Asus M5A97 LE R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 31%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 65%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 23%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (36th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 64 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 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 64.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics49.4% 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 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.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsus M5A97 LE R2.0  (all builds)
Memory3.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1600 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130111
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateApr 03 '19 at 18:57
Run Duration173 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 24%

 PC Performing below expectations (36th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6300-$90
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 3.75 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
64.6% Good
Memory 88.6
1-Core 56
2-Core 120
56% 88.4 Pts
4-Core 228
8-Core 287
33% 258 Pts
64-Core 280
17% 280 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 64.6%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 970-$200
CLim: 1455 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 388.13
Performing below potential (57th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
49.4% Average
Lighting 60.5
Reflection 65.2
Parallax 58
49% 61.2 fps
MRender 70.5
Gravity 58.7
Splatting 55.7
50% 61.6 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 49.4%
Great: 54%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
PNY CS13 11 240GB SSD
3GB free
Firmware: CS13
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 395
Write 438
Mixed 321
86% 385 MB/s
4K Read 24.4
4K Write 47.3
4K Mixed 29.5
100% 33.7 MB/s
DQ Read 211
DQ Write 157
DQ Mixed 10.6
55% 126 MB/s
Poor: 43% Great: 88%
Hitachi HDS721050CLA360 500GB
106GB free (System drive)
Firmware: JP2O
SusWrite @10s intervals: 27 40 36 39 34 42 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
16.7% Very poor
Read 21.5
Write 23.2
Mixed 19
SusWrite 36.2
18% 25 MB/s
4K Read 0.2
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.2
56% 0.6 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 16.7%
Great: 77%
Seagate Expansion 4TB
3.5TB free
Firmware: 9300
SusWrite @10s intervals: 18 19 19 19 18 18 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
13.7% Very poor
Read 28
Write 29.2
Mixed 26
SusWrite 18.5
19% 25.4 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 3
4K Mixed 0.7
175% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 13.7%
Great: 66%
Sony Card_R/W -CF 64GB
2GB free, PID 01bd
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 2 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
7.43% Terrible
Read 27
Write 20.8
Mixed 26.5
SusWrite 1.6
24% 19 MB/s
4K Read 4.3
4K Write 0.7
4K Mixed 1.3
84% 2.1 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 7.43%
Great: 16%
Sony Card_R/W -SD 64GB
35GB free, PID 01bd
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 12 12 12 12 13 13 MB/s
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
8.51% Terrible
Read 19.2
Write 19.5
Mixed 19
SusWrite 12.4
24% 17.5 MB/s
4K Read 3.7
4K Write 0.7
4K Mixed 1.2
78% 1.87 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 8.51%
Great: 17%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 C9 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 1333 MHz clocked @ 667 MHz
Performing below potential (22nd percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
43.2% Average
MC Read 17.2
MC Write 13.3
MC Mixed 14.8
43% 15.1 GB/s
SC Read 10.1
SC Write 8.6
SC Mixed 12
29% 10.2 GB/s
Latency 68.9
58% 68.9 ns
Poor: 28%
This bench: 43.2%
Great: 62%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A97 LE R2.0 Builds (Compare 1,462 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 21%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 65%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 17%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 - $200

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 81% - Excellent Total price: $377
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia 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) $39Corsair 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