Asrock A320M-HDV R4.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 39%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 80%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 35%
Jet ski
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (69th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 31 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 82.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics44.6% 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)
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.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock A320M-HDV R4.0  (all builds)
Memory5 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190626
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateOct 15 '19 at 01:04
Run Duration128 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU2%
Watch Gameplay: 570 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (69th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 2600-$145
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
82.6% Excellent
Memory 80.4
1-Core 117
2-Core 234
80% 144 Pts
4-Core 456
8-Core 718
72% 587 Pts
64-Core 843
52% 843 Pts
Poor: 67%
This bench: 82.6%
Great: 81%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 570-$130
ASRock(1849 5026) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1301 MHz, MLim: 1750 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 19.8.1
Performing below potential (56th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
44.6% Average
Lighting 53.6
Reflection 67.1
Parallax 68.7
44% 63.1 fps
MRender 65
Gravity 52.1
Splatting 54.9
47% 57.3 fps
Poor: 37%
This bench: 44.6%
Great: 49%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial BX300 240GB-$43
27GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M2CR010
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 511
Write 468
Mixed 234
90% 404 MB/s
4K Read 30.7
4K Write 61.8
4K Mixed 40.1
131% 44.2 MB/s
DQ Read 313
DQ Write 185
DQ Mixed 294
207% 264 MB/s
Poor: 65% Great: 114%
Samsung HD161HJ 160GB-$40
32GB free
Firmware: JF100-19
SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 18 20 10 22 18 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
25.2% Poor
Read 69.4
Write 75.9
Mixed 46.3
SusWrite 18
39% 52.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.7
123% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 25.2%
Great: 42%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5713-001.A00G 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
77.1% Very good
MC Read 31.8
MC Write 26.1
MC Mixed 23.4
78% 27.1 GB/s
SC Read 22.6
SC Write 31.4
SC Mixed 23.5
74% 25.8 GB/s
Latency 79.8
50% 79.8 ns
Poor: 50%
This bench: 77.1%
Great: 77%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A320M-HDV R4.0 Builds (Compare 6,036 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 39%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 36%
Jet ski

Motherboard: Asrock A320M-HDV R4.0

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 90% - Outstanding Total price: $343
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 more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
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 return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $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) $29Corsair 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