Today's hottest deals

Gigabyte X570 AORUS MASTER

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 72%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 108%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 73%
Battleship
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (52nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 48 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 104%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is outstanding.
Graphics62% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive381% 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
MotherboardGigabyte X570 AORUS MASTER  (all builds)
Memory25.9 GB free of 32 GB @ 3.7 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210521
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJul 31 '21 at 01:41
Run Duration351 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU1%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (52nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X-$122
AM4, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 4.6 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (86th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Memory 88.1
1-Core 167
2-Core 332
105% 196 Pts
4-Core 647
8-Core 1,156
108% 902 Pts
64-Core 1,589
98% 1,589 Pts
Poor: 81%
This bench: 104%
Great: 111%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$117
EVGA(3842 6264) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2012 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 471.41
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
62% Good
Lighting 78.7
Reflection 78.3
Parallax 71.5
64% 76.2 fps
MRender 68.1
Gravity 74
Splatting 70.2
58% 70.8 fps
Poor: 51%
This bench: 62%
Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 870 EVO 4TB-$303
1TB free
Firmware: SVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 432 435 429 430 449 426 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
102% Outstanding
Read 509
Write 429
Mixed 428
SusWrite 434
101% 450 MB/s
4K Read 46
4K Write 45.3
4K Mixed 44.5
151% 45.3 MB/s
DQ Read 220
DQ Write 154
DQ Mixed 187
140% 187 MB/s
Poor: 90%
This bench: 102%
Great: 137%
Samsung 870 EVO 4TB-$303
739GB free
Firmware: SVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 877 468 468 468 469 465 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 90% Great: 137%
Samsung 870 EVO 4TB-$303
845GB free
Firmware: SVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 431 434 428 428 448 425 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Read 510
Write 432
Mixed 430
SusWrite 432
101% 451 MB/s
4K Read 46.7
4K Write 49.5
4K Mixed 47.6
158% 47.9 MB/s
DQ Read 219
DQ Write 134
DQ Mixed 184
135% 179 MB/s
Poor: 90%
This bench: 104%
Great: 137%
Samsung 870 EVO 4TB-$303
479GB free
Firmware: SVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 431 434 428 428 448 425 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Read 509
Write 435
Mixed 434
SusWrite 432
102% 452 MB/s
4K Read 46.4
4K Write 51.7
4K Mixed 48.9
160% 49 MB/s
DQ Read 220
DQ Write 122
DQ Mixed 182
132% 175 MB/s
Poor: 90%
This bench: 104%
Great: 137%
Samsung 980 Pro NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$89
868GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 3B2QGXA7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2670 2667 2634 2608 1971 1566 MB/s
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
381% Outstanding
Read 3,027
Write 2,639
Mixed 2,738
SusWrite 2,353
605% 2,689 MB/s
4K Read 85.7
4K Write 73.4
4K Mixed 80.5
272% 79.9 MB/s
DQ Read 1,319
DQ Write 108
DQ Mixed 234
292% 553 MB/s
Poor: 266%
This bench: 381%
Great: 477%
WD Black 4TB (2013)-$175
1TB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 128 130 130 129 134 128 MB/s
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
74.5% Very good
Read 129
Write 127
Mixed 88.9
SusWrite 130
88% 119 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 3.2
4K Mixed 1.1
215% 1.7 MB/s
Poor: 58%
This bench: 74.5%
Great: 98%
WD Black 4TB (2012)-$179
3.5TB free
Firmware: 01.01L01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 155 158 157 155 162 153 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
92.6% Outstanding
Read 166
Write 152
Mixed 104
SusWrite 157
106% 145 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 3.6
4K Mixed 0.9
196% 1.73 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 92.6%
Great: 93%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX DDR4 3733 C19 2x16GB
2 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3733 MHz
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
101% Outstanding
MC Read 42.2
MC Write 27.1
MC Mixed 39
103% 36.1 GB/s
SC Read 28.7
SC Write 26.9
SC Mixed 43.5
94% 33 GB/s
Latency 69.4
58% 69.4 ns
Poor: 73%
This bench: 101%
Great: 130%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 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 8 7 60 27.5" 1280 720 SAM0C4D U28E590
Typical GA-X570 AORUS MASTER Builds (Compare 5,141 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 184%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 104%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 201%
UFO

Motherboard: Gigabyte X570 AORUS MASTER - $477

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 77% - Very good Total price: $1,521
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 $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $299WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $148
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $375WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i7-14700K $355Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $350
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