Asrock FM2A75M-DGS R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 55.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.51% 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.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A75M-DGS R2.0  (all builds)
Memory11.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1440 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20130711
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateDec 21 '19 at 15:33
Run Duration110 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing as expected (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X4 750K-$45
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
55.1% Above average
Memory 81.7
1-Core 61.4
2-Core 113
54% 85.3 Pts
4-Core 170
8-Core 155
22% 163 Pts
64-Core 170
10% 170 Pts
Poor: 40%
This bench: 55.1%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 630
Gigabyte(1458 3544) 2GB
CLim: 700 MHz, MLim: 400 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 384.76
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
3.51% Terrible
Lighting 4.33
Reflection 5.08
Parallax 3.56
4% 4.32 fps
MRender 5.9
Gravity 4.33
Splatting 3.09
4% 4.44 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.51%
Great: 5%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Toshiba DT01ACA100 1TB-$28
569GB free (System drive)
Firmware: MS2OA750
SusWrite @10s intervals: 61 86 43 86 100 89 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
39.9% Below average
Read 61.5
Write 121
Mixed 16.2
SusWrite 77.7
50% 69.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.1
29% 0.23 MB/s
Poor: 47%
This bench: 39.9%
Great: 107%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1866C9D3/8GX 16GB
800, 800 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (6th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
29.7% Poor
MC Read 14.1
MC Write 6.3
MC Mixed 10.8
30% 10.4 GB/s
SC Read 3.3
SC Write 4.8
SC Mixed 6.8
14% 4.97 GB/s
Latency 77.5
52% 77.5 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 29.7%
Great: 59%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A75M-DGS R2.0 Builds (Compare 10 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 43%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A75M-DGS R2.0

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 70% - Good Total price: $36
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback