Gigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 19%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (79th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 21 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 71.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics52.4% 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 DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemGigabyte A320M-H
MotherboardGigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF  (all builds)
Memory1.6 GB free of 4 GB @ 3.1 GHz
Display1680 x 1050 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190823
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 27 '20 at 10:21
Run Duration109 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 12%
Watch Gameplay: 570 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (79th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 1200 Quad-Core
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.1 GHz, turbo 3.45 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
71.1% Very good
Memory 80
1-Core 104
2-Core 205
73% 129 Pts
4-Core 358
8-Core 374
49% 366 Pts
64-Core 374
23% 374 Pts
Poor: 52%
This bench: 71.1%
Great: 77%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 570-$130
Sapphire(1DA2 E366) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1340 MHz, MLim: 1750 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 20.1.3
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
52.4% Above average
Lighting 65.4
Reflection 68
Parallax 82.4
53% 71.9 fps
MRender 67.3
Gravity 63.3
Splatting 57.3
51% 62.6 fps
Poor: 37%
This bench: 52.4%
Great: 49%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$37
825GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 108 80 171 171 185 174 MB/s
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
94.4% Outstanding
Read 181
Write 194
Mixed 79.3
SusWrite 148
110% 151 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
152% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 94.4%
Great: 113%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial BLS4G4D26BFSB.8FBD2 1x4GB
1 of 4 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3066 MHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
53.5% Above average
MC Read 20
MC Write 17.8
MC Mixed 17.4
53% 18.4 GB/s
SC Read 18.1
SC Write 16.9
SC Mixed 17.1
50% 17.4 GB/s
Latency 80.6
50% 80.6 ns
Poor: 33%
This bench: 53.5%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-A320M-H-CF Builds (Compare 2,913 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 29%
Raft

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 77% - Very good Total price: $233
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