Is the Ryzen 2200g worth getting in late 2018?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
E

Elf_Knight

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
650
1
11,015
I want to build a gaming PC for £300-£400. I was thinking of getting a PC with these specs:

AMD Ryzen 2200g APU

8GB DDR4 2400 mhz HyperX ram (2x4gb)

Asrock B450M Pro Micro ATX motherboard (so I can upgrade to Ryzen 3000 processors, it also has 4 ram slots so I can get 16gb of ram cause that is super expensive)

Crucial 500gb ssd (because I want only SSD storage for my games and programs to boot faster

Corsair 550 watt power supply

Cooler Master Micro ATX case

I will use the stock heatsink and upgrade to the Ryzen 2700x in the future but first I plan to get a GTX 1070 in a few months when I can afford it then sell my 2200g and save up for the 2700x and get 8 more gb of ram and maybe another SSD.

I would much rather forgo an internal hdd because a 1TB one is £40 and for that price I could get a £30 240gb ssd but that is only room for a few games so I'd prefer to spend a bit more for a bigger ssd and just have one drive like that.

I might get an RX 570 4gb or a used GTX 1070.

Can the 2200g still hold up in late 2018? I have watched videos of it achieving 30 fps in 720p-1080p even 60fps in cases like Battlefield 1 at 720p. Can it play Battlefield 5 if I turn down the resolution scaling and settings?

Otherwise I was thinking of getting the AMD Athalon 200ge (as a temp CPU) and then getting a used RX 570 4gb since they go for £100 on Ebay while saving up for an RTX card and better CPU.

What would be my best plan? I could still do the Athalon 200ge + RX 570 for £400 ish and there are videos where the Athalon achieves very good fps with hardly any bottleneck.

Many thanks in advance!
 
Solution
Darkbreeze
If you get a Sandy or Ivy bridge platform, it is only a better option if you get an i7 from that gen. Otherwise, the lack of cores is simply too much of a hindrance with modern applications and games. If you can get a good working board, with some kind of guarantee along with an i7-2600, i7-2600k, i7-3770 or i7-3770k, for a very good price, then it might be worth it at least temporarily. Better than a Ryzen 3 anyhow, EXCEPT, like I said, if you plan to get a Ryzen 5 or 7 at some point.

If you have to pay over 200 bucks for the CPU and motherboard then it just makes more sense in most cases to go with the Ryzen platform since IT at least has a future. The older platform should not be considered a long term option, which for most people...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Darkbreeze

Darkbreeze

Retired Mod
Jun 24, 2014
80,408
7,630
176,790
If you go with the 2200g now, I doubt you will want to upgrade to the 2700x in "a few months" considering that the Zen 2 CPUs are tentatively expected to be released sometime in March or April. It would make a lot more sense to upgrade to that newer architecture than it would to upgrade to any current existing generation of CPU at that time.

If you are looking for as cheap a build as possible right now that is going to be even remotely viable for use with that GTX 1070, then you are going to probably want to save a little more money and go with at least a Ryzen 5. That 2200G is less capable than a 2nd gen Sandy bridge i7 from 7 years ago. It works as a placeholder, or with a less capable graphics card like an RX 580 or GTX 1060, but it's a bit on the weak side with a 1070 and is definitely going to be a significant bottleneck, but it might be one you can live with for a while.

Problem is, Ryzen still has poor single core performance compared to any Intel CPU from the last six or seven generations, and is only competitive when it comes to price OR if you get a model with many cores and threads like the Ryzen 5 or 7 models. Even then it is only worthwhile if you are using applications or games that are well optimized for multithreading. Anything that runs better with strong single cores is going to suffer with a Ryzen 3 installed if you have a high end graphics card. Maybe even, to some degree, with a mid tier card.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

Elf_Knight

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
650
1
11,015


I was also thinking of picking up an Intel i5 3330 for £32 from a PC store here called CeX that have an online store that sells used hardware though I can also find them on ebay for £30 or so. They are quad core i5's. I can get 8gb DDR3 1366 mhz ram for £25. Should I get one stick and run it in single channel to be as cheap as possible or get 2 sticks of 8gb? I could also get two sticks of 4gb ram for 8gb for only £20. I could build an i5 3330 8gb ram system for around £150 and then easily fit in a used GTX 1070 or RX 570. Would that be a good idea? Should I get an i5 4590 instead? Or should I just wait for Zen 2? I know Zen 2 is coming in Jan but that is just the announcement and I am not sure when they will be out for sale. I just wanted a gaming PC as fast as possible hence why I was willing to go Ryzen cause for the price you only lose 10-20% fps and the Ryzen 2600 is actually the best CPU for the price to performance ratio right now. But yeah I dunno. I sadly can't afford Intel and Intel keep upgrading their chipset every time. I was stuck on LGA 1150 for the longest time but don't have that PC with me right now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Darkbreeze

