The AMD Ryzen 7 4700G holds its own against the Intel Core i9-10900K in initial benchmarks


Level 6
Oct 1, 2019
Initial benchmarks for the Ryzen 7 4700G are here, AMD's upcoming 65 W Renoir desktop APU. The Ryzen 7 4700G has been shown to offer upwards of 25% more performance than the Ryzen 7 4800H while being competitive against the likes of the Intel Core i9-10900K.

AMD is believed to be releasing the Ryzen 4000G series this month, which it has based on its Renoir architecture. The upcoming APUs have been subject to countless leaks over the last few months, including the 8 core Ryzen 7 4700G. Most recently, ITCooker published CPU-Z details confirming that the APU is capable of running at over 4.7 GHz and 1.425 V while retaining its 65 W TDP. The same overclockers have also published initial benchmarks for the Ryzen 7 4700G, and they put the APU in a good light.

The Ryzen 7 4700G has a 4.4 GHz boost clock, so all these results were achieved with a moderate overclock of between 100 MHz and 200 MHz. Additionally, the APU was tested in an ASRock B550 Taichi motherboard with 16 GB of DDR4 RAM running at 4,333 MHz with CL16 timings in dual-channel mode.

According to the screenshots below, the Ryzen 7 4700G scored 217 in Cinebench R15 Single at 4.64 GHz and 0.720 V. This score puts the Ryzen 7 4700G ahead of the Core i9-9900KS by a point and five ahead of the Core i9-9900K. It is also eight ahead of the Ryzen 9 3950X and 7 behind the Core i9-10900K.

The Ryzen 7 4700G also scored 2,306 in the multi-core portion of CB R15 when running at the same frequency and voltage. This score dropped to 2,235 when the APU was running at 4.54 GHz and 0.704 V. This means that the Ryzen 7 4700G is between 300-400 behind the Core i9-10900K despite having two fewer cores and four fewer threads. Additionally, the Core i9-10900K has a 125 W TDP to the 65 W of the Ryzen 7 4700G, although the former can consume up to 250 W for upwards of 56 seconds by default.


Level 12
Aug 22, 2013
Finally an apu with r7 amount of cores but why not put some hbm on die ?
DDR latency sucks for consumer workloads such as gaming and bandwidth is worse too.
And a few more compute cores won't hurt as well
Might not get materialized anytime soon. Low latency ddr ram is still a niche market and low on supplies. People don't care what memory they get as long as it remains cheap. only a few enthusiastic ones with deep enough pockets care for such a thing. May be the upcoming ddr5 may change things, let's hope.