News AMD Ryzen 3 5300G Review: The Best APU Not on the Market

We benchmarked AMD's unreleased Ryzen 3 5300G in gaming and application workloads to see if it could be a winner in the DIY market.

AMD Ryzen 3 5300G Review: The Best APU Not on the Market : Read more
And if it should come on the market it would be, what....the THIRD best APU?

Where ever it lands, the family of 5700G, 5600G and 5300G seems to make clear that AMD can adequately serve the low-to-mid-range GPU market with APU's that aren't likely to be impacted by miners buying up stock.
 
Reactions: vern72

vern72

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2012
240
16
18,685
0
I could have used the 5300G two weeks ago when I put together a system because the last one kept on rebooting on its own! But I got the 5600G instead (which I guess as AMD's strategy).
 

Giroro

Honorable
Jan 22, 2015
882
277
11,390
13
I could have used the 5300G two weeks ago when I put together a system because the last one kept on rebooting on its own! But I got the 5600G instead (which I guess as AMD's strategy).
What kind of system was randomly rebooting?
My ryzen 3700x system is also randomly rebooting and I'm having trouble diagnosing it. No blue screen, it just cuts to black and reboots. Usually while using premiere pro.
It's possibly related to the most recent bios, or my attempts to OC ram/fclk - but I'm still getting the reboots on timings that had been stable for the last year.
 
Assuming that AMD would price the 5300G at $150, it would retail for 60% less than $359 5700G and 40% less than the $259 5600G. However, according to our testing, the Ryzen 3 5300G delivers 86% of the gaming performance of the 5700G and 90% of the 5600G at 1280x720. That's a great value if we focus specifically on integrated graphics performance, which is really the only reason to consider buying this chip. However, it's clear that this could siphon away AMD's sales of pricier alternatives.
Expecting a $150 price point is probably being a bit too optimistic. AMD's limited 7nm manufacturing capacity means they aren't too interested in selling competitive budget offerings right now, which can be seen with the 5600G's pricing. The 5600G's integrated graphics might be notably better than those included with Intel's 6-core, 12-thread processors, but on the CPU side of things, it's not really any faster than an i5-10400 or 11400. And while it's priced at $260, those competing processors can be had for around $180, meaning you are effectively paying an extra $80 for that better IGP.

And for roughly the same price as a 5600G, you can now get an 8-core, 16-thread i7-10700K, which also falls behind on integrated graphics, but is a decent amount ahead in terms of CPU performance. Those extra cores may not be as much of a concern when comparing an 8-core processor against a 6-core, as both will likely remain relevant for gaming for a number of years when paired with a capable graphics card, but it does become more of a concern with this quad-core part. Just as the 5600G is priced similar to competing 8-core, 16-thread parts, it wouldn't be unexpected for the 5300G to be priced more like 6-core, 12-thread parts. And with some demanding games already choking a bit on 4-core, 8-thread processors, it doesn't exactly seem like the best choice for the long-term. The integrated graphics might be a fair amount better now, but they're still not something anyone interested in gaming performance will want to stick with once GPU prices return to normal.

Overall, it feels like AMD tacked on at least a good 20% over "expected" pricing across the entire Ryzen 5000 lineup, and it wouldn't be surprising to see them do the same for this part as well. Though perhaps they are waiting until it makes more sense for them to release it at retail for a somewhat more moderate price. Ryzen 5000 processors are already seeing price cuts and increased availability as Intel's Alder Lake release looms, and I would expect additional price cuts to come. Still, if they felt they could launch the 5700G for $360 and the 5600G for $260, the 5300G could easily be $160, if not more. There's also the possibility that it could be another 3300X, released to retail at a fairly competitive price, but with only extremely limited supply that made it more or less unobtainable post-launch. The CPU probably shouldn't be reviewed as if it were a great value, when the pricing and availability are only being guessed upon.
 

watzupken

Notable
Mar 16, 2020
489
205
1,070
1
It is a good APU, but again, not available as standalone purchase. I suspect AMD is aware that they can't produce enough, and that it will also cannibalise their higher end APUs. Truth to be told, I feel people buying APUs are not looking to play some hardcore games. So technically speaking, they don't need something like a 5700G. If I were to spend that much on a APU, it makes more sense to get a 5800X and also a dedicated GPU, since the 5700G is not as fast as the 5800X mainly due to the lack of cache and shared resources with the iGPU.

