MSI A75A-G55 (MS-7695)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 38%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (44th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 56 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 36.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics2.11% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive34.6% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
SystemMSI MS-7695
MotherboardMSI A75A-G55 (MS-7695)  (all builds)
Memory2.2 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20130201
Uptime0.3 Days
Run DateAug 03 '19 at 02:00
Run Duration143 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing as expected (44th percentile)

Actual performance vs. expectations. The graphs show user score (x) vs user score frequency (y).

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A4-3400 APU-$80
P0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.7 GHz
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
36.4% Below average
Memory 62.6
1-Core 41.3
2-Core 67.5
38% 57.1 Pts
4-Core 61.6
8-Core 70
9% 65.8 Pts
64-Core 66.7
4% 66.7 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 36.4%
Great: 44%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 6410D
MSI(1462 7695) 512MB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.947.0.0
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
2.11% Terrible
Lighting 2.43
Reflection 3.23
Parallax 1.88
2% 2.51 fps
MRender 3.29
Gravity 1.53
Splatting 3.61
2% 2.81 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 2.11%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB-$175
33GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXM05B0Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 93 58 45 58 38 60 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
34.6% Below average
Read 191
Write 153
Mixed 136
SusWrite 58.8
30% 135 MB/s
4K Read 12.9
4K Write 38.1
4K Mixed 20.4
66% 23.8 MB/s
DQ Read 29.6
DQ Write 88.8
DQ Mixed 32.5
32% 50.3 MB/s
Poor: 68%
This bench: 34.6%
Great: 116%
Lexar USB Flash Drive 128GB
23GB free, PID a838
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 56 40 35 57 56 56 MB/s
Performing as expected (49th percentile)
24.3% Poor
Read 73.2
Write 27.7
Mixed 8.5
SusWrite 50
47% 39.8 MB/s
4K Read 2.7
4K Write 0.7
4K Mixed 1.1
71% 1.5 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 24.3%
Great: 37%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial BLT4G3D1608DT1TX0. 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 1333 MHz clocked @ 667 MHz
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
25.4% Poor
MC Read 8.6
MC Write 8.5
MC Mixed 9.6
25% 8.9 GB/s
SC Read 4.6
SC Write 5.7
SC Mixed 7.6
17% 5.97 GB/s
Latency 120
33% 120 ns
Poor: 29%
This bench: 25.4%
Great: 64%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical A75A-G55 (MS-7695) Builds (Compare 11 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 19%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: MSI A75A-G55 (MS-7695)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 50% - Above average Total price: $80
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, UserBenchmark's data exposes the youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback