MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 104%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 102%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 116%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (47th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 53 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 106%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is outstanding.
Graphics95.1% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Memory48GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 48GB 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.
High background CPU (23%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
10 months ago, 8 months ago.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7C37
MotherboardMSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37)  (all builds)
Memory42.9 GB free of 48 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20230427
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJul 28 '23 at 12:12
Run Duration229 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 23%

 PC Performing as expected (47th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 9 5900X-$230
AM4, 1 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 3.7 GHz, turbo 4.6 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
106% Outstanding
Memory 82.8
1-Core 160
2-Core 338
102% 194 Pts
4-Core 690
8-Core 1,343
120% 1,016 Pts
64-Core 2,214
137% 2,214 Pts
Poor: 87%
This bench: 106%
Great: 108%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 3060-$266
MSI(1462 3903) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3750 MHz, Ram: 12GB, Driver: 536.40
Performing below potential (17th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
95.1% Outstanding
Lighting 123
Reflection 110
Parallax 114
100% 116 fps
MRender 135
Gravity 101
Splatting 85.6
85% 107 fps
Poor: 90%
This bench: 95.1%
Great: 106%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Corsair Force NVMe PCIe M.2 480GB
5GB free (System drive)
Firmware: ECFM22.7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,380
Write 2,034
Mixed 878
320% 1,431 MB/s
4K Read 3.5
4K Write 150
4K Mixed 58.7
160% 70.9 MB/s
DQ Read 1,244
DQ Write 528
DQ Mixed 556
499% 776 MB/s
Poor: 125% Great: 262%
Intenso PCIe 120GB
61GB free
Firmware: E8FM11.6 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 378 139 112 102 49 120 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
102% Outstanding
Read 799
Write 404
Mixed 533
SusWrite 150
104% 471 MB/s
4K Read 33.2
4K Write 88.8
4K Mixed 35.1
142% 52.4 MB/s
DQ Read 357
DQ Write 426
DQ Mixed 312
257% 365 MB/s
Poor: 81%
This bench: 102%
Great: 185%
WD Green 500GB (2009)-$23
101GB free
Firmware: 01.00A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 55 58 57 57 57 57 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
32.8% Below average
Read 57.2
Write 55.2
Mixed 36.5
SusWrite 56.8
38% 51.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.8
145% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 32.8%
Great: 54%
Seagate ST3500830AS 500GB-$145
33GB free
Firmware: 3.AAD
SusWrite @10s intervals: 63 64 64 63 66 67 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
40.4% Average
Read 76
Write 34.5
Mixed 40.1
SusWrite 64.6
40% 53.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.8
139% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 40.4%
Great: 44%
WD Red 3TB (2012)-$100
247GB free
Firmware: 82.00A82
SusWrite @10s intervals: 88 90 90 88 90 88 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
48.5% Average
Read 79.5
Write 75.6
Mixed 63.5
SusWrite 89.1
57% 76.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.8
160% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 42%
This bench: 48.5%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 BL16G32C16U4RL.16FE CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 BL16G32C16U4RL.16FE 48GB
3200, 3200, 3200, 3200 MHz
8192, 16384, 8192, 16384 MB
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
149% Outstanding
MC Read 95.4
MC Write 39.1
MC Mixed 39.2
165% 57.9 GB/s
SC Read 30.5
SC Write 23.9
SC Mixed 35.3
85% 29.9 GB/s
Latency 75.5
53% 75.5 ns
Poor: 94%
This bench: 149%
Great: 149%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 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 71 60 165 27" 1920 1080 AUS272D ASUS VG277Q1A
Typical MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37) Builds (Compare 10,548 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 129%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 94%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 130%
UFO

Motherboard: MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS (MS-7C37) - $179

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 87% - Excellent Total price: $1,012
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $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) $29Corsair 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