MSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 17%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (83rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 17 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 69.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics11.7% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive81.1% 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.
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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7C52
MotherboardMSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)  (all builds)
Memory4.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191107
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 25 '21 at 05:45
Run Duration130 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X-$102
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
69.3% Good
Memory 70.4
1-Core 114
2-Core 220
74% 135 Pts
4-Core 387
8-Core 426
53% 406 Pts
64-Core 418
26% 418 Pts
Poor: 46%
This bench: 69.3%
Great: 77%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI HD 4870
Sapphire(174B E115) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.970.100.9001
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
11.7% Very poor
Lighting 16.3
Reflection 17.1
Parallax 11.7
13% 15 fps
MRender 11.1
Gravity 8.4
Splatting 11.8
9% 10.4 fps
Poor: 7%
This bench: 11.7%
Great: 12%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial BX500 240GB-$27
164GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M6CR041
SusWrite @10s intervals: 390 429 324 170 145 238 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
81.1% Excellent
Read 488
Write 436
Mixed 400
SusWrite 282
90% 401 MB/s
4K Read 28.1
4K Write 88.2
4K Mixed 20.5
116% 45.6 MB/s
DQ Read 134
DQ Write 334
DQ Mixed 0.5
67% 156 MB/s
Poor: 30%
This bench: 81.1%
Great: 92%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial BLS4G4D240FSB.8FBD 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
85.5% Excellent
MC Read 33.6
MC Write 33.1
MC Mixed 29.7
92% 32.1 GB/s
SC Read 18.6
SC Write 23.4
SC Mixed 21.9
61% 21.3 GB/s
Latency 100
40% 100 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 85.5%
Great: 90%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 9 7 60 19" 1280 720 ENC2189 S1902
Typical A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52) Builds (Compare 3,011 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: MSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 82% - Excellent Total price: $298
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, our data exposes the youtubers that are paid to 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 spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia 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