Hi Hilbert. Just to point out one thing, this is a miniITX board, so how can it have a PCIex16 and possibly a PCIex1 also ? :) Mini-PCIe, maybe.

Thanks Hilbert. Been waiting for news like this. I can't wait to go Ryzen-ITX and I really would prefer not to go Biostar but I might anyway if Gigabyte uses the B350. Biostar has announced an X370 ITX board and I'd opt for that and risk the instability of ... well, Biostar. The Biostar board doesn't have mini-pcie for wifi, but hey, that's what USB ports are for right. That might be how they are able to go with the X370 in ITX form factor. I'm more excited after reviewers stopped drinking the Intel Kool-Aid and have pointed out that even in the legacy 1080p gaming bechmarks, the Ryzen CPUs, all of them, are actually providing excellent performance and keeping pace with all but the 7700k in most games including Battlefield, while utilizing less than 50% CPU . That clearly shows that it's a programming issue. Look at the same gaming benchmarks, and if you calculate where the Ryzen would be if it was utilizing the same amount of high CPU, it would actually be blowing Intel away, even the 7700k. I'm in, but I'm sold on tiny quiet ITX, so I have to wait.

I'm waiting for more mATX boards to become available, especially X370 mATX boards. So far I have seen one, I think, and the rest are B350 boards.

So, both MSI and Gigabyte are releasing ITX boards with the B350 chipset. Not that I'm complaining, but why? Why not the X300, which is meant for ITX? It seems to me the X300 is a more simple chipset, which means it should be easier to work with. But, perhaps using the X300 puts limitations on the manufacturers, such as having built-in wifi, maybe an additional USB 3.x controller, or more M.2 slots. From what I recall, the main advantage of the X300 was USB 3.1 ports, which personally I don't care about much.