not be that smooth, the 6500 XT will never reach it's full potential because it's bottlenecked by the vram and pcie.
The 6500XT has always been a bad deal. The current RTX 3050 / 6GB doesn't fare much better (but doesn't need a power connector, so still a somewhat viable niche). But the APU performance still doesn't have much full of a potential. It's basically GTX 1650 rendering performance levels -- entry level cards from four years ago and just ~30% faster than the 8 years old 1050ti. Games that need 8GB of VRAM minimum are beyond such a solution's scope more often than not. You're not suddenly able to get anyting worthwile out of say, Alan Wake 2. Sure, you can crank up texture levels to the hilt even in older or less demanding games, or even mod them to be super high res. But talking about "potential" with an APU seems still a bit off. That's unfortunate, as both AMD as well as Nvidia seem to be giving up on truly viable entry level gaming GPUs. No more 7500XT (the 5500XT 8GB was actually decent value), no more RTX 4050 (no 5050 listed so far either). However, given that even these fastest APUs still just about match the entry levels from half a decade ago, realistically there's probably also a physical limit how far they could go. The APUs in consoles for instance are of a much larger size than what fits into a mainstream PC motherboard socket. Does that mean decent entry level gaming is dead? I hope not, but only time will tell...
I feel like, from my experience in this industry most designing and testing to tape out will take anywhere from 8-12 months so these decisions were made quite a way back... Another this might be they can be architecturally limited in how many graphic cu they can have with those 1zen core and 3zenc or zen dense cores ... Or maybe the higher comput parts are also in testing and will be released as a refresher...
not to mention that on f.e. secondhand markets, you can go for a 2011v3 xeon, 1151 coffemod, 3xxx ryzens, with a 200$ 2070 card and get an absolute unit of a machine for 350$.
The last desktop I built happened to have an APU in it, along with a GPU. It was the most unstable piece of shit computer at times, although I think that was mainly cause of the motherboard being jank. Like, it would have a higher chance of crashing around startup if I didn't completely cut the power beforehand (turning my surge protector strip off, and maybe switching the PSU off) Then it got so bad, Sony Vegas editing would just randomly crash my PC when doing pan/edit/crop stuff. Come to think of it, I think it was several parts being jank in tandem, not sure. Regardless, I no longer trust APUs very much. That PC is now my dad's junk/misc/maintenance Win 7 PC. It seems to be less unstable these days, but it can still crash every once in a while.
These AMD APU's have became carrots and the end of the stick. Lots of low budget gamers buy these and realize the GPU performance ins't enough and later but a GPU anyway. Which ends up costing them more overall. AND the APU's have slightly worse CPU performance than their equivalent CPU
Only way I can imagine you should buy one of these is if you want to build a good pc in the end but you will build it over time because of the budget so for a few months you would have to use igpu. When you have the budget, just slam in a discrete gpu and the cpu is already good and won't bottleneck.
Apu need good (so expensive) ram, for work we'll, and this CPU cost already a lot, am5 motherboard too (you will probably not buy a cheap a620 with a 300$ dollar cpu), so buy a "discret gpu" when you do an expensive config like this is pretty weird. This Apu is juts useless in all point
@@patatedanstesdents I mean like if you are going to get a good gpu in the end of the day then max 5 percent performance from better ram doesn't really matter and it will be almost like let's say you went for the ryzen 7 7700 build but you had decent graphics performance until you had money to buy let's say a rtx 4070
The problem with that is that these CPUs are also handicapped on PCIe lanes. At most, you can use PCIe gen 4x8 for a dedicated GPU and you can have 2 gen 4x4 NVMe drives. Sure, the generations on NVMe drives basically don't matter for most people. For the GPU, PCIe 4x8 only loses a bit of performance even with an RTX 4090, but it might be different for future GPUs. It's just not a good idea to buy these APUs. They serve a very specific niche of people that want an incredibly small PC where you can't fit in a dGPU.
imo they should be pairing the Ryzen 3's and 5's with the 780M since that would actually make sense in terms of pricing. it doesn't make sense to only put the fastest graphics in the processor that would only make sense with a DGPU
Ive noticed quite a few reviews that arent catering to who this is for, APUs arent supposed to be cheaper or better than budget combos in that price range, theyre for SFF no gpu budget gaming machines or steam machines for the TV , like the 2200g theres no competition, no matter which way or what you combine to go against the new APUs, power , sound and heat will always be the advantage on the APUs, thats the market for them, not full towers that can accomodate a DGPU
What i don't get is why they make the GPU part worse as well a the CPU part, why not make the lower end chips have the higher end GPU part as they are less likely to be parted with a dedicated GPU.
i'm thinking of going APU only with the Deskmini X600. i play older games anyway and use emulator alot. i will just wait until the price is lower. i don't want to bother with gpus anymore.
