MSI A320M PRO-VH (MS-7C52)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 61%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (41st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 59 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 58.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics14.9% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Very high background CPU (73%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7C52
MotherboardMSI A320M PRO-VH (MS-7C52)  (all builds)
Memory3.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors, , 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20220725
Uptime3.2 Days
Run DateJul 30 '23 at 16:28
Run Duration126 Seconds
Run User PHL-User
Background CPU 73%

 PC Performing as expected (41st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 4600G
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.7 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
58.3% Above average
Memory 42.7
1-Core 120
2-Core 226
67% 130 Pts
4-Core 395
8-Core 633
63% 514 Pts
64-Core 790
49% 790 Pts
Poor: 61%
This bench: 58.3%
Great: 92%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX Vega 8 4000 (iGPU)
AMD(1002 1636) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 22.20.27.09
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
14.9% Very poor
Lighting 19.5
Reflection 18.8
Parallax 29.4
16% 22.6 fps
MRender 3.1
Gravity 22.2
Splatting 20
13% 15.1 fps
Poor: 8%
This bench: 14.9%
Great: 17%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 120GB-$28
17GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HCS1A25E
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 337
Write 306
Mixed 275
68% 306 MB/s
4K Read 12.9
4K Write 33.8
4K Mixed 6.7
46% 17.8 MB/s
DQ Read 86.3
DQ Write 261
DQ Mixed 12.9
56% 120 MB/s
Poor: 33% Great: 85%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$28
502GB free
Firmware: AQ04
SusWrite @10s intervals: 171 172 174 169 169 170 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
97.8% Outstanding
Read 170
Write 183
Mixed 76.2
SusWrite 171
109% 150 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.7
144% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 55%
This bench: 97.8%
Great: 112%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown Ramsta-3200MHz-8G 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
52.6% Above average
MC Read 23.4
MC Write 19.7
MC Mixed 19.4
60% 20.8 GB/s
SC Read 6.7
SC Write 11
SC Mixed 8.3
25% 8.67 GB/s
Latency 190
21% 190 ns
Poor: 53%
This bench: 52.6%
Great: 105%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 46: 0P 5R 5G 6B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
46% 30% 54 217 102 75 23.8" 1280 720 MDA0238 N2455
Typical A320M PRO-VH (MS-7C52) Builds (Compare 363 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: MSI A320M PRO-VH (MS-7C52)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 77% - Very good Total price: $168
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 $149
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $245Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $359
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