The Ryzen 5 2400G CPU has four cores, eight threads and 3.9 GHz maximum clock, bringing an integrated Vega 11 GPU, that is part of the most recent graphics chips family from AMD. Is it a good choice for a budget gaming PC without an independent video card? Check it out!
The Ryzen 5 2400G, along with the Ryzen 3 2200G, is one of the first Ryzen CPU with Vega integrated GPU (iGPU.) The main differences between these two models are the presence of the SMT technology on the Ryzen 5, which makes it offer eight threads while the Ryzen 3 has four threads, and the model of the iGPU, since the Ryzen 3 2200G brings Vega 8 (eight compute units) and the Ryzen 5 2400G has the Vega 11 (11 compute units) GPU. Both the CPUs use 14 nm manufacturing process, have a TDP of 65 W, and are unlocked for overclocking.
These CPUs are compatible with the AM4 motherboards launched last year, with the first Ryzen processors. However, you may have to update the motherboard BIOS in order to achieve compatibility.
While the Ryzen 5 2400G is similar to the Ryzen 5 1500X (both of them have four cores and eight threads,) they have different structures. Ryzen CPUs are based on CCX (core complex) modules, and each CCX has four processing cores, 512 kiB of L2 cache for each core, and 8 MiB of shared L3 cache. On the Ryzen 5 1500X, there are two CCX, each one with two disabled cores, so this CPU has a “2+2” structure. On the Ryzen 5 2400G, there is only one CCX, with the four cores enabled and only 4 MiB of L3 cache, so it has a “4+0” structure.
The Vega 11 integrated GPU present on the Ryzen 5 2400G has 704 cores and clock rate up to 1,250 MHz.
The CCX, the iGPU and other components (memory controlled, I/O unit) are connected inside the CPU using the AMD Infinity Fabric bus. The CPU has eight PCI Express 3.0 lanes for a dedicated graphics card, plus eight lanes for general use slots (used mostly for PCI Express SSDs,) two SATA-600 ports, four USB 3.1 gen 2 ports, one USB 3.0 gen 1 port, and one USB 2.0 port. Obviously, the platform offers more ports, controlled by the chipset.
Figure 1 shows the package of the Ryzen 5 2400G.
Figure 1: package
In Figure 2 we have the package contents: the Wraith Stealth cooler, a manual, two case stickers, and the CPU itself.
Figure 2: package contents
Figure 3 unveils the Ryzen 5 2400G processor.
Figure 3: the Ryzen 5 2400G CPU
In terms of price, the Ryzen 5 2400G is close to the Core i5-8400. In our roundup, we compared these two models, also including the Ryzen 5 1500X, the Ryzen 3 2200G, the Core i3-8100, and the Ryzen 3 1200.
As one of the highlights of the Ryzen 5 2400G is its integrated video, we ran the games with two configurations: first, with the integrated video, and then we disabled it and installed an entry video card, the GeForce GT 1030. The Ryzen 3 1200 and the Ryzen 5 1500X were, of course, tested only with the independent video card.
We decided to do this way, so we can compare both iGPU and CPU power. Besides that, we could compare the performance of the integrated Vega 11 to the Vega 8’s and to a “real” low-cost video card’s.
Let’s compare the main specs of the reviewed CPUs on the next page.
In the tables below, we compare the main features of the CPUs included in our review.
| CPU | Cores | HT/SMT | IGP | Internal Clock | Turbo Clock | Core | Tech. | TDP | Socket | Price |
| Ryzen 5 2400G | 4 | Yes | Yes | 3.6 GHz | 3.9 GHz | Raven Ridge | 14 nm | 65 W | AM4 | USD 170 |
| Core i5-8400 | 6 | No | Yes | 2.8 GHz | 4.0 GHz | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | 65 W | LGA1151 | USD 192 |
| Ryzen 5 1500X | 4 | Yes | No | 3.5 GHz | 3.7 GHz | Summit Ridge | 14 nm | 65 W | AM4 | USD 175 |
| Ryzen 3 2200G | 4 | No | Yes | 3.5 GHz | 3.7 GHz | Raven Ridge | 14 nm | 65 W | AM4 | USD 100 |
| Core i3-8100 | 4 | No | Yes | 3.6 GHz | – | Coffee Lake | 14 nm | 65 W | LGA1151 | USD 130 |
| Ryzen 3 1200 | 4 | No | No | 3.1 GHz | 3.4 GHz | Summit Ridge | 14 nm | 65 W | AM4 | USD 110 |
Below you can see the memory configuration for each CPU.
