MSI X470 GAMING M7 AC (MS-7B77)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 115%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 95%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 135%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 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 intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 86.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics130% 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 Drive122% 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.
Run History
9 months ago, 1 month ago.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7B77
MotherboardMSI X470 GAMING M7 AC (MS-7B77)  (all builds)
Memory27.9 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display2560 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191108
Uptime0.7 Days
Run DateApr 28 '24 at 21:42
Run Duration233 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X-$395
AM4, 1 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
86.3% Excellent
Memory 73.1
1-Core 146
2-Core 290
90% 170 Pts
4-Core 532
8-Core 1,060
94% 796 Pts
64-Core 2,185
135% 2,185 Pts
Poor: 80%
This bench: 86.3%
Great: 97%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2080S (Super)-$466
Nvidia(10DE 13A0) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3875 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 536.23
Performing below potential (46th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
130% Outstanding
Lighting 175
Reflection 174
Parallax 176
142% 175 fps
MRender 198
Gravity 157
Splatting 129
128% 161 fps
Poor: 116%
This bench: 130%
Great: 139%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
351GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 471 390 341 351 334 346 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
122% Outstanding
Read 500
Write 489
Mixed 410
SusWrite 372
100% 443 MB/s
4K Read 43.8
4K Write 107
4K Mixed 59.9
200% 70.3 MB/s
DQ Read 384
DQ Write 360
DQ Mixed 370
278% 371 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 122%
Great: 134%
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$69
276GB free
Firmware: 1B2QEXM7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2186 836 795 791 793 793 MB/s
Performing above expectations (85th percentile)
324% Outstanding
Read 2,677
Write 2,468
Mixed 1,848
SusWrite 1,032
449% 2,006 MB/s
4K Read 69.9
4K Write 174
4K Mixed 94.5
319% 113 MB/s
DQ Read 1,415
DQ Write 1,040
DQ Mixed 1,174
892% 1,210 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 324%
Great: 355%
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
170GB free
Firmware: 3B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1006 566 310 313 311 310 MB/s
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
194% Outstanding
Read 1,351
Write 1151
Mixed 613
SusWrite 469
199% 896 MB/s
4K Read 43.1
4K Write 131
4K Mixed 57
208% 77 MB/s
DQ Read 1,084
DQ Write 1,072
DQ Mixed 703
631% 953 MB/s
Poor: 142%
This bench: 194%
Great: 236%
Acer SA100 1920GB
1.5TB free
Firmware: V1021A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 447 434 444 452 240 323 MB/s
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
93.4% Outstanding
Read 490
Write 434
Mixed 387
SusWrite 390
96% 425 MB/s
4K Read 29.3
4K Write 108
4K Mixed 22.9
131% 53.3 MB/s
DQ Read 177
DQ Write 348
DQ Mixed 31
89% 185 MB/s
Poor: 54%
This bench: 93.4%
Great: 106%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Dominator DDR4 3000 C15 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
86.6% Excellent
MC Read 34.1
MC Write 30.8
MC Mixed 31
91% 32 GB/s
SC Read 23.5
SC Write 17.8
SC Mixed 30.3
68% 23.9 GB/s
Latency 93
43% 93 ns
Poor: 66%
This bench: 86.6%
Great: 109%

 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% 13 170 2 144 35" 1280 720 ACR046D XZ350CU
Typical X470 GAMING M7 AC (MS-7B77) Builds (Compare 315 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 98%
Nuclear submarine
Desktop
Desktop 86%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 95%
Nuclear submarine

Motherboard: MSI X470 GAMING M7 AC (MS-7B77)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 75% - Very good Total price: $881
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial 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) $39Corsair 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