Asrock FM2A58M-VG3+ R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 55%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
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 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 56.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.85% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive34.3% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (19%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A58M-VG3+ R2.0  (all builds)
Memory2.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1600 x 1200 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150511
Uptime0.3 Days
Run DateDec 14 '18 at 04:12
Run Duration139 Seconds
Run User IDN-User
Background CPU 19%

 PC Performing as expected (52nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-6600K APU-$88
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.9 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
56.4% Above average
Memory 83.1
1-Core 68.4
2-Core 114
56% 88.3 Pts
4-Core 179
8-Core 153
23% 166 Pts
64-Core 173
11% 173 Pts
Poor: 36%
This bench: 56.4%
Great: 60%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 8570D
ASRock(1849 990E) 2GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1062.1004
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
4.85% Terrible
Lighting 5.77
Reflection 8.42
Parallax 5.16
5% 6.45 fps
MRender 5.19
Gravity 4.4
Splatting 8.39
5% 5.99 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.85%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
V-GEN03AS18EU120G 120GB
51GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V0202
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 60 15 40 18 86 MB/s
Performing below potential (7th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
34.3% Below average
Read 208
Write 59.5
Mixed 76.5
SusWrite 40.8
21% 96.2 MB/s
4K Read 24.5
4K Write 27
4K Mixed 16.5
73% 22.7 MB/s
DQ Read 30
DQ Write 46.6
DQ Mixed 5.5
13% 27.4 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 34.3%
Great: 75%
Hitachi HTS547564A9E384 640GB
209GB free
Firmware: JEDOA50B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 49 44 46 46 49 48 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
28.9% Poor
Read 54
Write 41.7
Mixed 13.5
SusWrite 46.8
28% 39 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.4
67% 0.37 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 28.9%
Great: 51%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown RMR5030EB68F9W1600 RMR5030ME68F9F1600 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
33% Below average
MC Read 14.8
MC Write 6.7
MC Mixed 11.8
32% 11.1 GB/s
SC Read 7.1
SC Write 7.6
SC Mixed 10.2
24% 8.3 GB/s
Latency 75
53% 75 ns
Poor: 24%
This bench: 33%
Great: 33%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A58M-VG3+ R2.0 Builds (Compare 141 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A58M-VG3+ R2.0

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 21% - Poor Total price: $28
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/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 $174Nvidia 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