Gigabyte X470 AORUS GAMING 5 WIFI

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 42%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 92%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 43%
Speed boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (50th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 50 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 86.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics42.2% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
SystemGigabyte X470 AORUS GAMING 5 WIFI
MotherboardGigabyte X470 AORUS GAMING 5 WIFI  (all builds)
Memory24.7 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191127
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 26 '20 at 05:56
Run Duration238 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU7%
Watch Gameplay How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (50th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X-$200
AM4, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.1 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
86.9% Excellent
Memory 69.8
1-Core 151
2-Core 298
91% 173 Pts
4-Core 556
8-Core 976
92% 766 Pts
64-Core 1,424
88% 1,424 Pts
Poor: 76%
This bench: 86.9%
Great: 94%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2070S (Super)-$210
CLim: 2145 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 445.87
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
42.2% Average
Lighting 47.7
Reflection 55
Parallax 44.7
39% 49.1 fps
MRender 68
Gravity 47.7
Splatting 62.2
49% 59.3 fps
Poor: 105%
This bench: 42.2%
Great: 123%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
21GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 507
Write 490
Mixed 402
104% 467 MB/s
4K Read 44.9
4K Write 118
4K Mixed 60.6
208% 74.6 MB/s
DQ Read 387
DQ Write 363
DQ Mixed 369
279% 373 MB/s
Poor: 72% Great: 124%
Intel 660p NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB-$60
62GB free
Firmware: 002C Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 457 56 57 56 59 47 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
164% Outstanding
Read 1,354
Write 930
Mixed 827
SusWrite 122
179% 808 MB/s
4K Read 57.2
4K Write 148
4K Mixed 73.9
260% 93.2 MB/s
DQ Read 334
DQ Write 636
DQ Mixed 222
243% 397 MB/s
Poor: 94%
This bench: 164%
Great: 209%
Intel 660p NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$70
388GB free
Firmware: 002C Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1575 616 138 104 105 102 MB/s
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
206% Outstanding
Read 1,438
Write 1,579
Mixed 1,085
SusWrite 440
254% 1,136 MB/s
4K Read 59
4K Write 170
4K Mixed 80.4
282% 103 MB/s
DQ Read 639
DQ Write 906
DQ Mixed 270
344% 605 MB/s
Poor: 127%
This bench: 206%
Great: 255%
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016)-$62
792GB free
Firmware: CC26
SusWrite @10s intervals: 175 185 187 186 185 186 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
99.8% Outstanding
Read 164
Write 126
Mixed 80.7
SusWrite 184
102% 139 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.8
150% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 63%
This bench: 99.8%
Great: 114%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$25
223GB free
Firmware: CC47
SusWrite @10s intervals: 125 124 125 127 122 118 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
80.3% Excellent
Read 156
Write 120
Mixed 87.7
SusWrite 124
90% 122 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 1
176% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 55%
This bench: 80.3%
Great: 112%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 3000 C15 Series 3000 C15 Series CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 32GB
2133, 2133, 2133, 2133 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (19th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
66.6% Good
MC Read 26.8
MC Write 18.1
MC Mixed 26.6
68% 23.8 GB/s
SC Read 18.9
SC Write 18
SC Mixed 25.6
60% 20.8 GB/s
Latency 102
39% 102 ns
Poor: 66%
This bench: 66.6%
Great: 136%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-X470 AORUS GAMING 5 WIFI-CF Builds (Compare 864 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 83%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 85%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 81%
Aircraft carrier

Motherboard: Gigabyte X470 AORUS GAMING 5 WIFI - $475

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 101% - Outstanding Total price: $1,006
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair 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