Today's hottest deals

Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 44%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 91%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 50%
Yacht
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (24th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 76 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 a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 87.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics42.9% 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)
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)  (all builds)
Memory22.3 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191119
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 05 '23 at 18:28
Run Duration336 Seconds
Run User LKA-User
Background CPU9%
Watch Gameplay: 1650 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (24th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X-$305
AM4, 1 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
87.2% Excellent
Memory 68.3
1-Core 145
2-Core 284
88% 166 Pts
4-Core 567
8-Core 1,078
98% 823 Pts
64-Core 2,121
131% 2,121 Pts
Poor: 80%
This bench: 87.2%
Great: 97%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1650-$150
Asus(1043 86BA) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 516.94
Performing below potential (66th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
42.9% Average
Lighting 55.7
Reflection 57.9
Parallax 49.6
45% 54.4 fps
MRender 42.6
Gravity 50.3
Splatting 46.5
38% 46.5 fps
Poor: 39%
This bench: 42.9%
Great: 46%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$80
82GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2QEXM7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 2,524
Write 2,420
Mixed 1,832
503% 2,259 MB/s
4K Read 69.3
4K Write 166
4K Mixed 90.9
309% 109 MB/s
DQ Read 1,275
DQ Write 917
DQ Mixed 1,090
816% 1,094 MB/s
Poor: 178% Great: 346%
Addlink M.2 PCIE G3x4 NVMe 2TB
189GB free
Firmware: ECFM53.0 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1528 210 309 221 160 165 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
215% Outstanding
Read 1,380
Write 2,425
Mixed 1,482
SusWrite 432
323% 1,430 MB/s
4K Read 49.9
4K Write 161
4K Mixed 74.4
256% 95.1 MB/s
DQ Read 1,246
DQ Write 1,176
DQ Mixed 1,245
925% 1,222 MB/s
Poor: 124%
This bench: 215%
Great: 379%
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2017)-$85
87GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 58 81 79 75 80 81 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
34% Below average
Read 41
Write 62.6
Mixed 54.6
SusWrite 75.8
43% 58.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 5.4
4K Mixed 0.4
178% 2.2 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 34%
Great: 90%
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2017)-$85
146GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 77 79 82 77 80 77 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
37% Below average
Read 48.8
Write 73
Mixed 56.1
SusWrite 78.6
48% 64.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 4.6
4K Mixed 0.4
176% 2.03 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 37%
Great: 90%
Hitachi HUS724040ALE640 4TB
58GB free
Firmware: MJAOA580
SusWrite @10s intervals: 78 80 81 79 80 80 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
43.2% Average
Read 70.5
Write 75.9
Mixed 52.2
SusWrite 79.8
51% 69.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.7
144% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 45%
This bench: 43.2%
Great: 92%
Seagate SkyHawk 8TB (2016)-$170
159GB free
Firmware: AV01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 107 109 110 107 109 108 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
62.1% Good
Read 106
Write 102
Mixed 72.4
SusWrite 108
72% 97.1 MB/s
4K Read 7.4
4K Write 3.1
4K Mixed 1
477% 3.83 MB/s
Poor: 41%
This bench: 62.1%
Great: 102%
Toshiba HDWR180 8TB
425GB free
Firmware: 0603
SusWrite @10s intervals: 119 121 124 121 120 121 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
68.1% Good
Read 116
Write 105
Mixed 37.5
SusWrite 121
69% 94.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1.1
187% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 68%
This bench: 68.1%
Great: 130%
Seagate ST8000VN004-2M2101 8TB
445GB free
Firmware: SC60
SusWrite @10s intervals: 121 124 125 124 123 122 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 17% Great: 117%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing below potential (24th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
77.8% Very good
MC Read 30.4
MC Write 27.3
MC Mixed 28.1
82% 28.6 GB/s
SC Read 22.2
SC Write 17.6
SC Mixed 26.2
63% 22 GB/s
Latency 105
38% 105 ns
Poor: 67%
This bench: 77.8%
Great: 114%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) Builds (Compare 26,949 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 129%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 94%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 130%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI) - $190

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 98% - Outstanding Total price: $882
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 the gold standard for users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $210Nvidia RTX 4060 $285WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $125
Intel Core i5-12600K $155Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $389WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $80
Intel Core i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $330
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