Asus M5A97 R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 27%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 72%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 21%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 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 63.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics36.7% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive44.3% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 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.
Run History
MotherboardAsus M5A97 R2.0  (all builds)
Memory9.5 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20150626
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 29 '19 at 12:10
Run Duration218 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU4%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6350 Six-Core-$55
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 3.9 GHz
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
63.4% Good
Memory 79.8
1-Core 73.6
2-Core 148
60% 100 Pts
4-Core 262
8-Core 336
38% 299 Pts
64-Core 342
21% 342 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 63.4%
Great: 66%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 980-$500
PNY(196E 1116) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1392 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 441.12
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
36.7% Below average
Lighting 32.3
Reflection 80.2
Parallax 72.1
26% 61.5 fps
MRender 77.9
Gravity 71.1
Splatting 62.9
57% 70.6 fps
Poor: 53%
This bench: 36.7%
Great: 66%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intenso SATAIII 256GB
170GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S022
SusWrite @10s intervals: 267 139 62 57 56 37 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
44.3% Average
Read 450
Write 378
Mixed 362
SusWrite 103
72% 323 MB/s
4K Read 22.7
4K Write 12.1
4K Mixed 0.9
42% 11.9 MB/s
DQ Read 188
DQ Write 212
DQ Mixed 1.2
56% 134 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 44.3%
Great: 98%
Nvme TS256GMTE220S 256GB
238GB free
Firmware: 42B4 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 367 265 270 263 267 268 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
167% Outstanding
Read 1,088
Write 690
Mixed 832
SusWrite 284
161% 723 MB/s
4K Read 60.6
4K Write 139
4K Mixed 79.5
267% 93 MB/s
DQ Read 577
DQ Write 472
DQ Mixed 451
358% 500 MB/s
Poor: 141%
This bench: 167%
Great: 273%
SAMSUNG 200GB
172GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 20 20 20 20 20 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
22.2% Poor
Read 56.7
Write 53.8
Mixed 37.8
SusWrite 20.1
31% 42.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 22.2%
Great: 36%
Samsung SP2004C 200GB-$46
42GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 52 53 52 52 51 52 MB/s
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
28.8% Poor
Read 48.3
Write 54
Mixed 36.8
SusWrite 51.8
35% 47.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
125% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 28.8%
Great: 32%
SAMSUNG 160GB
47GB free
Firmware: BV10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 21 21 21 21 21 21 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
16.5% Very poor
Read 36
Write 41.5
Mixed 28.5
SusWrite 21
24% 31.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.8
138% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 16.5%
Great: 49%
Hitachi HDT721010SLA360 1TB-$30
424GB free
Firmware: ST6O
SusWrite @10s intervals: 84 83 82 83 84 83 MB/s
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
49.1% Average
Read 87.8
Write 90.5
Mixed 43.7
SusWrite 83
56% 76.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 49.1%
Great: 61%
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2017)-$63
3.5TB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 185 186 191 191 191 175 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 40% Great: 90%
Generic STORAGE DEVICE 197GB
118GB free, PID 0727
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 18 17 18 18 18 18 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
17.6% Very poor
Read 19.7
Write 18.5
Mixed 18.2
SusWrite 17.6
25% 18.5 MB/s
4K Read 4.7
4K Write 3.2
4K Mixed 3.7
252% 3.87 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 17.6%
Great: 18%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 991770 Corsair VS2GB1333D4 991770 Corsair VS2GB1333D4 12GB
1066, 1066, 1066, 1066 MHz
4096, 2048, 4096, 2048 MB
Performing as expected (41st percentile)
39.3% Below average
MC Read 15.5
MC Write 13.4
MC Mixed 12.5
39% 13.8 GB/s
SC Read 9.4
SC Write 8.5
SC Mixed 10.4
27% 9.43 GB/s
Latency 81
49% 81 ns
Poor: 39%
This bench: 39.3%
Great: 42%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A97 R2.0 Builds (Compare 2,842 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus M5A97 R2.0 - $89

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $354
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 $45SanDisk 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