ADD TO PC
BUILD

MSI Z97 U3 PLUS (MS-7922)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing CPU, RAM
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (73rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 27 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Graphics	27% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	81.5% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

System	MSI MS-7922
Motherboard	MSI Z97 U3 PLUS (MS-7922) (all builds)
Memory	4.2 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20150529
Uptime	0.7 Days
Run Date	Aug 03 '15 at 12:56
Run Duration	571 Seconds
Run User	AUT-User
Background CPU	2%

PC Performing above expectations (73^rd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-4790K-$348 455,746 User benchmarks, average bench 79% SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 4.9 GHz Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete		1-Core 140 2-Core 286 96% 213 Pts	4-Core 566 8-Core 822 87% 694 Pts	64-Core 814 50% 814 Pts
Poor: 67% Great: 87%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
AMD R9 270-$140 47,409 User benchmarks, average bench 24% Gigabyte(1458 226C) Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1046.2 Performing way above expectations (99^th percentile)	27% Poor	Lighting 33.4 Reflection 30.9 Parallax 42.5 27% 35.6 fps	MRender 28.2 Gravity 30.5 Splatting 36.6 26% 31.8 fps
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 27% Great: 26%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Kingston HyperX 3K 120GB-$100 46,066 User benchmarks, average bench 74% 16GB free (System drive) Firmware: 580ABBF0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing above expectations (80^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 95 95 9915207 (05) Reallocated sector count 99 99 2 (09) Power-on hours count 99 99 -113584705108562 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 588 (AB) Unknown 100 100 1 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AE) Unknown 0 0 82 (B1) Unknown 0 0 1 (B5) Unknown 100 100 1 (B6) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BD) vendor-specific 31 37 47247065119 (C2) HDA temperature 31 37 47247065119 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 120 120 9915207 (C4) Reallocation count 99 99 2 (C9) Soft read error rate 120 120 9915207 (CC) Soft ECC correction 120 120 9915207 (E6) GMR head amplitude 100 100 100 (E7) Temperature 97 97 12884901889 (E9) Unknown 0 0 2809 (EA) Unknown 0 0 2087 (F1) Unknown 0 0 2087 (F2) Unknown 0 0 2258	81.5% Excellent	Read 494 Write 181 Mixed 250 67% 308 MB/s	4K Read 37.7 4K Write 105 4K Mixed 24.8 144% 55.7 MB/s	DQ Read 219 DQ Write 160 DQ Mixed 63.5 82% 147 MB/s
Poor: 57% ↑ This bench: 81.5% Great: 87%
WD Blue 640GB (2008)-$33 94,563 User benchmarks, average bench 50% 157GB free Firmware: 07.04C07 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing way below expectations (10^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 165 162 4716 (04) Start/Stop count 97 97 3855 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 253 0 (09) Power-on hours count 49 49 37587 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 1380 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 97 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 199 199 3855 (C2) HDA temperature 115 97 32 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	34.9% Below average	Read 60.2 Write 61.3 Mixed 73 49% 64.8 MB/s	4K Read 0.45 4K Write 1.59 4K Mixed 0.33 84% 0.79 MB/s
Poor: 31% ↑ This bench: 34.9% Great: 62%
WD WD2000JS-00MHB0 200GB 2,544 User benchmarks, average bench 27% 82GB free Firmware: 02.01C03 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing way above expectations (94^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 201 186 4950 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 430 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 14 14 63264 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 291 (BE) vendor-specific 54 38 46 (C2) HDA temperature 104 88 46 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 1 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	33.7% Below average	Read 58.4 Write 58.6 Mixed 58.6 44% 58.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.62 4K Write 1.82 4K Mixed 0.4 104% 0.95 MB/s
Poor: 14% ↑ This bench: 33.7% Great: 34%
Seagate ST380215AS 80GB-$45 2,707 User benchmarks, average bench 29% 74GB free Firmware: 3.AAD Max speed: SATA 1.0 150 MB/s Performing way above expectations (91^st percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 117 99 158622301 (03) Spinup time 97 97 0 (04) Start/Stop count 98 98 2524 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 85 60 342409153 (09) Power-on hours count 84 84 14131 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 98 98 2324 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 66 48 572653602 (C2) HDA temperature 34 52 60129542178 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 81 66 143058660 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 2 (C8) Write error rate 100 253 0 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 100 253 0	40.1% Average	Read 70.1 Write 69.3 Mixed 69.3 52% 69.6 MB/s	4K Read 0.53 4K Write 1.4 4K Mixed 0.42 95% 0.78 MB/s
Poor: 12% ↑ This bench: 40.1% Great: 42%
Samsung HD322GJ 320GB 9,769 User benchmarks, average bench 59% 60GB free Firmware: 1AR10001 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing above expectations (68^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 6 (02) Throughput performance 252 252 0 (03) Spinup time 84 76 4932 (04) Start/Stop count 97 97 3780 (05) Reallocated sector count 252 252 0 (07) Seek error rate 252 252 0 (08) Seek timer performance 252 252 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 3127 (0A) Spinup retry count 252 252 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 252 252 0 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 1461 (BF) G-sense error rate 100 100 20 (C0) Power-off retract count 252 252 0 (C2) HDA temperature 64 59 176094248990 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 100 100 0 (C4) Reallocation count 252 252 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 252 252 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 252 252 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 1 (C8) Write error rate 100 100 5 (DF) Load/unload retry count 252 252 0 (E1) Load/Unload cycle count 100 100 3826	67.7% Good	Read 103 Write 133 Mixed 99.7 84% 112 MB/s	4K Read 0.65 4K Write 2.19 4K Mixed 0.23 93% 1.02 MB/s
Poor: 27% ↑ This bench: 67.7% Great: 81%
Generic- SD/MMC 64GB 660 User benchmarks, average bench 12% 59GB free, PID null Performing as expected (48^th percentile)	11% Very poor	Read 18.8 Write 15.9 Mixed 17.7 22% 17.5 MB/s	4K Read 3.23 4K Write 1.31 4K Mixed 1.07 93% 1.87 MB/s
Poor: 6% ↑ This bench: 11% Great: 17%
Generic Flash Disk 2GB 6,669 User benchmarks, average bench 5% 2GB free, PID 6387 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing above expectations (76^th percentile)	4.87% Terrible	Read 16 Write 5.92 Mixed 4.96 9% 8.97 MB/s	4K Read 5.08 4K Write 0.02 4K Mixed 0.02 20% 1.7 MB/s
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 4.87% Great: 8%
Intenso Rainbow Line 2GB 5 User benchmarks, average bench 4% 2GB free, PID 6387 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing way above expectations (90^th percentile)	5.55% Terrible	Read 18.6 Write 5.9 Mixed 8.06 12% 10.9 MB/s	4K Read 6.53 4K Write 0.008 4K Mixed 0.009 25% 2.18 MB/s
Poor: 3% ↑ This bench: 5.55% Great: 6%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical Z97 U3 PLUS (MS-7922) Builds (Compare 93 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 36%

Jet ski

Desktop

Desktop 78%

Battleship

Workstation

Workstation 28%

Raft

Motherboard: MSI Z97 U3 PLUS (MS-7922) - $125

CPU
Core i5-4690KIntel $50Bench 70%, 229,359 samples	27x
Core i7-4790KIntel $348Bench 79%, 455,746 samples	17x
Core i5-4590Intel $188Bench 63%, 151,366 samples	12x

GPU
GTX 970Nvidia $200Bench 49%, 834,238 samples	15x
GTX 1060-6GBNvidia $117Bench 56%, 1,368,019 samples	11x
GTX 1070Nvidia $278Bench 80%, 1,459,281 samples	10x

SSD
WDS200T2B0A-00SM50 2TBWDCBench 98%, 8,872 samples	6x
850 Evo 500GBSamsung $94Bench 112%, 695,664 samples	4x
860 Evo 1TBSamsung $137Bench 112%, 602,853 samples	4x

RAM
HMT125U7BFR8C-G7 HMT125U7BFR8C-G7 HMT125U7BFR8C-G7 HMT125U7AFR8C-G7 8GBHynixBench 34%, 5 samples	5x
Vengeance Pro DDR3 1866 C9 2x8GBCorsairBench 55%, 18,444 samples	4x
Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x8GBHyperXBench 59%, 122,541 samples	4x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 69% - Good

Total price: $375

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 obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or 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

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160	Nvidia RTX 4060 $290	WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $153
Intel Core i5-13600K $249	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110	Nvidia RTX 4070 $520	Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $363

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback