AMD, Is Kyzen the next Ryzen?


The manufacturer has applied for the protection of a whole range of processors.

In the last few months, there was hardly a week that did not provide new details about AMD processors or GPUs. Lastly, the manufacturer announced with Threadripper a further Ryzen series, which is to be moved above the current top models. In addition, rough roadmaps were published for the further development of CPU and GPU architectures.

WCCFTech is now apparently stumbled upon a list, with AMD to have the trademark protection for a number of names. Not only are the already known names of future (graphic) chips – RX Vega, Threadripper, Epyc. Rather, the application contains the previously unknown names of Kyzen, Aragon, Pharos, Promethean, Zenso and CoreAmp.

Nearby is the Ryzen replaced by Kyzen. The Kyzen CPUs are expected to come on the market in 2018 and are based on the Zen-2 architecture. In another place, too, a connection can be established: with Promethean, AMD – as already at Athlon and Sempron – is attacking, in particular, the old Greece. At this point, a new product could be expected in the future. However, it can also be excluded that some of the names from the list are linked to projects that are already set.

Kyzen already, perhaps Gyzen or Fyzen? Or Zyzen? Kyn-Zen for me …

Aragon … This is the compromise between Argon and Aragorn, right?

“Thread Ripper”? “EPYC”? Really, AMD? Is it perhaps even slightly lower in the level?
This is probably due to the targeted target group.

How about Shyzen?

Intel: Kaby-Lake chips, mainboard and Optane storage as a bundle


The Optane memory, presented together with the Kaby-Lake chips, is intended to provide a high performance, but the interest is limited – not least because of the high investment costs.

With the Optane data storage, Intel is focusing on a so-called 3D Xpoint memory technology, which is supposed to achieve significantly higher performance than conventional NAND SSDs. First storage solutions on this basis were already presented in January – together with the Kaby-Lake chips. However, demand is still low, which should not be least due to the associated costs, which are comparatively high. In addition to the processor and memory, a mainboard with a 200-series chipset is also required.

Now the Chiphersteller seems to want to prepare a bundle in order to boost the sales especially with users who assemble their computer in self-government. As a kind of platform, processor, board and memory will be provided in a package. It is still unclear how exactly these packages are to be designed, which seem to come to the dealers in the third quarter. Currently there are about 130 motherboards that support the Optane memory.

Nvidia Battlebox for the first time alongside AMD CPUs

Nvidia recommends first AMD CPUs for use in a Battlebox. The VGA comes naturally only from Nvidia.

For several years, Nvidia has been working with renowned system makers to offer gaming PCs that meet a certain performance standard. Nvidia provides the hardware specifications and the system builders use these to bring appropriate systems to the man and the woman.

Now Nvidia lists for the first time AMD CPUs in connection with the Battlebox PCs.

The GeForce GTX Battlebox Essential is based on a Geforce GTX 1060 with 6.0 gigabytes of video memory, at least 8.0 gigabytes of memory and a system SSD with Windows 10. The processor can be between a CPU from the Intel Core i5 series or a CPU From the series AMD Ryzen 5.

The GeForce GTX Battlebox Ultimate relies on a Geforce GTX 1080 Ti, at least 16 gigabytes of memory and a CPU from the Intel Core i7 or AMD Ryzen 7 series.

The GeForce GTX Battlebox Essential is aimed at players who want to play games like Overwatch and League of Legends with 60 FPS in Full HD. The GeForce GTX Battlebox Ultimate is also suitable for 4K resolutions and VR games.

Comparison: Ryzen 7 1700 vs Core i7 7700k pros and cons

amd ryzen 7 1700

With the new Ryzen CPUs AMD tries to fight against the prelude of Intel and sets thereby besides attractive prices also more and more on clarification of the users.

Just recently, AMD has sent a comparison between the Intel Core i7 7700K and the Ryzen 7 1700X in a press release to make it clear to users what CPU delivers the better all-round performance.