| CPU | L2 Cache | L3 Cache | Memory Support | Memory Channels |
| Ryzen 5 2400G | 4 x 512 kiB | 4 MiB | Up to DDR4-2933 | 2 |
| Core i5-8400 | 6 x 256 KiB | 9 MiB | Up to DDR4-2666 | 2 |
| Ryzen 5 1500X | 4 x 512 KiB | 2 x 8 MiB | Up to DDR4-2666 | 2 |
| Ryzen 3 2200G | 4 x 512 kiB | 4 MiB | Up to DDR4-2933 | 2 |
| Core i3-8100 | 4 x 256 KiB | 6 MiB | Up to DDR4-2400 | 2 |
| Ryzen 3 1200 | 4 x 512 KiB | 2 x 4 MiB | Up to DDR4-2666 | 2 |
During our benchmarking sessions, we used the configuration listed below. The only variable was the CPU being tested, besides the motherboard, which had to be replaced to match the different CPUs.
Hardware Configuration
- Motherboard (Coffee Lake): Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
- Motherboard (Kaby Lake): Gigabyte AORUS Z270X-Gaming 7
- Motherboard (AM4): Gigabyte AB350M-Gaming 3
- Memory: 16 GiB, two DDR4-3200 8 GiB Geil modules configured at 2666 MHz
- Boot drive: Samsung 960 EVO 500 GiB SSD
- Video Card: GeForce GTX 1080
- Video Monitor: Philips 236VL
- Power Supply: Corsair CX600
Operating System Configuration
- Windows 10 Home 64-bit
- NTFS
- Video resolution: 1920 x 1080 60 Hz
Driver Versions
- NVIDIA video driver version: 388.13
- AMD video driver version: 17.40.3701
- Intel video driver version: 15.65
Software Used
- 3DMark< /a>
- Blender
- Cinebench R15
- CPU-Z 1.81
- Handbrake
- PCMark 10
- WinRAR 5.5
- CS:GO
- Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
- Dirt Rally
- GTA V
- Hitman
- Mad Max
- Rise of the Tomb Raider
- The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Error Margin
We adopted a 4% error margin. Thus, differences below 4% cannot be considered relevant. In other words, products with a performance difference below 4% should be considered as having similar performance.
PCMark 10
PCMark 10 is benchmarking software that uses real-world applications to measure computer performance. We ran the standard test, which included opening applications, web browsing, writing, photo editing, video chat, video conversion, and rendering. Let’s see the results.
On the 3DMark 10 benchmark, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G performed similarly to the Core i5-8400.
3DMark
3DMark is a program with a set of several 3D benchmarks. Time Spy runs a Direct X12 simulation; Fire Strike runs a “heavy” DirectX 11 simulation, and Sky Diver also measures DirectX 11 performance but is aimed at average computers.
On Time Spy, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 166% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but it was 9% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
On the Fire Strike benchmark, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 168% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but it was 16% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
On the Sky Diver benchmark, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 130% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 7% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
On the Cloud Gate benchmark, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 50% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, and it was 14% faster than the GeForce GT 1030.
On the following benchmarks, we tested both with the integrated GPU and with the independent video card, but as the results were the same, we are only publishing the data with the video card.
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 is based on the Cinema 4D software. It’s useful to measure the performance gain obtained by the presence of several processing cores while rendering heavy 3D images. Rendering is an area where a bigger number of cores helps a lot because usually, this kind of software recognizes several processors (Cinebench R15, for example, can use up to 256 processing cores).
We ran the CPU benchmark, which renders a complex image using all the processing cores (real and virtual) to speed up the process. The result is given as a score.
On Cinebench R15 CPU benchmark, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 15% slower than the Core i5-8400.
Blender
Blender is an image and movie rendering software that uses all the threads of the CPU. We used the program to render a heavy image of a project named Gooseberry Benchmark. The graph below shows the time the CPU used to finish the image, so the less, the better.
On Blender, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 20% slower than the Core i5-8400.
CPU-Z
On its current version, the well-known hardware identification software CPU-Z comes with a benchmarking tool, which measures CPU performance for one core and for all available cores.
On the single thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 8% slower than the Core i5-8400.
On the multiple thread benchmark, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 7% slower than the Core i5-8400.
Handbrake
Media Espresso is a video conversion program that uses the graphics processing unit of the video engine to speed up the conversion process. We converted a 1 GiB, 1920x1080i, 23,738 kbps, .mov video file to a smaller 320×200, H.264, .MP4 file for viewing on a smartphone. The results below are given in seconds, so the lower the better.
Here the Ryzen 5 2400G was 25% slower than the Core i5-8400.