@@saricubra2867 You're gonna spend extra anyway on a GPU because Intel's iGPU are weak and with inferior drivers for emulation, meanwhile a 5600G w/o GPU can run fine into the actual emulation scene, which it's the purpose of the guy to whom you replying, build a tiny efficient box just for emulation.
@@Rapatta22 Intel patched the drivers years ago, UHD 770 with vulkan destroys ryujinx and yuzu with my i7-12700K, no extra money. Emulators are CPU bottlenecked, not GPU, for 8 player smash bros matches with the most CPU intensive characters, stages and items, the frametime is perfect 16.6ms (or 60fps) without framedrops with one core 100% maxed out. The 5600G is a significantly slower CPU wise vs the i7-12700K.
@@Rapatta22"tiny efficient box" Emulation rule number 1: Intel always has been faster than AMD because Intel has higher IPC on their chips. HIgher IPC means more perfomance per watt per clock. Emulation rule number 2: The Ryzen 7 X3D destroys the rest of Ryzen for emulation. Rule number 3: Intel has better memory controllers. Rule number 4: core count and thread count matters for shader compilation, if you have 12 cores instead of 8, you increase shader compilation speed by 54%. PD: my first CPU was an AMD APU, good for PC port gaming, bad for emulation.
To be fair, most of the Ryzen G after the 3000G the MSRPs have been quite insane, bt the price drop was also insane, so maybe in a year or less these CPUs will be a great option for low end gamers. Also USA prices are just different, here in Brazil the 6500XT is 1000 reais, or 200 USD, if they come here at a decent price they will be very popular, since the steamdeck doesn't exist here lol.
Philip, it is clear to me, that you did not test the 8700G, someone proved it runs with 9000 MT/s DDR5 sticks, which improved FPS +15% ... and someone else claims to have used it with 10000 MT/s DDR5 sticks ... without giving actual data, so +15% would mean that you could game Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080P@60FPS@QualityFSR ........... 1 RDNA3 core = 2 Vega cores, 12 RDNA3 cores = 24 Vega cores!
Actually the 2400G also made sense as it was often discounted to just $140 which during the crypto boom allowed you to actually play games without dropping triple the MSRP on a GPU. But today when you can get RX 580s for sub $60 and used RX 6600s for just $140? any APU above $150 just doesn't make any sense for anything other than a set top box.
Personally, this is exactly the product I am looking for. I need a chip for a home server that has some graphical capabilities including support for the latest Vulkan so that it can run 3D apps, but mainly the chip needs good CPU performance. This will save me having to put in a bulky GPU into a system. Ideally I also need it to be power efficient, since this will be running 24/7, and I don't want it consuming too much power or putting out too much heat. I'm hoping to fit it all into a 2U server rack.
What about PSU and electricity costs for very similar performance at a TRIPLED power draw (65W vs ~170W) against the 6500xt combo? More energy, more heat, and as you mentioned worse productivity performance.
Yeah, I think most are also forgetting or overlooking the fact that 780M at the best is RX6400 (they have the same amount of shaders). RX6400 itself is barely a 1080p GPU. 780M is always going to suffer memory bandwidth issues.
i've, for the most part, seen APUs as a backup when there is a chance for your GPU to die, and you need your pc every day, so it is like a backup for that. i get the imperssion that bugdet gamers just go for second hand market and will save up if need for dedicated GPUs. It would be nice if you could get competitive APUs, but the market forces are making them a bit of a niche thing, in my opinion...
z1 extreme, (7840H) 780m, 8700g. as far as im concerned these are all the same part and u just get to choose the formfactor it is packaged in, be it a handleheld, a laptop or motherboard platform.
to be honest to be honest the 8600G can make sense as I got some points in favor of it: >the CPU side of it is powerful enough to install a dedicated GPU eventually >the IGPU is powerful enough to barely run most of the triple A games at 30 FPS (according to Gamers Nexus) >AM5 is still supported while intel's LGA1700 and AM4 are basically end of life to me this makes sense if you can only afford two thirds of the PC now and the GPU 3-6 months down the line as you might not want to pair it with a 6500 XT maybe you'll want an RX 7700 XT or waiting for Intel's Battlemage since news is supposed to come out in Q1 of 2024
Where I am, the 7700 costs $300 and the 8700G is $330.. So for $30 more you get GPU that's good enough for low end gaming. Everyone who is expecting a lot more is delusional.
