Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 88%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 89%
Aircraft carrier
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (43rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 57 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 typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 88.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics101% 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 Drive146% 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.
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS  (all builds)
Memory27.6 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20220428
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 10 '24 at 18:31
Run Duration195 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU3%
Watch Gameplay How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (43rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X-$190
AM4, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
88.4% Excellent
Memory 71.4
1-Core 146
2-Core 288
90% 168 Pts
4-Core 564
8-Core 950
92% 757 Pts
64-Core 1392
86% 1392 Pts
Poor: 76%
This bench: 88.4%
Great: 94%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 5700-XT-$250
Ram: 8GB, Driver: 23.12.1
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
101% Outstanding
Lighting 127
Reflection 204
Parallax 228
103% 186 fps
MRender 116
Gravity 145
Splatting 97.2
96% 119 fps
Poor: 91%
This bench: 101%
Great: 104%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial P1 3D NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$50
108GB free (System drive)
Firmware: P3CR010 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 402 15 35 39 54 47 MB/s
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
146% Outstanding
Read 1,365
Write 875
Mixed 872
SusWrite 98.5
178% 803 MB/s
4K Read 51.3
4K Write 113
4K Mixed 55.2
208% 73.2 MB/s
DQ Read 341
DQ Write 620
DQ Mixed 10.9
141% 324 MB/s
Poor: 103%
This bench: 146%
Great: 242%
Samsung 970 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$84
16GB free
Firmware: 2B2QEXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,913
Write 1,870
Mixed 1,132
364% 1,638 MB/s
4K Read 50.5
4K Write 112
4K Mixed 69.8
225% 77.5 MB/s
DQ Read 1,380
DQ Write 1,165
DQ Mixed 1,238
937% 1,261 MB/s
Poor: 199% Great: 340%
SanDisk SSD Plus 240GB-$34
136GB free
Firmware: Z33130RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 156 115 132 129 115 134 MB/s
Performing below potential (14th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
40.5% Average
Read 232
Write 221
Mixed 197
SusWrite 130
44% 195 MB/s
4K Read 18.8
4K Write 42.5
4K Mixed 7.6
61% 23 MB/s
DQ Read 181
DQ Write 89.4
DQ Mixed 33.5
52% 101 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 40.5%
Great: 86%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$29
568GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 162
Write 146
Mixed 91.1
98% 133 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 2.4
4K Mixed 1.1
229% 1.67 MB/s
Poor: 52% Great: 109%
WD Blue 500GB (2008)-$29
284GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 73 71 71 73 73 72 MB/s
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
44.3% Average
Read 81.6
Write 87.4
Mixed 59.2
SusWrite 72.3
55% 75.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 1
177% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 44.3%
Great: 69%
Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000.C 1TB-$70
70GB free
Firmware: JP4OA3EA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 105 104 103 106 104 104 MB/s
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
56.8% Above average
Read 93.7
Write 98.9
Mixed 51
SusWrite 104
64% 86.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
148% 1 MB/s
Poor: 30%
This bench: 56.8%
Great: 74%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX2400C15/8G KHX3200C16D4/16GX KHX2400C15/8G 32GB
2400, 2400, 2400 MHz
8192, 16384, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (18th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
47.2% Average
MC Read 17
MC Write 15.6
MC Mixed 15.4
46% 16 GB/s
SC Read 17
SC Write 16.9
SC Mixed 16.8
48% 16.9 GB/s
Latency 98.3
41% 98.3 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 47.2%
Great: 73%

 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 72 60 60 24.5" 1280 720 HPN3425 OMEN by HP 25
Typical TUF GAMING X570-PLUS Builds (Compare 6,887 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 - $185

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 86% - Excellent Total price: $1,013
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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 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 $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $50
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair 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