Now you go back with a comparison of the smaller Ryzen 7 1700 against the popular Core i7 7700k. AMD divides the performance of the CPUs into 6 segments, which are designated with video coding, content creation, game streaming, 4K gaming, 1080p gaming and encryption. In each segment, AMD compares the two CPUs using benchmarks. These include, but are not limited to, Handbrake, Adobe Premiere CC, Povray, Blender, and other popular programs. The results have been applied to AMD on an easy-to-read Spider-Chart to demonstrate where the strengths and weaknesses of the respective CPUs lie.

AMD is quite honest, because, as many independent tests have shown, the Intel CPU is able to hold its own against the Ryzen, especially in the field of gaming. However, this only applies to 1080p gaming or even lower resolutions. Intel’s core processors currently offer more “data throughput” in games, so that when the graphics card is low, more FPS are printed on the paper. But if you load the graphics card more, for example by 4K gaming, the advantage of Intel shrinks to a small advantage.

The Intel processor can therefore only offer true advantages in gaming areas in which particularly high framerates larger than 150 FPS are required. These include, for example, E-Sports games, which are often played in low resolutions because of high frame rates. Typical casual gamers or high-end gamers, however, hardly benefit from it.

Away from the gaming, the Ryzen 7 1700 stands out clearly from the Intel i7 7770k. Especially with the particularly important point “content creation” falls the Intel CPU by 29% against the Ryzen processor back. AMD’s lead is also evident in the other areas, as the Ryzen 7 1700 can benefit from its 8 cores and 16 threads, just like the Ryzen 7 1700X. AMD’s CPU thus offers twice as many cores and threads as Intel in the approximately same price class.

AMD is with the CPU at the price is currently minimally attractive, because the Ryzen 7 1700 costs with about 315 euros well 30 euros – about 10% – less than the Intel CPU. Both CPUs are equipped with a free multiplier so that both models can be used for fast overclocking. Unlike the Intel CPUs, all Ryzen models have a free multiplier, so you do not have to pay attention to a “k-model” like Intel.

Both CPUs have their advantages and it seems, especially the Ryzen 5 1600 and Ryzen 7 1700 among the users well, because both CPUs count now beside the 7700k of Intel to the top-demanded models in the price comparisons.

For the comparisons the AMD in its duel of the CPUs pulls the following details are made:

Tests in AMD Performance Labs on March 3, 2017 on the following systems: Socket AM4: Ryzen ™ 7 1700 Processor with NVIDIA GTX 1070 6 GB Graphics Card 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 RAM, Windows 10 RS2 Operating System, Graphics Driver 21.21. 13.7633 :: 12/11/2016 Socket 1151: Z270 SLI, Core i7-7700K Processor with NVIDIA GeForce GTX

1070 8GB graphics card, 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 RAM, Windows 10 RS2 operating system, graphical driver 21.21.13.7633 :: 12/11/2016. Compared to the Ryzen 7 1700, the Core i7-7700K reached 73% of the video coding performance in handbrake and 87% of the performance in Adobe Premiere CC, so the average video coding performance compared to the Ryzen 7 1700 is 80%. Compared to the Ryzen 7 1700, the Core i7-7700K achieved 70% of its performance in POVRay, 74% of its performance in Blender, and 69% of its performance in Cinebench – the average performance of the Ryzen 7 1700 is 71% ,

In simultaneous game streaming, de Ryzen lost 7 1700 a single image loss of less than 1% during the Core i7-7700K 18% of the total images. In the case of the VR performance in the context of benchmark tests for the games “Price of Freedom”, “Serious Sam” and “Raw Data”, the single image loss for the Ryzen 7 was 1700 as

Also the Core i7-7700K less than 1%. The results are based on estimates. Performance may vary when using the latest drivers. PC manufacturers may choose other system configurations, so the results may differ. RZN-37

** This information represents the views of third parties at https://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/luke-hill/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-6c12t-cpu-review/10/, http: // www .kitguru.net / components / cpu / luke-hill / amd-ryzen-7-1700x-cpu-review / 10 / http://www.pcgamer.com/amd-ryzen-5-review/ about secure data encryption

And 1080p gaming and premium gaming. These test data of third parties were not confirmed by AMD. AMD is not obligated to update third party information and can not be held liable under any circumstances for damages resulting from your reliance on such third party content.

AMD Ryzen 9 ‘Threadripper’ with 16 cores and 32 threads

More and more information about the upcoming Ryzen 9 models is available. The rumors gather more and more and the announcement of a powerful processor with 16 cores and 32 threads at 155 watts TDP is to go out. There is a lot of evidence that new AMD processors will be presented at the Computex 2017 (end of May). We have put together the latest information for you.

Even though AMD is still cautious with the release of information, some facts are confirmed. The fact that there should be a 16-core CPU, AMD has already given in conversations with other editorial offices. The X399 platform is conspicuously often in conversation. Now a table with possible specifications of the Ryzen 9 series is dived, which is to be enjoyed with caution. However, the fact that there will be 14 core models is very unlikely.

The Ryzen 9 1998X and 1998, respectively, could be properly described. That there will be a 12-core.variante is quite possible. We also believe the announcement of an 8-core version is realistic. This is close since AMD can unite several DIEs on one chip and will do so in all probability. This is demonstrated by the newly shown “EPYC” processor, which will replace the “Opteron”. The EPYC is a CPU with 4 DIEs, which offer a total of 32 cores. This means that there are four 8-core chips that are combined in one package.

Well, there goes the journey, more and more cores and corresponding tread through SMT. Actually logical, as the degree of production is no longer large. Think the max. At 6-8nm should be close, if overhauls.

In the umbrella, “if you want to have more power, you only have to increase the number of cores” because you can not increase the pro-clock performance any further. Of course, this can not be continued forever.
I guess there will probably be a new technology to be found in the next few years …

Not Kaby Lake, AMD Ryzen Processors be the Consumer Favorites

According to the survey results, the latest AMD processors are Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5 managed to bring the level of consumer satisfied is very high. Even Ryzen 5 listed as the processor with the highest level of user satisfaction since 2011, when the release of Intel’s Sandy Bridge processors.

A survey conducted by 3DCenter show as much as 83.9 percent of users Ryzen 5 responded positively to the existence of such processors. The figure is the highest since 2011, when it released the Intel Sandy Bridge processor which has a very significant increase in performance over the previous generation. Meanwhile, satisfaction levels Ryzen 7 are directly under Sandy Bridge which amounted to 74.6 percent.

The data show AMD has managed to grab the attention of PC users this year. Because the Intel Kaby Lake had a positive response that is much lower than Ryzen. Survey 3DCenter said Kaby Lake by consumer acceptance of just 12 percent.

Seeing the data, Intel should immediately take steps to maintain its position as the number one PC processor manufacturers.

Here are the survey data from 3DCenter:

Skylake-X, the first intel core i9 come in the summer

According to recent news, Intel will separate Kaby Lake-X and Skylake-X, which are based on the same platform: Kaby Lake-X remains as its mainstream counterpart to Core i7, Skylake-X will be more of processor cores called core I9 clearly.

It would be a surprise, but it would fit: While the Kaby Lake-X alias Core i7-7740K and 7640K have been benchmarking for several weeks and months, it is still quiet to the Skylake-X. Recently, it was announced that they will not only offer six, eight, or ten cores, but Intel will also release twelve kernels for the desktop, presumably in response to Ryzen. A new name goes along with it.

More than four cores = Core i9

From the Anandtech forum, which has proven to be very reliable in this information, the messages – which refer to a picture with a German description – are coming, that Skylake-X will provide the first CPUs for the new Core i9 family. The idea of a Core i9 is not new. Already in 2009, the first six-core processors with the codename Gulftown should be christened in Core i9, later in the year the branding at Sandy Bridge-E was once again highlighted – but always discarded.

Intel Skylake-X as Core i9 and Kaby Lake-X as Core i7

Matching the new message, the image returns all the names. Core i9-7920X is the flagship with twelve cores and 24 threads, which offers 16.5 Mbyte L3 cache and 44 PCIe lanes. The clock rates for this model are not yet known since it was postponed at short notice. So it should not appear already in June, but only to follow in August. Its TDP, however, is rated at 160 watts, again, a gain of the well-known 140 watts.

In June, three Skylake-X. The core i9-7900X will have ten cores, the base clock is 3.3 GHz. In turbo mode, up to 4.3 GHz is reached, while the special mode Turbo 3.0 introduced with Broadwell-E for load on only one core/thread provides up to 4.5 GHz. The model with eight cores, Core i9-7820X, offers the same clock rates in the turbo mode, but the base clock is at 3.6 GHz. In the entry with six cores on the Core i9-7800X, there are 3.5 GHz in the base and 4.2 GHz in the turbo. The Turbo 3.0 is no longer available here, just as there are only 28 PCIe lanes – the procedure is known from the past generations when entering the high-end world.

Skylake-X is a small Skylake-SP

The special feature of Skylake-X compared to Kaby Lake is the separation in architecture. While Kaby Lake-X is based on the mainstream models Kaby Lake, Skylake-X is derived from the real, new high-end server processor Skylake-SP. This is accompanied by a quadruple the L2 cache to 1 MB per core, the quad-channel memory interface is also there, maximum for DDR4-2.666. Also, AVX-512 is to be in the game, although this is still unconfirmed. Kaby Lake-X remains at 256 KB L2 cache per core and dual-channel DDR4-2.666.

Octa-core processors not mean faster than Quad-Core

When you want to buy an Android smartphone, there are many criteria you should look at. One of them is the processor.

Octa-core and quad-core are commonly processors used by smartphone vendors. Usually, it is used to simplify the technology so it is easy to understand. However, sometimes this just makes the vendors not completely honest with customers.

For example in terms of processor. Just because the octa – core processor has 8 cores, that does not mean it’s always better than quad – core processors. Just like a camera. Having a bigger resolution does not promise better photo results. A more in-depth explanation of the core of this mobile processor can be seen in the following article:

In the midst of fierce competition of gadget vendors to get customers, we are often crammed with technical terms that are not easy to understand. Have you ever gone to a mobile store and the guard said, “It’s quad-core, octa-core, RAM is 2GB?” Do you understand or pretend to understand what those words mean? Or, you think more and more “cores” mean better? Let’s see this article.

In the computer world, all data is processed by a single component named processor. Therefore, he often compared with the brain in humans. Processed data has a variety of forms, ranging from user instructions and software that is running.

All computer devices, including laptops, tablets or phones you are currently using to read this article have a processor. Especially for mobile phones, usually the processor is placed with other components in one place, so commonly called System on Chip (SoC). Usually, the processor name is inseparable with its speed when we buy a computer. Often, do not you hear the 1.2GHz or 2.5GHz processor and so on.

As the main unit that functions as a data processing center, or in lay language is the “brain” of a device, the processor is often used as a reference to measure the capabilities or performance of a device, including mobile devices.

Manufacturers compete with each other to deliver high-speed processors with more cores, as more and more core processors are used and the faster the speed, the performance of a device will be better. Is that right? Is it true that mobile devices require more processor cores in it?

The history of multi-core processing

The term core or core in the processor begins when multi-core processing systems are found by computer experts. In fact, multi-core processing systems have been around for more than 10 years. It all started when the processor makers for the server successfully implemented a multi-core processor architecture to improve performance on a server processor.

Unlike the previous generation, processors that use multi-core processing systems have faster data processing capabilities and lower power. Why is that? Because each task assigned to the processor can be done in parallel by each of its cores so that data processing can run faster. Imagine when you have many tasks, then have friends to share the burden.

In line with the development of technology, The number of cores on the processor is also growing from the previous two only core (dual-core) and now into eight cores (octa-core).

Not only on server computers or PCs, multi-core processing systems have also been present in mobile devices. The advantages of the system are very much in line with what is required by mobile devices, namely higher processing speed and lower power consumption.

Dual-core, quad-core, or octa-core?

Most consumers are usually not too familiar with various terms in the computer world. They just want a device that is comfortable to use and has a performance as fast as possible. For this reason, the manufacturers of mobile devices are competing to highlight the processor with a growing core and faster processing speed.

But really the more the core on the processor, the faster the speed of the data process, then the higher performance?

In theory, yes. The more processor cores are used, the more units that can be used to perform data processing in parallel. The higher the speed of data processing, the faster the data is processed that leads to the increase of mobile device performance.

If the analogy is simple, the more people work, of course, a job will be quickly completed, and the sooner the worker will work, the job will be completed faster too. Workers in terms of multi-core processing are the core processor.

