Asus M5A97 R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 39%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 31%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (59th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 41 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 62.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics59.1% 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 Drive71% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago, 4 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
MotherboardAsus M5A97 R2.0  (all builds)
Memory8.6 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150626
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 13 '20 at 06:37
Run Duration235 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU10%

 PC Performing as expected (59th 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, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
62.8% Good
Memory 80
1-Core 74.5
2-Core 139
59% 97.7 Pts
4-Core 257
8-Core 314
37% 285 Pts
64-Core 319
20% 319 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 62.8%
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: 432.0
Performing below potential (55th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
59.1% Above average
Lighting 74.4
Reflection 78
Parallax 75.9
61% 76.1 fps
MRender 77.4
Gravity 70.5
Splatting 61.3
56% 69.7 fps
Poor: 53%
This bench: 59.1%
Great: 66%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Nvme TS256GMTE220S 256GB
238GB free
Firmware: 42B4S8JA Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 383 267 270 270 270 271 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
158% Outstanding
Read 1,182
Write 908
Mixed 928
SusWrite 289
184% 827 MB/s
4K Read 52.6
4K Write 115
4K Mixed 68.2
228% 78.5 MB/s
DQ Read 535
DQ Write 450
DQ Mixed 464
355% 483 MB/s
Poor: 141%
This bench: 158%
Great: 273%
Intenso SATAIII 256GB
186GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S022
SusWrite @10s intervals: 297 134 56 56 44 56 MB/s
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
71% Very good
Read 492
Write 399
Mixed 387
SusWrite 107
77% 346 MB/s
4K Read 24
4K Write 87.6
4K Mixed 26
116% 45.9 MB/s
DQ Read 212
DQ Write 230
DQ Mixed 1.2
62% 148 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 71%
Great: 98%
Samsung SP2004C 200GB-$46
172GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 57 58 57 57 57 57 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
32% Below average
Read 53.8
Write 59
Mixed 40.3
SusWrite 57.3
39% 52.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 32%
Great: 32%
Samsung SP2004C 200GB-$46
40GB free
Firmware: VM10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 15 15 16 15 16 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
17.8% Very poor
Read 46.5
Write 36.2
Mixed 30.8
SusWrite 15.2
24% 32.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
125% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 17.8%
Great: 32%
Hitachi HDT721010SLA360 1TB-$30
421GB free
Firmware: ST6O
SusWrite @10s intervals: 101 99 102 102 101 100 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
54.3% Above average
Read 88.2
Write 82.2
Mixed 40
SusWrite 101
57% 77.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 54.3%
Great: 61%
Seagate IronWolf 4TB (2016)-$74
3TB free
Firmware: SC60
SusWrite @10s intervals: 176 185 187 185 186 184 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
108% Outstanding
Read 193
Write 174
Mixed 87.5
SusWrite 184
116% 159 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.9
170% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 62%
This bench: 108%
Great: 108%
Samsung FIT USB 3.0 32GB-$27
30GB free, PID 1000
Operating at USB 3.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 28 26 24 26 26 24 MB/s
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
71.3% Very good
Read 206
Write 36
Mixed 83.8
SusWrite 25.9
92% 87.8 MB/s
4K Read 12.8
4K Write 10.7
4K Mixed 10.3
762% 11.3 MB/s
DQ Read 15.4
DQ Write 19.1
DQ Mixed 12.2
1,122% 15.6 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 71.3%
Great: 90%
ST4000DM 004-2CV104 4TB
2.5TB free, PID 0611
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 161 155 167 169 167 165 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
57.5% Above average
Read 121
Write 126
Mixed 96.5
SusWrite 164
175% 127 MB/s
4K Read 7.4
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.4
68% 2.87 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 57.5%
Great: 71%
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 13.6
MC Mixed 12.3
39% 13.8 GB/s
SC Read 8.9
SC Write 8.5
SC Mixed 11
27% 9.47 GB/s
Latency 80.6
50% 80.6 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 2,843 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: 70% - Very good Total price: $358
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
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 i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $48
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback