Asus M5A97 EVO R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 40%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 33%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (64th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 36 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 67.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics55.9% 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 Drive83.8% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
MotherboardAsus M5A97 EVO R2.0  (all builds)
Memory6.5 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit väriä
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130410
Uptime1 Days
Run DateNov 16 '18 at 12:06
Run Duration246 Seconds
Run User FIN-User
Background CPU 24%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-3GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (64th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8350-$130
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
67.7% Good
Memory 89.5
1-Core 69.2
2-Core 137
61% 98.6 Pts
4-Core 250
8-Core 433
41% 342 Pts
64-Core 415
26% 415 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 67.7%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-3GB-$119
Asus(1043 85B9) 3GB; DUAL-GTX1060-O3G
CLim: 1974 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 3GB, Driver: 416.34
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
55.9% Above average
Lighting 68.6
Reflection 70
Parallax 60.3
56% 66.3 fps
MRender 70.5
Gravity 66.1
Splatting 67.9
56% 68.2 fps
Poor: 48%
This bench: 55.9%
Great: 56%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$76
308GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 273 277 296 300 295 299 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
83.8% Excellent
Read 482
Write 312
Mixed 297
SusWrite 290
77% 345 MB/s
4K Read 27.5
4K Write 68.4
4K Mixed 32.1
119% 42.7 MB/s
DQ Read 260
DQ Write 199
DQ Mixed 0.5
62% 153 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 83.8%
Great: 129%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$28
796GB free
Firmware: CC47
SusWrite @10s intervals: 176 184 184 184 185 183 MB/s
Performing above expectations (80th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Read 181
Write 145
Mixed 77.3
SusWrite 183
107% 146 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 1
174% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 55%
This bench: 104%
Great: 112%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$67
963GB free
Firmware: CC27
SusWrite @10s intervals: 161 172 171 171 171 171 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
93.6% Outstanding
Read 157
Write 132
Mixed 79.2
SusWrite 170
98% 134 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.9
157% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 56%
This bench: 93.6%
Great: 113%
WD Green 2TB (2011)-$55
472GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 69 69 69 69 69 69 MB/s
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
45.6% Average
Read 89.5
Write 86
Mixed 55.2
SusWrite 69.2
55% 75 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.9
153% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 45.6%
Great: 67%
Samsung Spinpoint F4 2TB-$119
1.5TB free
Firmware: 1AQ10001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 102 101 101 101 101 101 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
57.7% Above average
Read 99.8
Write 97.5
Mixed 56
SusWrite 101
65% 88.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 57.7%
Great: 72%
Kingston DataTraveler G3 16GB
15GB free, PID 1643
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 5.1 4.8 10 13 13 12 MB/s
Performing above expectations (76th percentile)
6.87% Terrible
Read 16.8
Write 12.2
Mixed 7.8
SusWrite 9.6
15% 11.6 MB/s
4K Read 4.7
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.5
48% 1.87 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 6.87%
Great: 9%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair CMZ4GX3M2A1600C9 Kingston KHX1600C9D3/4GX CMZ4GX3M2A1600C9 Kingston KHX1600C9D3/4GX 12GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
2048, 4096, 2048, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
43.9% Average
MC Read 17.1
MC Write 14.3
MC Mixed 14.4
44% 15.3 GB/s
SC Read 10.1
SC Write 8.6
SC Mixed 13.1
30% 10.6 GB/s
Latency 67.9
59% 67.9 ns
Poor: 43%
This bench: 43.9%
Great: 46%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A97 EVO R2.0 Builds (Compare 581 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 31%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asus M5A97 EVO R2.0 - $166

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 70% - Very good Total price: $512
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 endorse 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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
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