Checking the actual performance of the Ryzen 5 1600 with non-"x" overclocking configurations.
Checking the actual performance of the Ryzen 5 1600 with non-"x" overclocking configurations.
The VRM configuration matches the gaming K4 setup exactly. Even though it might seem like a cheat to claim a 6+3 phase when it's actually (3+3)+3, it still performs well at the hardware level. The K4 supports LLC and offset voltage settings, whereas the Pro 4 doesn't (it has gone through nine BIOS updates, so I'm unsure why these features are missing). I wouldn't completely rule out overclocking, but proceed carefully since the BIOS settings won't match real-world performance under load. Make sure to verify the load voltage with CPU-Z to be safe.
It matches what I expected. It's odd they don't list an LLC option in the bios. Does the information on that board provide anything unique compared to others? Usually, upgrading BIOS features is constrained by the ROM capacity, so perhaps they either omitted it or kept other functionalities to gain support for LLC.
I suspect there was a deliberate choice made to avoid affecting sales of the B350 gaming K4 & X370 Pro 4, both featuring the same power delivery configurations but offering superior BIOS overclocking features, priced $30 or $40 more.
Why would you incur that additional cost just for SLI support when the BIOS options are the same?
It’s certainly annoying, but it’s an $80 board—the only one under $100 with dual M2 slots, and clearly the top VRM configuration in its price range, so something had to change.
MSI has followed the same path with the B350 PC Mate compared to the gaming 3,5, Plus series.
All generations of PC mate are on my "do not recommend" list nonetheless. Seems this board will follow suit too. Indeed, it's affordable, and what's needed for the cost. Suitable for someone who doesn't plan to overclock. However, as an overclocking choice, I won't suggest it at all. Not that I'd normally do so, but occasionally...
Rogue Leader: It's really not wise to tell people to follow any safety guidelines. We've seen many users damage their recent Ryzen and Intel chips this way. It might seem inexpensive, but not everyone can afford to lose a $100-$400 processor... Who would pay that much for a Ryzen? The main idea is they're affordable and easy to replace. You could get a R7 1800x for $200, check it out here: http://www.microcenter.com/product/48548...-processor. It's actually about $170 after the discount on the motherboard. The 2700x is a scam, and the 1800x performs almost like a 2700x once it's overclocked. The main challenge is the VRMs on cheap boards, which can burn out quickly under heavy stress. You can see my attempts to overclock the R7 1700 here: It's likely the board will fail during a stress test like prime95 AVX because the VRMs exceed their temperature limits.
If there had ever been a candidate facing immediate bans after just one "incident," this would definitely be it.
This data is nearly, if not exactly, as foolish as the person claiming there were seven core Intel processors and even more risky.
Rogue Leader: It's really not wise to tell people to follow any safety guidelines that could cause damage. Many users have already suffered burns from Ryzen and Intel processors due to such actions. It seems like a cheap option, but not everyone can afford to risk damaging a $100-$400 processor... The idea of spending up to $400 on a Ryzen is questionable. The main goal is affordability and ease of replacement. A R7 1800x for $200 is available here: http://www.microcenter.com/product/48548...-processor. In reality, it's about $170 after the $30 discount on the motherboard. The 2700x model is overpriced and only comparable to a higher-end 2700x once it's overclocked. The key advantage of these processors is their low cost and disposability. This makes them appealing for AMD users, but the real challenge lies in the VRMs on budget boards, which can fail quickly under stress. I've personally experienced this with my R7 1700 overclocking attempts: The biggest concern is the risk of board failure during high-stress tests like Prime95 AVX. I've seen it crash under such conditions. It's a personal experience, but it's clear that reliability matters more than just the initial cost. For most users, these chips are not worth the effort. The 1800x is discontinued, and while you might have found one for $200, it's no longer available. Compared to the stock 2700x, which is faster and better optimized, the 1800x isn't a significant upgrade unless you're willing to pay a premium. In short, it's not about cooking good; it's about making smart choices. Avoid giving unsound advice on overclocking—learn proper techniques or stay informed.
It seems the board is likely to fail under the prime95 AVX stress test due to VRM temperature limits. Based on past experiences shared by seasoned users, running AVX versions of Prime would reveal a lack of understanding of thermal and stability principles, contradicting common overclocking best practices. For steady-state thermal testing or applications like Realbench, non-AVX versions should be used. Prime95's non-AVX Blend mode works well for memory configurations with XMP or custom settings.
