MSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 67%
Battle cruiser
Desktop
Desktop 93%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 62%
Destroyer
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (65th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 35 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 typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 92.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics70.2% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive83.2% 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.
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-7C52
MotherboardMSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)  (all builds)
Memory3.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20201207
Uptime1.2 Days
Run DateMar 01 '22 at 20:31
Run Duration261 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU4%
Watch Gameplay: 1660S + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (65th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 3600-$86
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
92.9% Outstanding
Memory 84.6
1-Core 143
2-Core 282
93% 170 Pts
4-Core 544
8-Core 833
85% 689 Pts
64-Core 1,090
68% 1,090 Pts
Poor: 73%
This bench: 92.9%
Great: 92%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super)-$195
CLim: 2130 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 457.51
Performing below potential (38th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
70.2% Very good
Lighting 87
Reflection 86.7
Parallax 82
71% 85.2 fps
MRender 109
Gravity 79.3
Splatting 71
69% 86.3 fps
Poor: 65%
This bench: 70.2%
Great: 76%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 480GB-$38
41GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFKK1B3
SusWrite @10s intervals: 447 198 26 26 25 25 MB/s
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
83.2% Excellent
Read 431
Write 351
Mixed 360
SusWrite 125
71% 316 MB/s
4K Read 32.8
4K Write 93.7
4K Mixed 39.1
149% 55.2 MB/s
DQ Read 219
DQ Write 349
DQ Mixed 171
161% 246 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 83.2%
Great: 102%
Toshiba P300 1TB-$40
325GB free
Firmware: MS2OA8R0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 140 156 157 157 156 157 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
74.7% Very good
Read 106
Write 110
Mixed 35.8
SusWrite 154
74% 101 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
159% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 74.7%
Great: 107%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown BL8G32C16U4BL.M8FE 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
61.7% Good
MC Read 22.9
MC Write 21
MC Mixed 19.5
60% 21.1 GB/s
SC Read 20.3
SC Write 21.4
SC Mixed 20.9
60% 20.9 GB/s
Latency 72.4
55% 72.4 ns
Poor: 37%
This bench: 61.7%
Great: 62%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52) Builds (Compare 3,007 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: MSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 82% - Excellent Total price: $298
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. 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 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $28Corsair 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