Maybe $60... Once it gets to $50, then it's equal to the Athlon 3000G (though, available price seems to be $55 now, a little higher than its $50 release price).The 2300x needs to be no more than $50 to make any kind of sense.
It makes sense for a budget gaming-centric build, and that's about it. I mean it's still a quad core Zen+ with a decent clock... it would drive an entry level 1650 or RX 570 nearly as well as a $150 chip. So if you're on a real budget, you could do worse for $70. Saves you some cash to put towards that dGPU, which is where you're going to see the most difference anyway.Maybe, though the 2200g is a little more expensive than the 1600AF.
That said, I guess if that ~$70 price is accurate, it's a weird tradeoff, $20 more to lose a little bit of boost speed, but get integrated Vega 8 graphics.
Seems like the 2300X finds itself in a weird position to try to slot itself into. But then if it goes lower still, it intrudes on Athlon 200/220/240/3000GE territory. Though, of course, the Athlons have Vega 3 graphics, vs requiring an add-in video card.
Where do you see 1200's for $50? They're getting rare. That aside, the 2300X offers: Better clocks (both stock and when overclocking), better RAM support, and Zen+.Well, the Ryzen 3 1200 really already intrudes onto 3000g pricing, both being around $50 maybe plus change.
Really the 2300x doesn't make sense to exist.