Asrock 970M Pro3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 64%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 12%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (45th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 55 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 59.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics16.5% 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 Drive81.4% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (20%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock 970M Pro3  (all builds)
Memory12.9 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit barev
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160617
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 21 '17 at 16:32
Run Duration116 Seconds
Run User CZE-User
Background CPU 20%

 PC Performing as expected (45th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8300-$168
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.45 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
59.3% Above average
Memory 79.4
1-Core 59.7
2-Core 119
54% 86.2 Pts
4-Core 213
8-Core 355
35% 284 Pts
64-Core 370
23% 370 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 59.3%
Great: 64%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 560-$180
Gigabyte(1458 352A) 1GB
CLim: 900 MHz, MLim: 1002 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 376.33
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
16.5% Very poor
Lighting 19.1
Reflection 22.2
Parallax 16.9
16% 19.4 fps
MRender 26.4
Gravity 19.4
Splatting 22.3
18% 22.7 fps
Poor: 12%
This bench: 16.5%
Great: 15%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
188GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT02B6Q Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
81.4% Excellent
Read 494
Write 388
Mixed 404
95% 429 MB/s
4K Read 32.1
4K Write 42
4K Mixed 29.4
108% 34.5 MB/s
DQ Read 116
DQ Write 88.5
DQ Mixed 17
36% 73.7 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 81.4%
Great: 134%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$67
29GB free
Firmware: CC27 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
54.3% Above average
Read 99.8
Write 89.4
Mixed 83.2
68% 90.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.76
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.25
86% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 56%
This bench: 54.3%
Great: 113%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1600C9D3/4GX KHX1600C9D3/4GX 99U5403-078.A00LF 99U5403-078.A00LF 16GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
41.8% Average
MC Read 17.1
MC Write 14.1
MC Mixed 13.5
43% 14.9 GB/s
SC Read 9.5
SC Write 7.5
SC Mixed 11.5
27% 9.5 GB/s
Latency 81.7
49% 81.7 ns
Poor: 41%
This bench: 41.8%
Great: 44%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 970M Pro3 Builds (Compare 848 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 22%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 18%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock 970M Pro3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 80% - Very good Total price: $217
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable 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 praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products 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. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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