MSI A320M PRO-M2 (MS-7B84)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (79th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 21 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 moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 80.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics45.2% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7B84
MotherboardMSI A320M PRO-M2 (MS-7B84)  (all builds)
Memory3.1 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190701
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 09 '24 at 13:52
Run Duration170 Seconds
Run User PRT-User
Background CPU10%
Watch Gameplay: 570 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (79th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X-$125
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.65 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
80.2% Excellent
Memory 76.9
1-Core 115
2-Core 225
77% 139 Pts
4-Core 449
8-Core 683
70% 566 Pts
64-Core 905
56% 905 Pts
Poor: 62%
This bench: 80.2%
Great: 82%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 570-$130
CLim: 1300 MHz, MLim: 1750 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 24.3.1
Performing below potential (56th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
45.2% Average
Lighting 56.8
Reflection 51
Parallax 78.3
46% 62 fps
MRender 54.7
Gravity 62.4
Splatting 44.3
43% 53.8 fps
Poor: 37%
This bench: 45.2%
Great: 49%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
23GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT01B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 498
Write 482
Mixed 407
103% 462 MB/s
4K Read 38.9
4K Write 82.4
4K Mixed 50.4
167% 57.2 MB/s
DQ Read 376
DQ Write 352
DQ Mixed 362
272% 364 MB/s
Poor: 72% Great: 124%
4GB free, PID 6387
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 14.2
Write 3.2
Mixed 2.7
6% 6.7 MB/s
4K Read 4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
15% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 2% Great: 6%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX 2400 C15 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 2400 MHz clocked @ 1200 MHz
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
45.5% Average
MC Read 17
MC Write 14.6
MC Mixed 14.3
44% 15.3 GB/s
SC Read 16.4
SC Write 16.4
SC Mixed 15.6
46% 16.1 GB/s
Latency 91
44% 91 ns
Poor: 28%
This bench: 45.5%
Great: 47%

 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 67 54 144 24" 1280 720 GSM5B73 24GL600F
Typical A320M PRO-M2 (MS-7B84) Builds (Compare 111 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: MSI A320M PRO-M2 (MS-7B84)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 88% - Excellent Total price: $298
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 $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