Comparison of dual-core processor performance with quad-core

It is important to know, more and more processor cores also have an unavoidable side effect, namely the increasingly wasteful power consumption. Indeed, the use of multi-core processing systems does reduce power usage, but that is when compared to the use of dual processors that do not have multi-core processing system.

For example, devices using an octa-core processor have a much lower power consumption than using eight separate processors without using multicore processing systems.

More and more processor cores mean more power is used. This factor is now a major challenge for vendors because mobile devices certainly have a limited battery capacity. For that, Some manufacturers are using a new concept called big.LITTLE system.

The system works by combining two types of processor cores that have different roles, ie one type of high-performance, power-intensive processor core and another low-performance, yet power-efficient processor core.

If you ask for help from a solid friend who eats a lot to lift 100kg load, but if you only lift 10kg burden you ask for help with thin-skinned friends with small portions of food. And another processor core with the low performance but power efficient. If you ask for help from a solid friend who eats a lot to lift 100kg load, but if you only lift 10kg burden you ask for help with thin-skinned friends with small portions of food. And another processor core with the low performance but power efficient. If you ask for help from a solid friend who eats a lot to lift 100kg load, but if you only lift 10kg burden you ask for help with thin-skinned friends with small portions of food.

Comparison of dual-core processor performance up to quad-core

By combining both types of processors, a mobile device is able to work more flexibly and power saving. The workings of the big.LITTLE system uses the concept of adaptation; When the device is in an idle or silent state, then the processor used to work is a processor with the low performance but efficient power, while when the device is in a busy condition, then the processor used is a high-performance processor but more extravagant power.

The big.LITTLE concept has been widely used in various SoCs, such as Exynos7 Octa from Samsung and MT6595 from MediaTek.

Octa-core is better than dual-core?

As we wrote earlier, that theoretically more and more core processors are used, the better the performance. Unfortunately, it is just a theory, and theories can be wrong when applied in the field.

In fact, the performance of a device is influenced by many factors, and the number of cores from the processor used is just one of many factors.

Call it the iPhone 6 that uses dual-core processors, but its performance can beat Android devices that use octa-core processor.

Why?

Behind the number of core processors and their speed, there are several factors that greatly affect the performance of a device. These factors include memory bandwidth, latency, and the ability to execute a thread.

All these factors affect the performance of a device that is calculated by the unit of instruction per cycle (IPC). The bigger IPC, the faster performance of a device.

Comparison of iPhone 6 performance and flagship Android phone

IPC is rarely mentioned in the specification table of a device. But that’s what Apple has been pursuing all along. They do not want to follow in the footsteps of other competitors, such as MediaTek and Qualcomm who only pursue the addition of the number of processor cores without considering its IPC.

The result, the iPhone 6 is superior in terms of performance than Android devices that use octa-core processors.

In addition to the number of IPC, the optimization of the operating system and other supporting software is also very influential on the performance of a mobile device. Ever, right, you bought an Android phone that was initially very fast but over the course of the day, it feels more slowly?

In the case of iPhone 6 above, Apple does have its own advantages. In addition to designing their own SoC, They also create their own operating system, so they can freely optimize the performance of each of their devices with ease.

Unlike Apple, most Android devices use SoCs made by other companies (such as Qualcomm and MediaTek). Its operating system also uses the base operating system made by Google, so that device manufacturers like LG, Sony, Samsung, and others can not freely optimize their various devices. This will certainly affect the performance of a device. Its operating system also uses the base operating system made by Google, so that device manufacturers like LG, Sony, Samsung, and others can not freely optimize their various devices. This will certainly affect the performance of a device. Its operating system also uses the base of the operating system made by Google, so device manufacturers like LG, Sony, Samsung, and others can not freely optimize their various devices. This will certainly affect the performance of a device.

The more cores that a processor has does not merely mean it is better. More cores will be better only if the software used on the phone can take advantage of that many cores. There are many factors that determine the performance and efficiency of the processor, Like the architecture of the processor itself.

The most important thing that determines the efficiency of processor cores is software. For example, mobile games are usually optimized to take advantage of multiple cores to provide the best performance. However, not all games can take advantage of many cores.

