Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 26%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 80%
Aircraft carrier
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (39th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 61 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 73.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics18.8% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive99.2% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
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 VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS  (all builds)
Memory26.3 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20200617
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJul 01 '20 at 05:34
Run Duration356 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU8%

 PC Performing below expectations (39th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X-$410
AM4, 1 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
73.2% Very good
Memory 66.6
1-Core 134
2-Core 262
84% 154 Pts
4-Core 426
8-Core 953
83% 690 Pts
64-Core 2,038
137% 2,038 Pts
Poor: 82%
This bench: 73.2%
Great: 96%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-Ti-$110
CLim: 1346 MHz, MLim: 1350 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 451.48
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
18.8% Very poor
Lighting 67.3
Reflection 45.7
Parallax 65.4
18% 59.5 fps
MRender 53.5
Gravity 67.5
Splatting 39.9
19% 53.6 fps
Poor: 18%
This bench: 18.8%
Great: 21%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Adata Ultimate SU800 1TB-$100
885GB free (System drive)
Firmware: R0918B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 328 410 380 342 357 344 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
99.2% Outstanding
Read 463
Write 416
Mixed 373
SusWrite 360
91% 403 MB/s
4K Read 33.9
4K Write 82
4K Mixed 49.6
158% 55.2 MB/s
DQ Read 218
DQ Write 182
DQ Mixed 126
114% 175 MB/s
Poor: 77%
This bench: 99.2%
Great: 124%
Corsair Force 120GB
100GB free
Firmware: 2.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.7 0 0 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (0th percentile)
1.14% Terrible
Read 16.2
Write 40.1
Mixed 126
SusWrite 2.3
11% 46.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.3
1% 0.33 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 1.14%
Great: 57%
Adata XPG SX900 128GB-$103
57GB free
Firmware: 5.0.1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 124 144 122 133 135 121 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
63% Good
Read 437
Write 159
Mixed 221
SusWrite 130
52% 237 MB/s
4K Read 24.5
4K Write 43.7
4K Mixed 27.7
96% 32 MB/s
DQ Read 200
DQ Write 157
DQ Mixed 168
129% 175 MB/s
Poor: 50%
This bench: 63%
Great: 82%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$17
388GB free
Firmware: KC45
SusWrite @10s intervals: 117 123 123 122 124 123 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
73.5% Very good
Read 134
Write 133
Mixed 67.5
SusWrite 122
84% 114 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 73.5%
Great: 78%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB-$89
170GB free
Firmware: 3.AAD
SusWrite @10s intervals: 59 59 58 56 57 57 MB/s
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
33.8% Below average
Read 60.1
Write 60.9
Mixed 41
SusWrite 57.6
40% 54.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.8
138% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 33.8%
Great: 43%
SanDisk Cruzer Glide 16GB
11GB free, PID 5575
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 4.3 5 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.9 MB/s
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
13.1% Very poor
Read 35.6
Write 4.2
Mixed 9
SusWrite 4.5
13% 13.3 MB/s
4K Read 4.8
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1.2
123% 2.63 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 13.1%
Great: 16%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
G.SKILL F4 DDR4 3200 C14 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
72.5% Very good
MC Read 28.4
MC Write 24.9
MC Mixed 26.5
76% 26.6 GB/s
SC Read 20.1
SC Write 17.2
SC Mixed 24.4
59% 20.6 GB/s
Latency 110
36% 110 ns
Poor: 66%
This bench: 72.5%
Great: 184%
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TUF GAMING X570-PLUS Builds (Compare 9,699 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 105%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 125%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 113%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 76% - Very good Total price: $829
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-9600K $195Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $230Crucial MX500 250GB $49
Intel Core i5-9400F $155Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super) $170Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-9700K $370Nvidia RTX 2070S (Super) $510Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $50
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $42Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $76SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $75SanDisk Extreme 32GB $46
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $85G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $681SanDisk Extreme 16GB $24
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback