Asus M5A97 R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 41%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 72%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 32%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 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.
Graphics61.2% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive49.4% 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)
Memory9.6 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20150626
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateNov 29 '19 at 14:09
Run Duration191 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing as expected (57th 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 79.9
1-Core 73.9
2-Core 149
60% 101 Pts
4-Core 259
8-Core 344
38% 301 Pts
64-Core 341
21% 341 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
Performing below potential (75th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
61.2% Good
Lighting 77.6
Reflection 80.3
Parallax 72.2
63% 76.7 fps
MRender 78.2
Gravity 71.2
Splatting 64
57% 71.1 fps
Poor: 53%
This bench: 61.2%
Great: 66%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intenso SATAIII 256GB
170GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S022
SusWrite @10s intervals: 289 134 52 60 51 57 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
49.4% Average
Read 442
Write 366
Mixed 22.3
SusWrite 107
52% 234 MB/s
4K Read 20.8
4K Write 12.8
4K Mixed 20.3
64% 18 MB/s
DQ Read 206
DQ Write 18.5
DQ Mixed 1.3
29% 75.2 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 49.4%
Great: 98%
Nvme TS256GMTE220S 256GB
238GB free
Firmware: 42B4 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 380 271 265 267 267 267 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
167% Outstanding
Read 1083
Write 564
Mixed 816
SusWrite 286
153% 687 MB/s
4K Read 59.7
4K Write 137
4K Mixed 79.4
265% 92.1 MB/s
DQ Read 582
DQ Write 478
DQ Mixed 460
363% 506 MB/s
Poor: 141%
This bench: 167%
Great: 273%
SAMSUNG 200GB
172GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 58 57 55 54 54 55 MB/s
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
32.5% Below average
Read 57.3
Write 55.2
Mixed 38.5
SusWrite 55.5
38% 51.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.9
151% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 32.5%
Great: 36%
Samsung SP2004C 200GB-$46
42GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 52 53 53 52 52 52 MB/s
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
29.2% Poor
Read 49.2
Write 54.6
Mixed 36.9
SusWrite 52.2
36% 48.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
125% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 29.2%
Great: 32%
Hitachi HDT721010SLA360 1TB-$30
424GB free
Firmware: ST6O
SusWrite @10s intervals: 101 99 102 101 99 101 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
54.2% Above average
Read 88
Write 86.9
Mixed 39.7
SusWrite 101
58% 78.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 54.2%
Great: 61%
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2017)-$79
3.5TB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 186 187 193 194 191 182 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 40% Great: 90%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 991770 Corsair VS2GB1333D4 991770 Corsair VS2GB1333D4 12GB
1066, 1066, 1066, 1066 MHz
4096, 2048, 4096, 2048 MB
Performing below potential (25th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
38.6% Below average
MC Read 15.5
MC Write 12.9
MC Mixed 12.2
39% 13.5 GB/s
SC Read 9.6
SC Write 8.3
SC Mixed 9.6
26% 9.17 GB/s
Latency 80.7
50% 80.7 ns
Poor: 39%
This bench: 38.6%
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 2,841 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 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 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 and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $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