Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 80%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 91%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 74%
Battleship
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 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 light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 71.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics104% is an outstanding 3D score, it's the bee's knees. This GPU can handle almost all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive394% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Sub-optimal background CPU (19%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)  (all builds)
Memory24.4 GB free of 32 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20220427
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 21 '22 at 18:01
Run Duration144 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 19%

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 3500-$140
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 4.3 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
71.4% Very good
Memory 79.3
1-Core 138
2-Core 268
88% 162 Pts
4-Core 341
8-Core 676
60% 509 Pts
64-Core 717
44% 717 Pts
Poor: 65%
This bench: 71.4%
Great: 90%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 3060-$266
Asus(1043 8816) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2310 MHz, MLim: 4125 MHz, Ram: 12GB, Driver: 526.98
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Lighting 137
Reflection 123
Parallax 128
112% 129 fps
MRender 144
Gravity 108
Splatting 91.4
91% 114 fps
Poor: 90%
This bench: 104%
Great: 106%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$68
75GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 33 37 40 42 48 47 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
394% Outstanding
Read 3,831
Write 40
Mixed 76.2
SusWrite 41.1
207% 997 MB/s
4K Read 592
4K Write 2.6
4K Mixed 3.3
903% 199 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 394%
Great: 355%
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$68
150GB free
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 365 311 339 377 410 420 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
211% Outstanding
Read 2,214
Write 1,638
Mixed 1,431
SusWrite 370
314% 1,413 MB/s
4K Read 49.8
4K Write 102
4K Mixed 55.6
201% 69.2 MB/s
DQ Read 1,207
DQ Write 526
DQ Mixed 747
585% 826 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 211%
Great: 355%
Samsung 870 EVO 1TB-$100
111GB free
Firmware: SVT02B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 7,494
Write 5,974
Mixed 6625
1,492% 6,698 MB/s
4K Read 522
4K Write 156
4K Mixed 246
1,189% 308 MB/s
DQ Read 1,318
DQ Write 589
DQ Mixed 803
635% 903 MB/s
Poor: 82% Great: 137%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
91.8% Outstanding
MC Read 39.4
MC Write 23.5
MC Mixed 37.8
96% 33.6 GB/s
SC Read 24.5
SC Write 22
SC Mixed 32.1
75% 26.2 GB/s
Latency 81.9
49% 81.9 ns
Poor: 67%
This bench: 91.8%
Great: 119%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) Builds (Compare 26,054 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 129%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 94%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 130%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) - $115

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 87% - Excellent Total price: $935
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
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 $45SanDisk 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