Today's hottest deals

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

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 19%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (16th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 84 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 an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 15.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Graphics4.31% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (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.
Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemMicro-Star MS-7C52
MotherboardMSI A320M-A PRO MAX (MS-7C52)  (all builds)
Memory1.9 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20200610
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJun 14 '23 at 20:30
Run Duration153 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 100%

 PC Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-9600 APU (2016 D.BR)
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.1 GHz, turbo 3.35 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
15.9% Very poor
Memory 19.4
1-Core 28.7
2-Core 51.6
19% 33.2 Pts
4-Core 68.8
8-Core 88.1
10% 78.4 Pts
64-Core 52.6
3% 52.6 Pts
Poor: 25%
This bench: 15.9%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
MSI(1462 7C52) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 20.10.44
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
4.31% Terrible
Lighting 5
Reflection 5.1
Parallax 9.8
4% 6.63 fps
MRender 2.6
Gravity 8.8
Splatting 5.8
5% 5.73 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 4.31%
Great: 8%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
JAJM600M256C 256GB
13GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S0222A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 29 108 137 122 33 12 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
71.5% Very good
Read 177
Write 138
Mixed 2.2
SusWrite 73.3
70% 97.6 MB/s
4K Read 0
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.1
11% 0.03 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 71.5%
Great: 89%
Toshiba P300 1TB-$34
901GB free
Firmware: MS2OA8R0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 157 156 140 131 141 155 MB/s
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
84.6% Excellent
Read 148
Write 161
Mixed 35.7
SusWrite 147
89% 123 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.6
135% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 84.6%
Great: 107%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x8GB
1 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
7.99% Terrible
MC Read 2.2
MC Write 1.6
MC Mixed 4.6
8% 2.8 GB/s
SC Read 1.6
SC Write 1.5
SC Mixed 1.7
5% 1.6 GB/s
Latency 325
12% 325 ns
Poor: 18%
This bench: 7.99%
Great: 67%

 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 3,131 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: 85% - Excellent Total price: $275
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 i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $130
Intel Core i5-12600K $164Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $389WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $210Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $389
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