Asus TUF GAMING X570-PLUS (WI-FI)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 96%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 39%
Jet ski
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 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 90.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics28.3% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive76.4% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory64GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 64GB 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)
Memory51.4 GB free of 64 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20201204
Uptime2.5 Days
Run DateJun 07 '21 at 13:34
Run Duration297 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU2%
Watch Gameplay: 1050-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 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 9 3900X-$315
AM4, 1 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 3.95 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
90.6% Outstanding
Memory 75.2
1-Core 141
2-Core 282
89% 166 Pts
4-Core 567
8-Core 1,024
96% 796 Pts
64-Core 2,134
132% 2,134 Pts
Poor: 80%
This bench: 90.6%
Great: 97%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1050-Ti-$59
Gigabyte(1458 3764) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 462.59
Performing below potential (35th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
28.3% Poor
Lighting 36.1
Reflection 39.9
Parallax 37.4
29% 37.8 fps
MRender 37.7
Gravity 37.7
Splatting 23.9
26% 33.1 fps
Poor: 27%
This bench: 28.3%
Great: 33%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WDC WDS100T2B0A-00SM50 1TB
716GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 401020WD
SusWrite @10s intervals: 313 363 384 369 384 381 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
76.4% Very good
Read 495
Write 391
Mixed 245
SusWrite 366
84% 374 MB/s
4K Read 29.6
4K Write 53.2
4K Mixed 21.9
101% 34.9 MB/s
DQ Read 125
DQ Write 58.5
DQ Mixed 66.2
56% 83.2 MB/s
Poor: 65%
This bench: 76.4%
Great: 117%
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 2TB-$159
673GB free
Firmware: 2B2QEXM7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1746 1782 1793 1807 1571 1333 MB/s
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
353% Outstanding
Read 2,566
Write 1,810
Mixed 1,772
SusWrite 1,672
438% 1,955 MB/s
4K Read 66.6
4K Write 160
4K Mixed 91.6
303% 106 MB/s
DQ Read 1,303
DQ Write 1,117
DQ Mixed 1,193
898% 1,204 MB/s
Poor: 223%
This bench: 353%
Great: 435%
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$85
107GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 449 450 450 450 450 450 MB/s
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
115% Outstanding
Read 496
Write 450
Mixed 405
SusWrite 450
101% 450 MB/s
4K Read 43.3
4K Write 92
4K Mixed 56.8
187% 64 MB/s
DQ Read 220
DQ Write 185
DQ Mixed 201
151% 202 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 115%
Great: 134%
WDC WD40 EZRX-00SPEB0 4TB
270GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 32 34 35 35 35 35 MB/s
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
24% Poor
Read 72.7
Write 74.9
Mixed 67.5
SusWrite 34.1
83% 62.3 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.9
99% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 24%
Great: 47%
WDC WD60 EZRZ-00RWYB1 6TB
551GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 32 34 35 35 35 35 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
35.3% Below average
Read 131
Write 132
Mixed 103
SusWrite 34.1
130% 100 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 1
133% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 35.3%
Great: 62%
Hitachi HDS721010CLA332 1TB
930GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 64 68 69 69 70 70 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
27.2% Poor
Read 58.3
Write 69.5
Mixed 40
SusWrite 68.3
81% 59 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.6
64% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 27.2%
Great: 49%
WDC WD20 EZRX-00D8PB0 2TB
537GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 73 74 74 74 74 71 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
40.7% Average
Read 116
Write 116
Mixed 97.2
SusWrite 73.3
134% 101 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.9
119% 1.47 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 40.7%
Great: 43%
LaCie d2 quadra 4TB
329GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 19 22 21 21 21 21 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
12.6% Very poor
Read 36.6
Write 37.6
Mixed 31
SusWrite 21.1
42% 31.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.3
41% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 12.6%
Great: 18%
LaCie d2 quadra 4TB
981GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 23 21 22 22 22 22 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
19.3% Very poor
Read 39.9
Write 38.9
Mixed 34.5
SusWrite 21.7
45% 33.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 1.2
139% 1.6 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 19.3%
Great: 18%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Team Group Inc. TEAMGROUP-UD4-3200 2x31.5GB
2 of 4 slots used
63GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
104% Outstanding
MC Read 42.5
MC Write 37.2
MC Mixed 37.9
112% 39.2 GB/s
SC Read 21.5
SC Write 24.1
SC Mixed 31.8
74% 25.8 GB/s
Latency 89.9
44% 89.9 ns
Poor: 60%
This bench: 104%
Great: 134%

 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 26,128 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) - $185

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 86% - Excellent Total price: $1,013
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 $163Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $160
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $383
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