Darkbreeze

Retired Mod
Jun 24, 2014
80,408
7,630
176,790
If you get a Sandy or Ivy bridge platform, it is only a better option if you get an i7 from that gen. Otherwise, the lack of cores is simply too much of a hindrance with modern applications and games. If you can get a good working board, with some kind of guarantee along with an i7-2600, i7-2600k, i7-3770 or i7-3770k, for a very good price, then it might be worth it at least temporarily. Better than a Ryzen 3 anyhow, EXCEPT, like I said, if you plan to get a Ryzen 5 or 7 at some point.

If you have to pay over 200 bucks for the CPU and motherboard then it just makes more sense in most cases to go with the Ryzen platform since IT at least has a future. The older platform should not be considered a long term option, which for most people means it's not a good option. But it is AN option. An i7 from those generations WILL play well enough with practically any modern GPU card to be viable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
E

emeralds1000000

Proper
Jun 29, 2018
88
3
135
If you really want to play battlefied V , look at the Xbox one X Gold rush edition that comes with BF V and now there is a special offer in EU for it (around 400 euros)

Gaming PC cant beat that machine at low budget
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Darkbreeze

Darkbreeze

Retired Mod
Jun 24, 2014
80,408
7,630
176,790
Xbox and other consoles don't even come close by comparison to practically ANY gaming configuration. Low end CPU or not.

It comes with an 8 core CPU at only 2.3Ghz, and a very weak custom graphics solution.

Consoles are not even remotely up to the performance of even a half decent entry level gaming PC.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

emeralds1000000

Proper
Jun 29, 2018
88
3
135


sorry you are wrong on this one , The Xbox one X is the same performance of a desktop PC with GTX 1060 and an i5 running at stock speed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Darkbreeze

Darkbreeze

Retired Mod
Jun 24, 2014
80,408
7,630
176,790
Yeah, an old and slow i5. Not a modern i5. I'm not wrong. I've been building and testing systems for a VERY long time, over 30 years, so you go ahead and believe that those Jaguar cores are in any way compatible with the performance of a modern Kaby or Coffee lake i5.

Even PC gamer indicates that the Xbox one X ONLY competes on the level of an i3-8100, which is what they used on their "cheap gaming PC" build.

https://www.pcgamer.com/heres-how-microsofts-xbox-one-x-compares-to-a-pc/
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Supernova1138

Supernova1138

Illustrious
Mar 22, 2011
5,340
54
37,690


The GPU on the One X is about equivalent to a midrange card like the 1060, but the CPU is still incredibly weak, which is why most console games are still locked to 30FPS on the One X where the GPU should be capable of doing 1080p 60FPS easily on any game, pushing higher framerates would result in a horrible CPU bottleneck in a lot of titles. About the only thing the One X has going for it is that it can sort of do 4K gaming (with a lot of caveats) and if you have a 4K TV and want the games to not look like complete crap, then it might be the cheapest option, though performance still wouldn't be great.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

Elf_Knight

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
650
1
11,015
Hey! I decided that I will get either a Ryzen 3 1200 or a Ryzen 5 2600 if I can afford it. I am tempted to build a PC with an i5 3330 and a GTX 980 because I can get a 980 for £160 and an i5 3330 for £30 and the whole PC with the i5 and GTX 980 would be £300 approximately.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Darkbreeze

Darkbreeze

Retired Mod
Jun 24, 2014
80,408
7,630
176,790
An i5 from that generation is going to suffer, much as a Ryzen 3 would, when paired with that graphics card. It will work, but you are going to have reduced performance from what you'd see with a Ryzen 5 or at least an i7 from the same generation, or newer, as the i5-3330. But there are worse configurations out there so it's a starting point at worst. Maybe you can find another CPU in an i7 model like the i7-3770 or 3770k later on.

Personally, I think the Ryzen 5 would be the much better choice, and THAT at least has an upgrade path later down the road. None of the older Intel platforms have any upgrade path once you get to that i7, you're just stuck with a whole new platform if you want to go anywhere from there.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom