Review AMD Ryzen 5 8600G review — the new value iGPU gaming champion

[Admin]

We put AMD's new $229 Ryzen 5 8600G "Phoenix" chip through our test suite to see how it ranks against the Intel competition and its own pricier sibling, the Ryzen 7 8700G.

AMD Ryzen 5 8600G review — the new value iGPU gaming champion : Read more

 

[Notton]

Considering how the Core 5 135H is looking, I really wish AMD enabled the full 12CU from this chip.

 

[usertests]

APUs are screaming for more memory bandwidth, and the 8600G will look great if it hits the low prices seen for the 5600G along with other platform costs getting cheaper.

 

[baboma]

>The current-gen flagship APU, the Ryzen 7 8700G, is 10% faster than the 8600G, but it costs $100 (44%) more, making the 8600G the clear value winner for this generation of APUs.

This is incorrect, because you do not use the APU by itself, but as a part of a system. The correct value calculation is to take the price delta of the entire system but with different APUs.

Assuming a $1K SFF build, the $100 APU price diff would come out to ~10%, which is the same perf diff between 8700G and 8600G. AMD did its pricing homework. The value proposition is the same for both APUs.

I agree both are niche, as their main appeal would be for small SFF (eg NUC), and in that space, mobile parts, eg MTL & AMD 780M parts, may have more functionality and be better value.


>...the 8600G will look great if it hits the low prices seen for the 5600G along with other platform costs getting cheaper.

That'll happen if you're willing to wait ~2 years until the 9600G's release.

5600G pricing was very stable, staying close to its $259 launch price, and only gradually dropping after the 7000 series release on Sep'22.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B092L9GF5N

 

[jeremyj_83]

"Higher DDR5 pricing, no 8GB options"

I am so tired of hearing about DDR5 pricing being a con. While it is more expensive, you won't have a choice for a new CPU in the Zen 5 or 15th Gen anyways. Not to mention due to the added bandwidth the 8600G averages 72% more iGPU performance at 1080p vs the 5600G. If you are looking at doing only iGPU gaming that added cost is minimal compared to extra performance. The lack of an 8GB option is also not a con. Gaming on 8GB is with a dGPU isn't good, unless it is old games. Doing it on an iGPU can kill your performance completely.

 

[SunMaster]

I think in most cases the APU will be preferable over the CPU with the old graphics card.

If price is your only reason to go for a system like this, and you badly want to game, the APU isn't the best solution. But case/enclosure size, heat and noise will be the primary reason to choose the APU. The fact that you actually can game on it will what makes the sale.

 

[Udyr]

A decent review marred by ridiculous cons.

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

The lack of an 8GB option is also not a con. Gaming on 8GB is with a dGPU isn't good, unless it is old games. Doing it on an iGPU can kill your performance completely.

A few years ago I played through the entirety of Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order on a Ryzen 3200G (no dedicated GPU) and with a 4GB x 2 kit of RAM. The Series S also works fine with what is functionally only 8 GB of RAM shared between the CPU and GPU (there's technically +2 GB for a total of 10, but the extra 2 GB is clocked slow and is for the OS). Memory needs tend to be overstated.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Memory needs tend to be overstated.

Have you tried to do basic work on a computer with Win 10, 8GB RAM, and 2GB RAM reserved for the iGPU? It is painfully slow as you are page swapping all the time. Any computer that isn't a Chromebook should come with less than 16GB RAM now.

 

[kyzarvs]

Have you tried to do basic work on a computer with Win 10, 8GB RAM, and 2GB RAM reserved for the iGPU? It is painfully slow as you are page swapping all the time. Any computer that isn't a Chromebook should come with less than 16GB RAM now.

My desktop is a 32GB ram machine. I also have an i7 / 32gb / 2TB nvme gaming laptop.

When I want portability on the road, I have a dell notebook that's education-oriented. 4GB ram, no fans, small CPU. It runs 10/11 perfectly well, starts up quickly and performs my work requirements (Office / Firefox / NextCloud) pretty much as quick as my main machines.

 

[mitch074]

Erm... Error in the article : Zen3 was using 7nm, not 12 - AMD dropped 12nm with Zen 2 and RDNA.