Price wise, I don't think it will be cheap since it is a monolithic chip. So it is highly possible that this may be a full fat 5700G (cost the same), but with disabled CPU and GPU CUs.
 

abufrejoval

Prominent
Jun 19, 2020
22
9
515
0
Quite contrary to Intel (in the old days) AMD doesn't try to produce 5300G.

They really try to produce a 5700G (or 5800U) all the time and if they wind up with a lesser chip, it's defect that's recycled as a lesser part, ~50% defective in the case of the 5300G.

We should be glad TMSC production doesn't produce a significant number of half defective chips.

And to demand that AMD sacrifice 100% or 75% chips to sell 50% chips is asking them to go against their bottome line.

Intel has been rumored to go to that extend to protect "their market", AMD seems less inclined.
 
Last edited:

vern72

Distinguished
Jul 15, 2012
240
16
18,685
0
What kind of system was randomly rebooting?
My ryzen 3700x system is also randomly rebooting and I'm having trouble diagnosing it. No blue screen, it just cuts to black and reboots. Usually while using premiere pro.
The system in question was a much older system (say Core i5-6xxx). I turned it on and it would start up for two seconds and then turn itself off for two seconds then try to boot again. After a couple dozen times, it would eventually say on but I didn't want to put that much strain on the components because of all that power cycling.
 

salgado18

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2007
683
91
19,070
4
A bit late, but I think there is something very important missing from this conclusion: the 3400g delivers nearly the same performance in games using the iGPU.

If a user wants only to game on the iGPU (a low-budget build, an HTPC, etc) the 3400g is as good as the 5300g. I personally think that's a bit disappointing, especially since the 3400g has 11 Vega cores and the 5300g has 6 Vega cores. But it still is a good option, especially because the AM4 platform can easily receive a 16-core processor as an upgrade in the future.

Because of that, if AMD would release it, it would cost between $170 and $200, and the 3400g would be at $150 or less, like the 3600 fills the gap between a 5600g and the quad-cores. Possibly $200, since the user can choose between a 6-core Zen 2 CPU or a 4-core Zen3 APU at the same price point.
 

abufrejoval

Prominent
Jun 19, 2020
22
9
515
0
A bit late, but I think there is something very important missing from this conclusion: the 3400g delivers nearly the same performance in games using the iGPU.

If a user wants only to game on the iGPU (a low-budget build, an HTPC, etc) the 3400g is as good as the 5300g. I personally think that's a bit disappointing, especially since the 3400g has 11 Vega cores and the 5300g has 6 Vega cores. But it still is a good option, especially because the AM4 platform can easily receive a 16-core processor as an upgrade in the future.

Because of that, if AMD would release it, it would cost between $170 and $200, and the 3400g would be at $150 or less, like the 3600 fills the gap between a 5600g and the quad-cores. Possibly $200, since the user can choose between a 6-core Zen 2 CPU or a 4-core Zen3 APU at the same price point.
While your observation is true for the iGPU part, the focus of the article is really on how the CPU power of a Zen 3 quad is extremely attractive for the theoretical price point.

The Ryzen 3000 are Zen+, quite a lesser CPU even if the iGPU is on a similar level. It may still be good enough, perhaps on par with a Kaby Lake, but it's still irrelevant when it's no longer being sold, just as Zen 3 quads aren't yet being sold readily.

With AM4 nearing its end, 6 and 8 core Zen 3 chips will become even more affordable while they remain available: saving a few $ here and there until you can afford more than 4 cores seems the better option than trying to buy obsolete chips or waiting for enough defects to accumulate.
 
Reactions: salgado18

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS