I can finally make this thread.
Phoenix is indeed RDNA3. My advice to everyone: treat the old APU rumours as being out of date.
Phoenix is indeed RDNA3. My advice to everyone: treat the old APU rumours as being out of date.
Discussion was about successor of 5600G/5700G meaning 7600G/7700G(Phoenix). Don't know why you changed that to 5700G, which has a much weaker Vega8 as an IGP. And that IGP is nowhere near GTX 1650's level of performance.
For the exact same reason they'd get a 5700G.Why would anyone make a new PC with only that little GPU performance in 2023?
The cost already has come down. I just did a quick and dirty search. Without trying I found an AM5 motherboard and 16gb of RAM for $225. I bet you can get it even cheaper, probably under $200. Add in a 7600 for $220 and you just need a case, PSU, etc. You don’t even technically need a GPU unless you game. You can probably put together an entire system (sans-GPU) for under $500.Regarding a potential 7700G, I think at some point the AM5 platform cost will come down. AM4 and DDR4 was also more expensive in the beginning when introduced, but dropped in price over time.
So then 7700G will be much cheaper than 5700X + RX6600. Also, the 7700G will have better CPU performance (but lower GPU performance), and the benefit of being on AM5 with upgrade option to later Zen generations. If this turns out to be true, I think there's definitely a market for it.
That said, there is no single system solution that fits everyone. Others may make other prioritizations.
If a 7700G cost as much as a 5700X+RX6600 then AMD needs to stop stealing and lower the AM5 prices. They havent doing so because they have zero competition for desktop APUs.Why would anyone make a new PC with only that little GPU performance in 2023? That level of performance I had in my laptop for almost 5 years.
BTW for GTX 1650 level of performance you would have to buy 7700G instead of 5700G and Zen4 based CPUs are a lot more expensive than the previous generation. Let's not forget about costlier AM5 motherboard and DDR5.
So the question is for what will that PC be used for?
If It's for budget gaming then
5700G + A520 board + 16GB 3200MHz DDR4 + RX 6600 would cost 482 euro.
7700(G) + A620 board + 16GB 6000MHz DDR5 would cost 508 euro.
I think the winner is clear.
Intel had their shot with Meteor Lake but they chose to cancel it on desktop. Though you never know. A zombie MTL-S could rise up from the grave on 31st DecemberIf Intel were to release an APU that was faster than the 5700G suddently all these problems of "RDNA3 APUs have to be expensive" would dissapear overnight.
you can say ali baba, igor.Intel had their shot with Meteor Lake but they chose to cancel it on desktop. Though you never know. A zombie MTL-S could rise up from the grave on 31st December
The price of 7700G was calculated based on the current prices for 5700G and 5700X in euro.If a 7700G cost as much as a 5700X+RX6600 then AMD needs to stop stealing and lower the AM5 prices. They havent doing so because they have zero competition for desktop APUs.
When the 2200G/2400G launched they didnt cost as much as going for a discrete gpu + Ryzen 1200/1400, even something like the GT1030 that was around the same level of performance had a higher price overall both with Intel and AMD cpus. Not to mention the RX550 and the RX560.
Then they lost the necesity to have better apus and started to cut back on IGP size and havent released something new ever since.
If Intel were to release an APU that was faster than the 5700G suddently all these problems of "RDNA3 APUs have to be expensive" would dissapear overnight.
Yeah everything great except display's IPS. I hope it's at least IPS Black with 2000:1 contrast ratio.Very nice, but It's regrettable that there is no higher RAM option.
Asus Ally also uses IPS.Yeah everything great except display's IPS. I hope it's at least IPS Black with 2000:1 contrast ratio.
It is their first chip, but it's also not a very important die in the grand scheme of things.So do we consider this AMD's first hybrid chip or not? I'm still confused about Ian's stance not considering Little Phoenix and claiming AMD hybrid chips are still way out.
That's not how the model number scheme works.What shocks me is it seems AMD found out the 2+4(7545U) die is a little bit stronger than 6+0(7540U) so AMD decide to name 2+4 die 7545U which makes it looks literally higher number and stronger. Shocking.
It will be faster... in Cinebench, at less than 15W TDP. This is definitely not a good year for AMD marketing.What shocks me is it seems AMD found out the 2+4(7545U) die is a little bit stronger than 6+0(7540U) so AMD decide to name 2+4 die 7545U which makes it looks literally greater number and stronger. Shocking.
Unfortunately that's exactly how it works, unless we want to try and explain to a consumer that "lower model within segment" can mean the higher performance modelThat's not how the model number scheme works.
Their naming scheme is clear as mud.It will be faster... in Cinebench, at less than 15W TDP. This is definitely not a good year for AMD marketing.
Unfortunately that's exactly how it works, unless we want to try and explain to a consumer that "lower model within segment" can mean the higher performance model
It is their first chip, but it's also not a very important die in the grand scheme of things.
Profile picture checks out.Anytime I am looking at an AMD laptop now I am forced to come back and look at that numbering table, cause it just doesn't make sense otherwise.