 

[nrdwka]

"Higher DDR5 pricing, no 8GB options"

I am so tired of hearing about DDR5 pricing being a con. While it is more expensive, you won't have a choice for a new CPU in the Zen 5 or 15th Gen anyways. Not to mention due to the added bandwidth the 8600G averages 72% more iGPU performance at 1080p vs the 5600G. If you are looking at doing only iGPU gaming that added cost is minimal compared to extra performance. The lack of an 8GB option is also not a con. Gaming on 8GB is with a dGPU isn't good, unless it is old games. Doing it on an iGPU can kill your performance completely.

Lack of 8GB option mean you cannot do 16GB dual channel, and you need to install 32GB minimum.
(Dual channel is mandatory for igpu, need to be insane to use 1 stick on igpu system).

 

[JasonovichClone]

I'm not sure the author of this article is fully up to date with the DDR5 pricing, I got a pair of Corsair Vengeance DDR5 6000 from Scan 32gb X 2 @ £130ish . Four sticks of 16gb for about £260 and this seems to be the trend, prices are falling. Not quickly enough but they're coming down.

I was holding out on the AM5 platform only until recently but I decided to take the plunge, hopefully in a few years I'll be able to upgrade to Zen 5 when the platform hits saturation.

Also B650 motherboards has seen a reduction in price, mine was £159, not bad. I can only assume A620's will be much cheaper.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Lack of 8GB option mean you cannot do 16GB dual channel, and you need to install 32GB minimum.
(Dual channel is mandatory for igpu, need to be insane to use 1 stick on igpu system).

That cannot be further from the truth.

PCPartPicker Part List

Memory: TEAMGROUP Elite 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR5-4800 CL40 Memory ($45.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $45.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2024-03-04 08:13 EST-0500

What 8GB option means is you cannot do 2x4GB for 8GB total.

 

[jeremyj_83]

When I want portability on the road, I have a dell notebook that's education-oriented. 4GB ram, no fans, small CPU. It runs 10/11 perfectly well, starts up quickly and performs my work requirements (Office / Firefox / NextCloud) pretty much as quick as my main machines.

That is quite surprising. My 4GB laptop with a minimal install of Win 10 is barely usable. It boots using 3GB RAM and is immediately page swapping.

At work we had some Dell Inspiron with Ryzen 5 3500u's and 8GB RAM and 2GB RAM reserved for the iGPU. We couldn't change the amount of reserved RAM in BIOS so the computers booted Win 10 Pro with 6GB RAM. They were very hard to use even with minimal programs installed on them as the OS used 4GB RAM on boot leaving 2GB for everything else. That meant that they were page swapping right away. Even with SSD when you page swap the performance tanks.

 

[PaulAlcorn]

>The current-gen flagship APU, the Ryzen 7 8700G, is 10% faster than the 8600G, but it costs $100 (44%) more, making the 8600G the clear value winner for this generation of APUs.

This is incorrect, because you do not use the APU by itself, but as a part of a system. The correct value calculation is to take the price delta of the entire system but with different APUs.

Assuming a $1K SFF build, the $100 APU price diff would come out to ~10%, which is the same perf diff between 8700G and 8600G. AMD did its pricing homework. The value proposition is the same for both APUs.

I agree both are niche, as their main appeal would be for small SFF (eg NUC), and in that space, mobile parts, eg MTL & AMD 780M parts, may have more functionality and be better value.


>...the 8600G will look great if it hits the low prices seen for the 5600G along with other platform costs getting cheaper.

That'll happen if you're willing to wait ~2 years until the 9600G's release.

5600G pricing was very stable, staying close to its $259 launch price, and only gradually dropping after the 7000 series release on Sep'22.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B092L9GF5N

I think you first have to understand the target market for this chip. You could spec out a more realistic system for this class of chip that costs less than that, and then the price delta becomes a higher percentage of the build. For instance, a $500 build.

Additionally, if you are upgrading a system and only buying the chip, DRAM, and board, then the price delta again comprises a higher percentage of the build.

If you add enough variables, you could water down the chips' price delta for the total build as much as you'd like. If you spent $500 on the PC case, the cost of the chip would be even less of a percentage of the total build.

So, you can calculate the difference based on the price of the chip, or you could calculate on the price of the chip, board and RAM, or you could even step up and calculate for the entire system price. All of these methods of calculation have advantages, and all have disadvantages. However, chip cost is the one immutable factor that cannot be changed or explained away by being buried in the cost of ever-more varied component choices (like PSU, cooler, faster or slower SSD, et al.).