Not all apps are designed like games. In fact, most apps are made to only use one or two cores only. Even so, the processor will still activate all the cores, and this is actually wasting the phone battery.

Another thing that affects the performance of the processor is the design. Currently, there are some companies that make processors for Android phones. However, there are only 2 main aristors, ARM and Intel. These two companies have different concepts regarding how a processor works best.

Many processor manufacturers such as Qualcomm, Samsung, NVIDIA, and MediaTek use ARM design as a reference when creating processors. While Intel makes the processor based on its own architecture.

ARM Currently

industry .ARM is becoming a leader in the mobile industry. They work with various mobile processor manufacturers. ARM is also a pioneer of big.LITTLE ideology. Aristektur big.LITTLE means, a processor will have 2 quad – core processors.

One quad – core processor focuses on delivering high performance, while one other processor works to save power while not delivering equally good performance. Typically, these two processors do not work at the same time.

Octa-core vs. Quad-core

Octa means “eight”. So, technically, quad – core processors with big.LITTLE architecture can also be called octa – core processors. However, it is not claimed to be an octa – core because the eight does not work at the same time.

That’s why, No vendor of smartphones that advertise smartphones they use processors “octa-core real”, that is, when the eight cores in the processor to work at the same time. Funnily enough, there are many apps and games that can run well on quad – core processors.

In theory, octa – core processors work better than quad – core processors. However, if an app can not optimize the eight existing cores, then more cores will not perform better.

In addition to the number of cores, Another thing that distinguishes the processor performance is the pair of processors used. For example on the ARM Cortex-A processor range, each has a different performance. This is the line of processors in the Cortex-A line, from the best performers to the less good: A72, A57, A53, A17, A15, A9, A7 and A5.

MediaTek MT6592 which was first announced in 2013, has 8 ARM Cortex-A7 that can run at the same time, with speeds between 1.7GHz to 2GHz.

Meanwhile, NVIDIA Tegra 4, also announced in 2013, is a quad-core processor that uses the ARM A15 core. Although Tegra 4 is a quad-core processor, because it uses cores with better quality, it provides better performance than MT6592.

This proves that not all octa-core processors are better than quad-core processors.

How to choose the best smartphone?

Processor architecture is a complex issue. There are several factors that determine the quality of the processor on your phone, for example, the manufacturing process. In addition, the processor is not the only element that determines the performance of your device.

So, you should not use jargon like “quad-core” or “octa-core” to determine the quality of smartphone performance. Instead, consider how the performance of a whole device.

Before buying a new phone, we recommend you search for reviews related to the phone. Therefore, You can know how the phone is performing. Sometimes, it will be compared to its competitors.

AMD Zen Quadcore, Raven Ridge, and Other Mainboards Price

A benchmark entry provides new insights into AMD’s Zen processors with Vega graphics.

By the end of 2017 AMD wants to bring its Zen processors with Vega graphics unit into the trade. The Raven Ridge named APU is now appearing for the first time in the benchmark database SiSoft Sandra . There, the combi-processor is operated as AMD Mandolin Raven. It has four cores and clocks between 3.0 and 3.3 GHz. The benchmark entry apparently comes from the mobile version of the APU, which has 2 MB of L2 cache and 4 MB of L3 cache installed.

However, it is not yet clear how powerful the Raven Ridge graphics unit will be. Presumably, the integrated Vega GPU contains 11 compute units with 704 shaders. According to the benchmark entry, the graphics cores operate at 800 MHz. As with previous AMD APUs, the speed of the built-in RAM will have a large impact on the speed of graphics calculations, as the processor and graphics unit share the RAM of the system.

AMD Ryzen Mainboard check: Prices, chipsets, important information

Each Ryzen processor from AMD also needs a motherboard with the new CPU socket AM4. We will present you all Ryzen mainboards from 80 to 330 Euro and show the differences of the chipsets.

