my VRM's are pretty frosty most of the time even with my (actually light) overclock, then again the heat sinks on them are pretty effective. A Prime B350 board is perfect if you want to build a more Ryzen economic system that still is very nice however I would recommend the Fatal1ty AB350 or Strix B350-F a little more for the superior built quality and audio, however the PCI slot with the Prime is nice for legacy parts, the Killer X370 is superb too

Ya it is a pretty good CPU especially when using just the iGPU in the system and also i find that people using a 2nd or 3rd gen i5 with a 750 Ti would have no problem with this CPU alone because the iGPU in the 2400G already out performs the 750 Ti and really just from this parts list alone is already super affordable https://pcpartpicker.com/list/zn3Rkd which does include a monitor and a keyboard/mouse.
The one other thing i like is AMD does send you a 2 core Ryzen chip for upgrading your bios so you can use these processors without any problem.

Don't get me wrong, the 2400G is a great CPU and it's IGPU is definitely far improved over the old A-series APU IGPUs........ but you really shouldn't be so quick to underestimate the GTX 750 TI..... in a few games the 2400Gs IGPU can come close to its performance, but it never manages to outperform it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtFxq0nR9Bo

TClanWolf i am sorry but graphs and still images in a video i won't really trust and come on the only video's he has with actual gameplay is the Intel chips oh and maybe 1 video with a Ryzen 5 chip.
Also lets not forget that 8100 has a dedicated GPU in it and let us not forget that there is a lot of people in the world that still own's processors such as a i5 2400, 3470, 4460 and would be wanting to build a whole new system which that person could sell his old system with the 750 Ti for about 300$ - 400$ and then buy a RX 570 for their new system.

Oh ya TClanWolf just would like to mention as well that the 2400G can be overclocked as well unlike the i3 8100 so CPU and GPU performance would go higher as well.
Also lets say someone is just starting to want to get into PC gaming the 2400G would be the better choice cause while the i3 8100 might be cheaper but in reality when you add in the GTX 750 Ti it would actually become more expensive cause the average price for a used 750 Ti is between 100$ to 150$ and yes i include the shipping and only from North America cause China usually scams people.

@Ecks30..... I get it, the 2400G is definitely going to be a better value for some, but the 750 TI is still outperforming it, that's not the only benchmark that shows this, that's just the first one that popped up in search, the 2400Gs GPU doesn't outperform a 750 TI, and it doesn't match it..... in some games the 750 TI climbs as high as 60% and higher than the 2400G.... there's a clear gap between the two in some games, while in other games they are far closer in performance.

I have done that search as well and really that is the only video that comes up cause after that video was for the 2200G and remember like i said a lot of people are still using 2nd and 3rd gen i core processors and sure maybe a few that is on a 4th gen which most people on YouTube will be using a 6th, 7th or 8th gen i core processor in their tests and again for the 2400G the CPU and iGPU can be overclocked as well.
I just did a search all are just images and graphs and still using an i3 8100 which i do not see one video showing someone with

An i3 2100/3220 or i5 2400/3470 because remember i said building a newer system and you can say "oh they can upgrade to the i3 8100" but really if you think about it they could build that Ryzen system instead and sell their old system to get a GTX 1050 Ti or a RX 570 as well which the performance would be a lot higher as well so that person could be playing their PUBG on higher settings instead and get roughly 35 to 50 fps (cause that game is still not optimized).

I don't disagree at all.... the 2400G is an excellent value, it's got a great IGPU that can hold you over until you can afford a dedicated GPU, and when later paired with something a bit more substantial like a GTX 1050 TI or RX 570, it would be a killer combo.

Are you for real bragging here right now?

TClanWolf I will only believe he has that once he verifies his system on here because really i could say something like i have a "core i9 7900X with a Asus TUF x299 Mark 2 32gb DDR4 G.SKILL Aegis Thermaltake SP-1200M with a MSI Radeon RX Vega 56 in Crossfire" just to try and make myself look cool so really him saying that is not that believable without proof.

So somehow you seem to think we care what you're running and that by listing your rig it somehow validates your opinion and makes you a "serious gamer"? LOL This guy! XD

The least he could do is Validate it lol. Not sure what he's trying to prove though.

You KNOW he's probably mumbling to himself right now "They're just jealous!" xD

The R7 1700 is NOT bottlenecking the gtx 1080ti at all, in no game does it reach 100% usage... do NOT mistake worse performance due to poor optimization with worse performance due to a CPU limitation(bottleneck).

@GreedyMuffin If the CPU isn't being pushed to 100% usage(or very close to it) on any of its cores, then it's NOT bottlenecking, the performance difference is due to other reasons... I've seen the benchmark comparisons and the reviews, the CPU is simply NOT being utilized properly, none of the cores are even being pushed past 50% usage... Psycho is entirely correct here, it's got nothing to do with a bottleneck and EVERYTHING to do with poor optimization in the game, and in the Windows OS itself

@TClawWolf
Just to point out, Windows 10 has been optimized for Ryzen as much as it has been for intel( I say intel, because their last 8 generation of CPUs have 95% the same optimization and really architecture to work with, just scaled up with slightly more instructions).

