Asus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 224%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 114%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 233%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (56th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 44 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 intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 114%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is outstanding.
Graphics201% is a record breaking 3D score, it's almost off the scale. This GPU can handle all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive257% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
MotherboardAsus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI  (all builds)
Memory23.3 GB free of 32 GB @ 4.8 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20221115
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 02 '24 at 17:41
Run Duration257 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing as expected (56th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 7 7700X-$230
AM5, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 4.5 GHz, turbo 5.2 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
114% Outstanding
Memory 77.2
1-Core 208
2-Core 410
119% 231 Pts
4-Core 806
8-Core 1,383
133% 1,094 Pts
64-Core 1,879
116% 1,879 Pts
Poor: 93%
This bench: 114%
Great: 122%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 6950-XT
XFX(1EAE 6950) ≥ 4GB
Ram: 16GB, Driver: 23.30.13.05
Performing below potential (64th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
201% Outstanding
Lighting 251
Reflection 262
Parallax 513
204% 342 fps
MRender 417
Gravity 218
Splatting 344
267% 326 fps
Poor: 183%
This bench: 201%
Great: 214%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 980 NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$88
527GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 3B4QFXO7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2100 368 198 143 153 135 MB/s
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
257% Outstanding
Read 1,666
Write 2,189
Mixed 1,764
SusWrite 516
346% 1,534 MB/s
4K Read 51.1
4K Write 182
4K Mixed 75.5
270% 103 MB/s
DQ Read 1,920
DQ Write 1,508
DQ Mixed 1,640
1,247% 1,689 MB/s
Poor: 149%
This bench: 257%
Great: 365%
Spcc Solid State Disk 1TB
505GB free
Firmware: H220916a
SusWrite @10s intervals: 469 410 429 427 422 429 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
62.5% Good
Read 403
Write 461
Mixed 395
SusWrite 431
96% 422 MB/s
4K Read 27
4K Write 10.3
4K Mixed 14.8
65% 17.4 MB/s
DQ Read 15
DQ Write 8.3
DQ Mixed 12.9
9% 12.1 MB/s
Poor: 43%
This bench: 62.5%
Great: 101%
Seagate Desktop SSHD 2TB-$90
1TB free
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 183 184 180 178 184 186 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
109% Outstanding
Read 196
Write 126
Mixed 60.3
SusWrite 182
103% 141 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 5
4K Mixed 2.4
418% 2.93 MB/s
Poor: 43%
This bench: 109%
Great: 108%
SAMSUNG HD154UI 1.5TB
505GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 82 81 77 77 82 82 MB/s
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
33% Below average
Read 74.4
Write 86.3
Mixed 47.9
SusWrite 80.2
98% 72.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
77% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 33%
Great: 40%
ST4000DM 005-2DP166 4TB
254GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 52 52 53 52 52 53 MB/s
Performing as expected (40th percentile)
44.7% Average
Read 180
Write 132
Mixed 91.6
SusWrite 52.2
141% 114 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.8
108% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 44.7%
Great: 69%
WDC WD50 00AAKS-00A7B0 500GB
461GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 82 78 79 82 82 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
39.3% Below average
Read 93.2
Write 90.3
Mixed 63.3
SusWrite 80.8
110% 81.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.6
4K Mixed 0.9
122% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 39.3%
Great: 39%
ST350064 1AS 500GB
282GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 53 52 53 52 52 53 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
25.4% Poor
Read 69.6
Write 33.6
Mixed 45
SusWrite 52.4
64% 50.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
67% 0.87 MB/s
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair CMH32GX5M2B6400C32 2x16GB
2 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM 22h clocked @ 4800 MHz
Performing below potential (9th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
141% Outstanding
MC Read 49.1
MC Write 51.9
MC Mixed 49.5
143% 50.2 GB/s
SC Read 47.8
SC Write 56
SC Mixed 50.3
147% 51.4 GB/s
Latency 86.8
46% 86.8 ns
Poor: 139%
This bench: 141%
Great: 215%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

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

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 41 5 120 31.5" 2560 1364 GBT3206 G32QC A
Typical TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI Builds (Compare 361 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 414%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 117%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 420%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus TUF GAMING X670E-PLUS WIFI

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $2,130
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