Today's hottest deals

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

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 80%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 32%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (48th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 52 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 76.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics44.8% 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 DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (16%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
3 years ago, 3 years ago.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7C52
MotherboardMSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)  (all builds)
Memory4.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20200610
Uptime1.9 Days
Run DateMar 06 '21 at 17:09
Run Duration110 Seconds
Run User ARG-User
Background CPU 16%

 PC Performing as expected (48th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 3100
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
76.8% Very good
Memory 74.4
1-Core 138
2-Core 245
84% 152 Pts
4-Core 426
8-Core 659
67% 542 Pts
64-Core 671
42% 671 Pts
Poor: 63%
This bench: 76.8%
Great: 83%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650
Asus(1043 879C) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3000 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 461.72
Performing below potential (31st percentile) - GPU OC Guide
44.8% Average
Lighting 55.3
Reflection 56.9
Parallax 50.3
45% 54.2 fps
MRender 64.3
Gravity 49.9
Splatting 50.2
44% 54.8 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 44.8%
Great: 50%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$35
290GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 99 114 128 126 122 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
82.6% Excellent
Read 176
Write 162
Mixed 79.1
SusWrite 112
97% 132 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.7
141% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 82.6%
Great: 113%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905713-019.A00G 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
68.9% Good
MC Read 27.9
MC Write 20
MC Mixed 25.3
70% 24.4 GB/s
SC Read 20.9
SC Write 20.1
SC Mixed 25.9
64% 22.3 GB/s
Latency 91.6
44% 91.6 ns
Poor: 34%
This bench: 68.9%
Great: 82%

 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 3,105 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: 86% - Excellent Total price: $274
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 $299WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $146
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $380WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $72
Intel Core i5-13600K $218Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $400
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