 

[PaulAlcorn]

"Higher DDR5 pricing, no 8GB options"

I am so tired of hearing about DDR5 pricing being a con. While it is more expensive, you won't have a choice for a new CPU in the Zen 5 or 15th Gen anyways. Not to mention due to the added bandwidth the 8600G averages 72% more iGPU performance at 1080p vs the 5600G. If you are looking at doing only iGPU gaming that added cost is minimal compared to extra performance. The lack of an 8GB option is also not a con. Gaming on 8GB is with a dGPU isn't good, unless it is old games. Doing it on an iGPU can kill your performance completely.

AMD itself has said that a large portion of APUs are sold to developing countries. These are primarily geared for the cheapest of budget systems, and the price delta does matter. Maybe not to you -- but it does to folks building the absolute cheapest system possible to game with.

In that vein, yes 8GB is not ideal, however, those skimping might chose to select that for the lowest-end of builds. Do you think you need more than 8GB to play DOTA II? Or some other e-sports shooter? It's an extreme price-cutting option that isn't available for a product that is largely geared for the lowest-cost gaming systems possible.

 

[baboma]

>You could spec out a system that costs less than that, and then the price delta becomes a higher percentage of the build. Additionally, if you are upgrading a system and only buying the chip, DRAM, and board, then the price delta again comprises a higher percentage of the build.

Yes, precisely. The price/perf delta will vary depending on overall system cost, but it would never be as lopsided (10% perf vs 44% cost delta) as the piece claims.

The point remains the same: the APU doesn't run by itself; it functions only as part of a system. Then the system cost needs to be taken into account, not just the APU.

The only scenario where your rationale would apply is when the APU is bought as an upgrade to an existing system. In every other case where the user is buying a system, the system cost is the basis of how value is calculated. The upgrade scenario mainly nonsense, as hardly anyone with an existing Ryzen 7000 + dGPU would pay for an APU to DOWNGRADE his system performance. Even if the system is running on the feeble Ryzen iGPU, the $229 would be much better spent on an entry GPU part, not an APU.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Do you think you need more than 8GB to play DOTA II? Or some other e-sports shooter? It's an extreme price-cutting option that isn't available for a product that is largely geared for the lowest-cost gaming systems possible.

Considering that an 8GB system with 2GB reserved give you 6GB effective RAM and you are page swapping for normal usage I would say yes. While the game might be OK, your usage for normal every day tasks will suffer greatly.

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

Have you tried to do basic work on a computer with Win 10, 8GB RAM, and 2GB RAM reserved for the iGPU? It is painfully slow as you are page swapping all the time. Any computer that isn't a Chromebook should come with less than 16GB RAM now.

Actually, yeah, I have, since I had never owned a laptop or desktop with more than 8 GB of RAM until the end of 2021, and never had a system with a discrete GPU until earlier in 2021. I didn't at first reserve 2 GB of RAM exclusively for the iGPU, but I tried it out later. I started developing my game using Visual Studio in spring of 2021. Though I believe by that point my desktop had its 1660 Super. Still, I've certainly used Visual Studio and plenty of other apps on 8 GB of RAM and integrated graphics before. I've even used Visual Studio and Windows 10 on 4 GB and even 2(!) GB of RAM years ago.

Now I'm back on the 4GB x 2 kit because my 16 GB RAM kit was causing BSODs.

Considering that an 8GB system with 2GB reserved give you 6GB effective RAM and you are page swapping for normal usage I would say yes. While the game might be OK, your usage for normal every day tasks will suffer greatly.

Maybe if "normal usage" means never closing down apps you aren't using, or doing very memory-intensive tasks that one typically wouldn't be doing on a budget build. If normal use means browsing the internet, checking your email, and maybe some basic office apps, 6 GB is plenty. And you don't have to dedicate 2 GB to the video. You can leave it dynamic so that it takes up less when it doesn't need it.

 

[Order 66]

>The current-gen flagship APU, the Ryzen 7 8700G, is 10% faster than the 8600G, but it costs $100 (44%) more, making the 8600G the clear value winner for this generation of APUs.