Why are these chips so expensive? It could be that the yield is poor, but the 7040HS is essentially the same chip, so you’d expect AMD to have ironed it out or at least be able to hit their price target. So what’s most probable is they set an initial price for early adopters, being the people who are building SFF and don’t have room for a dGPU. And then they cut the price to attract the large crowd building budget gaming rigs.
The 8000G stuff is clearly meant to simply be a niche product for people to buy if they are building a space or power limited system. It’s a shame AMD did not market the product based on those possibilities, since it’s the only reason to pay a price premium for it. I’m excited to have a ps3 emulator capable system with 16TB of storage in a stupid small 3L chassis. I would not be excited to buy this expecting to play modern games at 1080p.
1) love your reviews, they explain actual value and make detailed compairison for rl builds. (to cheap for my pc spec but i still understand this video better than a ltt (too goofy) or gamernexus (to technical and kinda dry)) 2) funny but not over the top or distracting from content. 3) small problem: almost didnt watch because it said "unboxing"
TLDR: ADD 780M to even Ryzen 3 8300G or else APU will never be mainstream and can't never replace low end GPUs.........adding top tier iGPU on Ryzen 7 Skus is't feasible and don't make any sense.... Yeah that's why need to buy Ryzen 7 even though Ryzen 3 or Core i3 with decent GPU is more that enough for almost all average person....IF THEY REALLY WANT TO PUSH APU FORWARD THEY NEED TO INCLUDE TOP IGPU TO LOWEST TIER ONE....But in reality chips like Ryzen 3 got only 4iGPU cores...that's maybe not as fast than 1050 and it bearly ? So, why bother and expensive one like Ryzen 7 SKUs, I can get a Real dGPU+CPU COMBO which will crush that iGPU even the top tier one....
If your budget is that tight you should really look into used gaming PCs. I just checked what you can get for around 600 bucks and these new builds look like child's toys compared to that.
$150/$200 would be great prices for the 8600g/8700g but we won't get anywhere near that for at least a year. The lack of competition in this segment of the market won't help either.
All they need to do is release the 8300G. A cheap $100 CPU that can do as much as any other $100 CPU while also having the graphics performance of a $100 GPU, sound familiar?
Even the SFF build argument is stupid, you should just get a 7940hs mini pc then instead, they cost less, are more energy effecient and takes much less space. I only see the 8700G worth it for already AM5 users who figured they never use their dGPU and want to save on electricity, sell their 7700x and dgpu, and drop a 8700G in there.
I wonder when we'll be getting console level APUs available to purchase. If AMD released a 8c/16t APU with RX 6600m level performance, for around 300-400$ it would be a massive hit.
Imma be real dawg, I was pretty excited and was waiting for something more after seeing all the amd chips in the steam deck. Seems they themselves don't want a good APU so that they can segment their market as they want it to be.
I have a genuine qestion, not sure if you can answer, however i got curious. I have realized that at least 2 or 3 of the comments i made here (mostly long comments) just disappeared and seen to have never been posted at all, why is that? were them held for review automatically? Were they flagged by youtube and then deleted afterwards? Because on none of these comment i do say disrespectiful words or something like that, however all of those comments that disappeared were mostly multi-paragraph long comments that i took literally many minutes to write; but that were just explaining technical details specific to the apus in the video. So, why did that happen?
So basically budget gaming is still DEAD. Wonder if the arc a380 does value wise? I hear you can get them for under/about $100 paired with any low end cpu thats going to be a decent rig. Plus modern encoding standard capabilities as well. Oh also, i still cannot get over audio crime 2, absolutely love that album.
7xxm is meant for mobile graphics performance and mini-pc's and laptops it blows intel away in efficiency and performance but they should really of just put a 780m in all of the desktop apu variants instead of cutting them down as they aren't wattage/diespace limited.
Ive recently got sick of my giant 40l pc that sucks so much power and makes so much heat, so APUs like this are starting to be pretty cool, tiny little CPUS able to get decent performance with like less than half of the power, heat, and much less space.
I feel the 8700G is more for people who can't afford to buy a good GPU right now, but know they will be able to afford one in a few weeks or months from now. So going for the much better CPU part which can still be used later when they get the good dGPU, instead of going for the gimped CPU part which might be even a bottleneck when they decide/can buy the dGPU. Or of course for those who need the CPU performance and don't need the GPU performance of a dGPU, but still game enough.
The 2200G was my entryway to PC gaming, I did my whole system for ~£300 in 2019. It's a shame that to do that now you pretty much have to go second hand.