The hype about AMD’s Ryzen CPU (all info) is unbroken, the first dealers are already ” sold out “. But what is the advantage of a fast processor without a suitable subset: an AM4 motherboard. At present, there are more than two dozen Ryzen mainboards available from 80 to 330 Euro. Micro-ATX boards with the mainstream chipset AMD B350 like the Asrock AB350M-HDV , The Asus Prime B350M-A and the MSI B350M GAMING PRO .
Hardcore gamers are better off to an AM4 motherboard with the top chipset X370. The cheapest model is with the Biostar RACING X370GT5 already from 140 euros to have, While the 170 euro expensive Asus Prime X370-PRO already offers a lot of mainboard for money. For top boards such as the MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium are already more than 300 euros are due. The following picture gallery provides a quick overview of all Ryzen mainboards including price check:

ASUS PRIME B350M-A
The Asus motherboard with AMDs B350 chipset is available for around 100 euros

MSI X370 XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM
Belongs with 360 euros to the most expensive AM4 motherboard: MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium with AMD X370 chipset

ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4
From € 145: ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4

Biostar B350GT3
The Biostar B350GT3 is one of the lowest priced AM4 mainboards with 115 euros

ASUS CROSSHAIR VI HERO
ASUS CROSSHAIR VI HERO is one of the top motherboards for AMDs Ryzen

Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming 5
The gigabyte motherboard GA-AX370 Gaming 5 with AMD’s X370 chipset is available for nearly 250 euros

ASRock Fatal1ty X370 professional gaming
Belongs to the most expensive Ryzen mainboards with around 340 euros: ASRock Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming

MSI B350 TOMAHAWK
150 Euro costs the MSI B350 TOMAHAWK

Biostar X370GT7
For nearly 240 euros, the Biostar X370GT7 is already equipped with the top AMD X370 chipset

ASUS PRIME B350 Plus
The ASUS PRIME B350 Plus costs only 120 euros

Gigabyte GA-AB350M Gaming 3
One of the few Ryzen motherboards in the micro-ATX format: Gigabyte GA-AB350M Gaming 3 for a cheap 120 Euro

Biostar X370GT5
Cheapest X370 board: The Biostar X370GT5 costs only 160 euros

ASrock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4
For around € 210: ASrock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4

Gigabyte GA-AB350 Gaming 3
The Gigabyte GA-AB350 Gaming 3 is available for almost 150 Euros

MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon
MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon is nice

ASRock X370 Taichi
300 Euro you have to go for the ASRock X370 Taichi

Gigabyte GA-X370 Gaming K7
The Gigabyte GA-X370 Gaming K7 with RGB lighting costs almost 300 euros

ASrock X370 Killer SLI
cost point for the ASrock X370 Killer SLI: around 200 euros.

ASUS Prime X370-PRO
you have to pay for the ASUS Prime X370-PRO.

MSI B350M Mortar
The MSI B350M Mortar micro-ATX motherboard is already available for $ 100

Biostar X370GT7
The AM4 top model from Biostar, the X370GT7 for comparatively cheap 240 euros

Gigabyte GA-AB350 Gaming
For £ 130 to have: Gigabyte GA-AB350 Gaming

ASRock AB350 Pro4
The ASRock AB350 Pro4 costs only 130 euros

X370 mainboard for the Ryzen
The price for the Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming K5 has not yet been fixed

When CPU attached with a heat pad not thermal paste

A guy shared his story about Fun Experience:

I was working on a laptop today with the new i7 7700k Intel chip. The system would jump to 99c when you ran pretty much anything. Then it would cool back down again at idle.
I opened the case to re-paste and look for issues and what did I find? The CPU was attached with a heat pad not thermal paste! I removed the pad and applied IC Diamond paste and now the little bugger is running low 80s when under load which is normal for that chip. Its idles are down in the mid 30s.
I wont share the brand because accidents happen. I have told the company since the system was new. Hoping to hear back for its owner something like an apology. Well see.

– T. Spetter

Haven’t heard of that before, might be an accident? Definitely not automated by machine. But who the hell in their right mind would do that manually?

Company has been around so he is guessing it was a new guy. It had a slight bit of thermal paste next to the heat pad but no contact because the pad was thicker. It was a new one for me. I have never seen it before.

Then, the company was so upset when they found out what happened they gave the owner a gears of war 4 key and apologized profusely. Awesome customer service.