The problem is that Ryzen's pipeline is brand new and games take 3-5 years to be made, plus their engines as well and AMD started shipping Ryzen to developers in late 2016 early 2017, so add a minimum of 3 years for games that were started in 2016/2017 to be optimized for Ryzen and that means that until late 2019 or early 2020 even if Zen2 and Zen3 are better than what intel has to offer, chances are that games will still run better on intel.

Very few developers will start optimizing for a brand new/newer architecture once they are well into the development of the game.

It's not that they're not good cards.... they are, it's just that gamers don't seem to be interested in them and aren't buying them, check the Steam hardware surveys, and you'll see how tiny the percentage of gamers using AMD GPUs is.....crypto miners have been the main source of income for the Radeon division lately, and that's drying up fast.
That's why I'm unsure how much longer AMD will remain interested in producing GPUs..... they can't just keep making them on hopes and dreams alone!

Well better if they stay at GPU market. If not, Nvidia will have no competition

I completely agree Archterror, any market that limits you only to one option isn't a market at all..... It's not that I don't want AMD to continue making GPUs, I definitely do, they make some excellent GPUs..... I'm just not sure how much longer they'll be able to afford to stay in the GPU game.

The 2400g competes with a gt 1030. The 1050 ti is faster. He probably chose to get the igpu because it cost the same as the 1400.

but the r5 1400 is soldered and the 2400g uses toothpaste...

That "toothpaste" doesn't matter, it is low end chip. It isn't targeted to overclockers or anyone seeking high end performance. It is made for average Joe who is on budget and won't give it more than 1050Ti or 1060, for which you don't really need overclock. And they still do ok overclocking wise.

well the problem is that it reaches quite high temperatures with the stock cooler at stock clock speeds, let alone when you overclock and that's with perfect air-flow XD

You guys do know i have this CPU as a test thing because i was originally thinking of building a system with it and also was planning on originally selling my old system with the 1050 Ti and get a RX 570 instead.
Besides the performance for the 2400G with a 1050 Ti from what i have seen does go pretty well together but now ever since they brought out the new 1151 (300 series) boards and the i5 8500 i am just going to go for that and sure it might cost me about 60$ more but it is better performance for what i pretty much end up doing.

instead of always clicking on for parts on the "Can i run it" selection which is why it shows it is not verified and really the second i do build up my system it will be verified as well.

The only way you would be getting an 80% performance boost if you were using something from like 9 years ago like a AMD Phenom II X6 1055T as an example or something similar to that in which that person might have already upgraded to the 1st gen Ryzen chips or went for a 6th/7th gen i core processor instead.
When upgrading anything in your system it is better to go for the sweet spots which is actually between 20% and 40% because lets say in 10 years they make something that would be an 80% boost that person would still go for the older tech

because it would also cost a lot cheaper and not be too different because lets say in 10 years they come out with 6th gen Ryzen's why spend so much money when you could spend about half the price for one gen before and lose like what 7% performance because this is the way the market is when there is more and more people out there buying used parts and really a friend of mine recently bought a GTX 780 for 300$ Canadian which performs like a 3gb GTX 1060 which at the time when he bought the card the 1060 was almost 600$.

So really a good upgrade isn't waiting like 10 years it is more like waiting every single 4 years to upgrade really unless you're the type that wants to always be updated then go nuts it is your money anyways but for me when it comes down to building or upgrading i always wait at least every second generation just so i know i am getting what i paid for and also i do end up selling my parts and/or system afterwards for a lot less value so the next person can use something well worth it for them.

The problem is that hardware improvements have stagnated so that Nvidia and AMD and Intel do NOT invest in new technology, but keep on beating the same architectural design with minor upgrades every generation... and now they plan to make a bigger gap between generations...

30% is when the performance difference begins to be noticeable unless the task you do takes days... so yeah...

All of these companies says "30%" but really when you watch a bunch of people not working for Intel/Nvidia/AMD test out these newer parts you can tell the gap isn't that far away because going back to the Phenom II X6 1055T that processor lasted till like what 2017 before it started to become a bottleneck for most of the newer GPU's out there and that was like what a 2008 processor so honestly i find the performance difference between a 1700X and a 2700X will be at most 15% which isn't that bad but not really an upgrade from a 1700X more like an upgrade

I agree that it slightly hits performance but his 8GB RAM and especially the 950 2GB need to be upgraded first before ANY cpu upgrade should be considered

Finally, someone who is NOT satisfied with 10% performance improvements.... 80% should be the minimum performance increase per upgrade and really per generation for the same money...

Well to be fair, CPUs don't improve or even need to improve as much as GPUs in the same time frame. Also there are professional speedrunners and as I learned from one, some skips are framerate bound meaning you need to be at or above a certain number of FPS for the trick to work so I can understand why they would need every little boost.

As for me, I have no reason to need something like that.

The problem is you are thinking games only... XD

Because that's mainly what I do and because that is what these processors are mainly intended for. Mainly.

Nah no CPU is meant for gaming, their marketing maybe, but the CPUs and all hardware is meant for work.

As I've said people that actually work with hardware(or anything else in any other sphere) do NOT need marketing, people who are to be entertained need marketing.