This is incorrect, because you do not use the APU by itself, but as a part of a system. The correct value calculation is to take the price delta of the entire system but with different APUs.

Assuming a $1K SFF build, the $100 APU price diff would come out to ~10%, which is the same perf diff between 8700G and 8600G. AMD did its pricing homework. The value proposition is the same for both APUs.

I agree both are niche, as their main appeal would be for small SFF (eg NUC), and in that space, mobile parts, eg MTL & AMD 780M parts, may have more functionality and be better value.


>...the 8600G will look great if it hits the low prices seen for the 5600G along with other platform costs getting cheaper.

That'll happen if you're willing to wait ~2 years until the 9600G's release.

5600G pricing was very stable, staying close to its $259 launch price, and only gradually dropping after the 7000 series release on Sep'22.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B092L9GF5N

Counter point: if you're going to spend $1K, even on an sff build, you can do better than the 8700g's IGPU. There are smaller 4060's and 7600s that would vastly outperform the 8700g.

 

[jeremyj_83]

And you don't have to dedicate 2 GB to the video.

On a lot of pre-built machines you cannot change the amount in BIOS. Therefore you are stuck with whatever Dell, HP, etc... set right away.

ve certainly used Visual Studio and plenty of other apps on 8 GB of RAM and integrated graphics before. I've even used Visual Studio and Windows 10 on 4 GB and even 2(!) GB of RAM years ago.

I've used Visual Studio on my old Samsung laptop from 2013 with 4GB RAM. It was set to only 64MB reserved. When it was new and on Win 8.1, I didn't run into RAM issues. Thing is a lot has changed in 10 years and by 2018 it was unusable because it booted using 90% of the RAM even on a fresh install. By and large a fresh install of Win 10 will boot using 3-4GB RAM on an 8GB system. Windows starts page swapping on an 8GB system when it is at 75% usage. Web pages have gotten A LOT more RAM intensive so you don't have to have a lot open to use another 2-3GB RAM. Now if you cannot change the dedicated RAM on your iGPU and it is set to 2GB (actually pretty common on pre-built systems) you have used 50-66% of your RAM at boot and Windows will start page swapping almost immediately. Is page swapping better than it was back in 2005, yes. However, even with a PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD it still is MASSIVELY slower than RAM.

 

[Deleted member 2969713]

On a lot of pre-built machines you cannot change the amount in BIOS. Therefore you are stuck with whatever Dell, HP, etc... set right away.

Fair enough.

I've used Visual Studio on my old Samsung laptop from 2013 with 4GB RAM. It was set to only 64MB reserved. When it was new and on Win 8.1, I didn't run into RAM issues. Thing is a lot has changed in 10 years and by 2018 it was unusable because it booted using 90% of the RAM even on a fresh install. By and large a fresh install of Win 10 will boot using 3-4GB RAM on an 8GB system. Windows starts page swapping on an 8GB system when it is at 75% usage. Web pages have gotten A LOT more RAM intensive so you don't have to have a lot open to use another 2-3GB RAM. Now if you cannot change the dedicated RAM on your iGPU and it is set to 2GB (actually pretty common on pre-built systems) you have used 50-66% of your RAM at boot and Windows will start page swapping almost immediately. Is page swapping better than it was back in 2005, yes. However, even with a PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD it still is MASSIVELY slower than RAM.

Maybe Windows 11 is different, but right now I have Edge open with 12 active tabs from Tom's Hardware and GBAtemp. According to Task Manager I'm sitting at 3.4 GB of RAM usage. Closing Edge dropped the memory usage to 2.3 GB total. I do have a DNS setup that blocks advertisements (shhhh) but still, Windows is "only" at 2.3 GB with only task manager as an active window, even with Microsoft Teams having been loaded in the background on startup.

The 2GB and 4GB systems I used were a budget Acer laptop and a "mobile desktop" (phone size form factor) in 2016. I don't remember exactly when, but I eventually got a hand-me-down Lenovo laptop with an i5 4200M and 8 GB of RAM. That may have been in 2017.

 

[logainofhades]

The platform cost is still too high. You can get an R5 5600 with an RX 6600 for a similar cost.

 

[Eximo]

If you drop down to the RX 6500 XT a little cheaper, RX6600 costs a tiny bit more. Definitely the way to go right now.