WinRAR
Another task where the CPU is very demanded is on file compacting. We ran a test compacting a folder with 8 GiB on 6.813 files to a file, using WinRAR 4.2. The graph below shows the time taken for each test.
In WinRAR, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 26% slower than the Core i5-8400.
On the gaming test performance charts, we bring data from the average (green bars) and minimum (red bars) framerate, but we are comparing only the averages.
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (or simply CS:GO) is a very popular FPS, launched in august 2012, that uses the Source engine, which is DirectX 9. We benchmarked it playing the “Inferno” map against bots, in Full HD and graphic settings as “medium”, measuring the framerate with FRAPS.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.
On CS:GO, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 93% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 27% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided is an action RPG with FPS elements, launched in August 2016, that uses the Dawn engine, being compatible with DirectX 12. We tested it using the benchmark included in the game, with DirectX 12 enabled, Full HD, and graphics options as “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.
On this game, with integrated video, th
e Ryzen 5 2400G was 157% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 14% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Dirt Rally
Dirt Rally is an off-road racing game released in April 2015, using Ego engine. To measure performance using this game, we ran the performance test included in the game, in 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) resolution and image quality configured as “medium” and MSAA off.
The results below are expressed in frames per second (fps).
In this game, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 173% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 26% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Grand Theft Auto V
Grand Theft Auto V, or simply GTA V, is an open-world action game released for PCs in April of 2015, using the RAGE engine. In order to measure the performance on this game, we ran the performance test of the game, measuring the framerate with FRAPS. We ran GTA V at Full HD, with all image quality set as “normal” and MSAA off.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.
In GTA V, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 89% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 40% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Hitman
Hitman is an action/stealth game, launched in March 2016, that uses a DirectX 12 compatible version of the Glacier 2 engine. To measure performance in this game, we ran the benchmark in it, measuring the framerate with FRAPS. We ran this game in Full HD, with DirectX 12 enabled, with image quality set as “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.
On Hitman, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 150% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 7% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Mad Max
Mad Max is an open-world action game launched in September of 2015, using the Avalanche engine. In order to measure the performance using this game, we ran its intro, measuring the framerate with FRAPS three times. We ran the game with image quality set as “normal”.
The results below are expressed in fps and they are the mean between the three collected results.
On Mad Max, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 133% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 26% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Rise of the Tomb Raider is an adventure/action game launched in January of 2016, based on Foundation engine. In order to measure the performance using this game, we ran the benchmark included on it, using Full HD resolution and graphics quality set to “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second.
Also on Rise of the Tomb Raider, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 188% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 26% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is an open-world RPG, released in May of 2015 and based on the REDengine 3 engine. In order to measure the performance in this game, we walk around at the first scene of the game, measuring the framerate with FRAPS three times. We ran the game at Full HD (1920 x 1080), with image quality set to “medium”.
The results below are expressed in frames per second and represent the arithmetical mean of the three collected results.
In this game, with integrated video, the Ryzen 5 2400G was 214% faster than the Core i5-8400 with integrated video, but 12% slower than the GeForce GT 1030.
As we mentioned on the first page of this article, the Ryzen 5 2400G CPU has unlocked clock multiplier, which means you can overclocking it just by changing its multiplier, as long as the motherboard has this feature.
We were able to configure the CPU to run stable at 3.95 GHz (100 MHz reference clock and x39.5 multiplier), with the original voltages. It may be possible to reach higher frequencies if you “play” with the available adjusts.
It is clear that this CPU has a good overclocking potential. But keep in mind that the overclock capability depends on pure luck, since two CPUs of same model can reach different maximum clocks.
The Ryzen 5 2400G proved to be a competent CPU in tasks that use several simultaneous threads. In these tasks, it was similar to the Ryzen 5 1500X and almost as fast as the Core i5-8400. On the other side, its integrated GPU is way faster than the iGPU used on the Intel processor.
However, when we compare the performance of its Vega 11 integrated video to the Vega 8 found on the Ryzen 3 2200G, we see that the difference in games was not expressive. Comparing the Vega 11 to a low-cost video card (GeForce GT 1030,) we also have more performance on the independent video card.
But the main point to answer is if this CPU has a good cost/benefit ratio. On our tests, we conclude that the Ryzen 3 2200G is a better choice if you have a limited budget, since it is cheaper, and performs almost as good as the Ryzen 5 2400G.
On the other hand, if you need a CPU with good performance for general tasks and you don’t want to spend your money on a video card, the Ryzen 5 2400G is a good option since it is almost as fast as the Core i5-8400, but has a superior iGPU, which allows some casual gaming.
Recommended for you
Last update on 2023-04-02 at 06:06 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
Leave a Reply