MSI Z170A GAMING M5 (MS-7977)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 71%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 96%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 62%
Destroyer
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (68th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 32 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 moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 84.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics76.8% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive291% 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.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
5 months ago, 14 days ago.
SystemMSI MS-7977
MotherboardMSI Z170A GAMING M5 (MS-7977)  (all builds)
Memory9 GB free of 16 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display2560 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180626
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateMay 18 '24 at 08:55
Run Duration241 Seconds
Run User NLD-User
Background CPU5%
Watch Gameplay: 1660-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (68th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-6700K-$170
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.2 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
84.3% Excellent
Memory 96.3
1-Core 128
2-Core 234
88% 153 Pts
4-Core 390
8-Core 687
65% 538 Pts
64-Core 644
40% 644 Pts
Poor: 70%
This bench: 84.3%
Great: 90%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1660-Ti-$143
CLim: 2175 MHz, MLim: 3000 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 552.44
Performing below potential (70th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
76.8% Very good
Lighting 97.3
Reflection 99.8
Parallax 89.6
79% 95.6 fps
MRender 98.6
Gravity 91.1
Splatting 78.7
72% 89.5 fps
Poor: 70%
This bench: 76.8%
Great: 81%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 990 Pro NVMe PCIe M.2 2TB-$170
1.5TB free (System drive)
Firmware: 3B2QJXD7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1770 1699 1722 1785 1784 1808 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
291% Outstanding
Read 2,029
Write 1,798
Mixed 1645
SusWrite 1,761
407% 1,808 MB/s
4K Read 55.7
4K Write 101
4K Mixed 72.7
231% 76.5 MB/s
DQ Read 869
DQ Write 491
DQ Mixed 778
552% 713 MB/s
Poor: 299%
This bench: 291%
Great: 592%
Adata SP900 256GB-$300
237GB free
Firmware: 5.6.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 210 206 192 233 182 226 MB/s
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
80.7% Excellent
Read 366
Write 297
Mixed 274
SusWrite 208
64% 287 MB/s
4K Read 30
4K Write 81.9
4K Mixed 37.9
137% 49.9 MB/s
DQ Read 266
DQ Write 227
DQ Mixed 187
156% 227 MB/s
Poor: 53%
This bench: 80.7%
Great: 89%
Samsung 860 Evo 1TB-$140
862GB free
Firmware: RVT04B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 464 467 470 466 468 469 MB/s
Performing above expectations (76th percentile)
123% Outstanding
Read 508
Write 464
Mixed 402
SusWrite 468
104% 460 MB/s
4K Read 43.7
4K Write 88.6
4K Mixed 56.3
185% 62.9 MB/s
DQ Read 382
DQ Write 341
DQ Mixed 360
270% 361 MB/s
Poor: 81%
This bench: 123%
Great: 133%
Seagate FireCuda 2.5" 1TB-$65
931GB free
Firmware: SDM1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 121 128 128 129 130 134 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
67.9% Good
Read 108
Write 65.1
Mixed 107
SusWrite 128
76% 102 MB/s
4K Read 2.2
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 2.5
397% 2.07 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 67.9%
Great: 70%
WD Green 1TB (2009)-$72
931GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 79 84 83 83 83 81 MB/s
Performing above expectations (79th percentile)
49.5% Average
Read 90.3
Write 83.5
Mixed 60.3
SusWrite 81.9
58% 79 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.8
159% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 49.5%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB-$40
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
94.4% Outstanding
MC Read 37.3
MC Write 34.4
MC Mixed 26.7
94% 32.8 GB/s
SC Read 21.9
SC Write 41.5
SC Mixed 30.4
89% 31.3 GB/s
Latency 53.6
75% 53.6 ns
Poor: 61%
This bench: 94.4%
Great: 110%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 58: 0P 5R 10G 3B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
17% 8% 62 205 38 60 34.1" 1280 720 GSM59F1 LG ULTRAWIDE
History: Score 17: 0P 3R 0G 2B | Score 58: 0P 5R 10G 3B
Typical Z170A GAMING M5 (MS-7977) Builds (Compare 4,957 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 68%
Battle cruiser
Desktop
Desktop 87%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 57%
Gunboat

Motherboard: MSI Z170A GAMING M5 (MS-7977) - $140

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 75% - Very good Total price: $713
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable 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 praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products 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. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
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