MSI 890GXM-G65 (MS-7642)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 33%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 64%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 25%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 57%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics55.1% 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)
Boot Drive91.3% 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.
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.
SystemMSI MS-7642
MotherboardMSI 890GXM-G65 (MS-7642)  (all builds)
Memory9.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120112
Uptime7.3 Days
Run DateMar 21 '21 at 03:27
Run Duration201 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU1%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T-$175
CPU1, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 2.85 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
57% Above average
Memory 83.8
1-Core 48
2-Core 92.7
49% 74.8 Pts
4-Core 165
8-Core 246
26% 206 Pts
64-Core 243
15% 243 Pts
Poor: 46%
This bench: 57%
Great: 61%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$117
Device(0000 0000) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 461.72
Performing below potential (44th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
55.1% Above average
Lighting 67.9
Reflection 72.7
Parallax 66.6
55% 69.1 fps
MRender 65.5
Gravity 69.6
Splatting 65.5
55% 66.9 fps
Poor: 51%
This bench: 55.1%
Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$80
260GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 301 264 215 265 233 223 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
91.3% Outstanding
Read 443
Write 384
Mixed 257
SusWrite 250
75% 333 MB/s
4K Read 37.1
4K Write 80.4
4K Mixed 47.9
160% 55.1 MB/s
DQ Read 273
DQ Write 102
DQ Mixed 36.8
67% 137 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 91.3%
Great: 129%
WD Green 2TB (2011)-$60
769GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 81 83 81 83 83 82 MB/s
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
50.4% Above average
Read 93.4
Write 83.9
Mixed 77.6
SusWrite 82.2
62% 84.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.6
123% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 50.4%
Great: 67%
Mass Storage Device 256GB
228GB free, PID 121f
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 9.8 9.8 9.9 10 9.9 9.9 MB/s
Performing below expectations (20th percentile)
8.24% Terrible
Read 10.5
Write 9.5
Mixed 9.7
SusWrite 9.9
13% 9.9 MB/s
4K Read 3.7
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 1.6
109% 2.17 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 8.24%
Great: 14%
Seagate Backup+ Desk 4TB
686GB free, PID a0a4
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 44 42 43 43 43 43 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
27.6% Poor
Read 88.8
Write 48.3
Mixed 50.5
SusWrite 42.9
72% 57.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
84% 1 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 27.6%
Great: 65%
Seagate Backup+ Desk 5TB
2TB free, PID ab31
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 23 23 23 22 22 31 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
46% Average
Read 105
Write 56.2
Mixed 58.4
SusWrite 24.1
73% 60.9 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 8.2
4K Mixed 0.6
304% 3.4 MB/s
DQ Read 0.3
DQ Write 9.2
DQ Mixed 0.8
341% 3.43 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 46%
Great: 78%
Seagate Expansion Desk 8TB
3TB free, PID 3322
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 44 42 42 43 43 43 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
39.6% Below average
Read 94.6
Write 58.5
Mixed 64.6
SusWrite 42.6
82% 65.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 5.3
4K Mixed 0.6
206% 2.4 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 39.6%
Great: 76%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM
Performing below potential (15th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
30.5% Below average
MC Read 13.1
MC Write 6.7
MC Mixed 11.2
30% 10.3 GB/s
SC Read 6.2
SC Write 5.9
SC Mixed 7.7
19% 6.6 GB/s
Latency 73.8
54% 73.8 ns
Poor: 23%
This bench: 30.5%
Great: 61%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 890GXM-G65 (MS-7642) Builds (Compare 30 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: MSI 890GXM-G65 (MS-7642)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 61% - Good Total price: $175
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
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $164Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $369
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback