Asus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 338%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 116%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 335%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (66th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 34 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 112%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is outstanding.
Graphics315% is a record breaking 3D score, it's almost off the scale. This GPU can handle all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive333% 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (16%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 11 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago, 10 months ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI  (all builds)
Memory26.8 GB free of 32 GB @ 4.8 GHz
Display3440 x 1440 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20230516
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 30 '23 at 20:42
Run Duration307 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 16%

 PC Performing above expectations (66th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D-$329
AM5, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 4.2 GHz, turbo 4.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
112% Outstanding
Memory 96.9
1-Core 191
2-Core 372
118% 220 Pts
4-Core 678
8-Core 1,149
111% 914 Pts
64-Core 1,660
103% 1,660 Pts
Poor: 107%
This bench: 112%
Great: 123%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 4080-$1,000
Palit(1569 F296) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 3180 MHz, MLim: 5600 MHz, Ram: 16GB, Driver: 535.98
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
315% Outstanding
Lighting 484
Reflection 439
Parallax 470
394% 464 fps
MRender 570
Gravity 376
Splatting 271
316% 406 fps
Poor: 263%
This bench: 315%
Great: 305%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$43
372GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2QEXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1755 670 674 670 673 673 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
333% Outstanding
Read 2,595
Write 2,374
Mixed 1,726
SusWrite 852
422% 1,887 MB/s
4K Read 70
4K Write 207
4K Mixed 98.8
342% 125 MB/s
DQ Read 1,699
DQ Write 1,491
DQ Mixed 1,556
1,177% 1,582 MB/s
Poor: 199%
This bench: 333%
Great: 340%
Samsung 970 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$150
81GB free
Firmware: 2B2QEXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 2,522
Write 2,399
Mixed 1,779
497% 2,233 MB/s
4K Read 64.7
4K Write 191
4K Mixed 90.4
315% 115 MB/s
DQ Read 1,776
DQ Write 1,594
DQ Mixed 1,662
1,253% 1,677 MB/s
Poor: 214% Great: 372%
SanDisk SSD Plus 240GB-$28
59GB free
Firmware: Z32080RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 407 166 98 97 63 95 MB/s
Performing above expectations (66th percentile)
68.1% Good
Read 436
Write 416
Mixed 364
SusWrite 154
77% 343 MB/s
4K Read 17.4
4K Write 104
4K Mixed 18.4
105% 46.5 MB/s
DQ Read 169
DQ Write 302
DQ Mixed 28.7
80% 167 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 68.1%
Great: 86%
WD Blue 500GB (2008)-$29
286GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 90 90 91 90 91 90 MB/s
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
52.5% Above average
Read 92.1
Write 88.7
Mixed 62
SusWrite 90.2
61% 83.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.9
180% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 52.5%
Great: 69%
Hitachi HTS545050B9A300 500GB-$71
124GB free
Firmware: PB4OC60F
SusWrite @10s intervals: 56 60 60 60 61 61 MB/s
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
34.9% Below average
Read 61.6
Write 39.9
Mixed 30.1
SusWrite 59.7
35% 47.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.8
137% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 34.9%
Great: 45%
Toshiba P300 2TB-$61
1TB free
Firmware: MX4OACF0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 147 152 152 150 154 151 MB/s
Performing below expectations (37th percentile)
83.2% Excellent
Read 139
Write 165
Mixed 32.6
SusWrite 151
88% 122 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
159% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 58%
This bench: 83.2%
Great: 108%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair CMH32GX5M2D6000Z36 2x16GB
2 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM 22h 4800 MHz clocked @ 6000 MHz
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
220% Outstanding
MC Read 85.5
MC Write 73.7
MC Mixed 82.2
230% 80.5 GB/s
SC Read 69
SC Write 71
SC Mixed 64.7
195% 68.2 GB/s
Latency 50.7
79% 50.7 ns
Poor: 141%
This bench: 220%
Great: 207%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI Builds (Compare 348 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 413%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 117%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 417%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 67% - Good Total price: $2,298
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $31Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.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