Rogue Leader: nobspls: Who in their right mind is going to pay $400 for a Ryzen? The whole point is they are cheap an expendable. $200 max. You can get a R7 1800x for $200 see: http://www.microcenter.com/product/48548...-processor It is really effectively $170 because you get $30 off on the mobo. The 2700x is ripoff and the 1800x is basically par with a 2700x once overclocked. But the whole point of being cheap and expendable is why it is worth the effort and risk for going AMD. Cook it and cook it good! Just like good cooking, you OC just right and you won't be making char coal. The biggest hurdle is probably the VRMs on cheap mobos will fry long before you Ryzen destroys itself. You can see my efforts to overclock my R7 1700 here: Most likely the board will crash under prime95 AVX stress test because the VRMs hit there temp limits. Who would? Me. I paid $500 for an 1800X on launch day and I don't regret it for one second. Yep telling people to overpay for stuff is good advice. If anyone that is no qualified it should be you. Rogue Leader: The 1800X is discontinued, sure you may have been able to get one for $200, but not anymore as its sold out. It is not discontinued, and I drive to the store and pick right up as the link I've shown you. No lies. Less than $200 effectively. Rogue Leader: They may be expendable for you, but for many of our members they are not. Right now their 2 highest line processors are over $200 (2600X and 2700X). Either way overclocking it until it beats the crap out of your board is not how to do it either. I read your thread, and thats all you're doing is beating on stuff until it breaks. You don't have experience doing it properly and have gotten lucky so far. It is a $60 board, and a $140 processor. The whole point is to get it cheap and beat the crap out of them. Overpaying for that extra maybe 5%-7% for the latest 2600x/2700x, at nearly 45% more money is simply insanity. If a $200 processor is not expendable then over paying for 260x/2700x is a total nonstarter. Rogue Leader: You should not be giving any advice to anyone on overclocking. Learn to do it properly or keep your methods to yourself. You will not be damaging other users equipment with your bad advice here. I do not know where you get the idea that you are the only authority to overclocking, and only your can give advice. Overclocking is all about getting lucky. It is the playing the chip lottery. Everyone knows this is how you play, you have to gamble to win. The risk is low, the costs of going cheap on the mobo and getting cheap ryzen is how to mitigate your risks and not overcommit. And if they crap out, return the board within 30days of purchase, if the CPU does not overclock you liking exchange in the 30 day period. Got to beat the hell out of them early so you can return/exchange the flakes fast. Rinse and repeat. The hassle is real, but the payoffs is worth it. This is how to maximize your dollars. Protecting the pocket book is far more important worrying about wearing out the gear at a faster rate. You over dramatize calling it "damaging". Heck I still got my Sandybridge from 2011 overclocked to 4.2 Ghz. Stuff still kicking and stable as it ever was, and my R5 1600 an R7 1700 are 100% stable, the normal load operating temps, and voltages are within reason and expectations. I've done this overclocking stuff since the days of the of my first PC, an 80286 and over clocked the thing to 12mhz from 8mhz, you know that famous turbo button put it to real use. Sure the memory was cooked after 4 years, but I was ready to move on to the 386 by then. The strategy is simple, buy the previous year stuff or whenever they are cheap, overclock the hell out of them, and profit.
Advice shared by users is clear: encouraging people to pay more is sensible. If someone lacks the expertise, they should be the ones making decisions. It seems the message was repeated—never suggested overpaying for anything, and Ryzen isn’t a budget-friendly option under $200. The 2700X model is currently priced below $200, which is realistic.
Discontinuation matters too. The 1800X is no longer being produced; AMD ceased manufacturing them once they shifted focus to the 2xxx series. Even if you find a used unit at home, it won’t be restocked because it’s discontinued. The link provided confirms this status.
Pricing strategies are key. A $60 board with a $140 processor aims to offer value and undercut competitors. Paying 5–7% extra for newer models like the 2600x/2700x is not justified unless you can afford it. The 2700X adds two cores, but the 2600X still delivers faster performance out of the box. Many can’t afford $200 processors, making overpayment risky.
Not everyone can justify spending $200. The numbers seem inconsistent—higher prices don’t always mean better value. The 2xxx chips have improved overclocking capabilities and yield rates, making them more reliable. AMD is clearly improving quality. If you can find a first-gen chip at a reasonable price, it’s a smart move, but supply will dwindle soon.
Overclocking isn’t just luck—it’s about strategy. It involves understanding chip limitations, managing costs, and being prepared to return faulty gear within 30 days if overclocking fails. The risks are real, but the rewards can be significant.
Your approach overlooks practicality. While it’s true some people succeed, it’s not a universal solution. The advice here leans toward caution, emphasizing informed decisions over blind spending.