Asrock FM2A58M-HD+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 51%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (28th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 72 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 38.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics20% 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 Drive37.7% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A58M-HD+  (all builds)
Memory5.9 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150508
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 29 '20 at 06:00
Run Duration131 Seconds
Run User MYS-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing below expectations (28th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A10-5800B APU (2012 D.Tr)
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
38.4% Below average
Memory 55.2
1-Core 59.4
2-Core 80.6
41% 65.1 Pts
4-Core 127
8-Core 124
17% 126 Pts
64-Core 126
8% 126 Pts
Poor: 40%
This bench: 38.4%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-Ti-$92
Nvidia(10DE 105F) 2GB
CLim: 1476 MHz, MLim: 1502 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 445.87
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
20% Very poor
Lighting 24.9
Reflection 19
Parallax 22.6
20% 22.2 fps
MRender 28.4
Gravity 25.4
Splatting 19.2
19% 24.3 fps
Poor: 16%
This bench: 20%
Great: 19%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Apacer AS340 120GB
21GB free (System drive)
Firmware: AP613PE0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 134 152 105 50 70 43 MB/s
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
37.7% Below average
Read 240
Write 201
Mixed 183
SusWrite 92.3
40% 179 MB/s
4K Read 24.3
4K Write 14.4
4K Mixed 15.2
64% 18 MB/s
DQ Read 128
DQ Write 14.9
DQ Mixed 25.9
30% 56.1 MB/s
Poor: 41%
This bench: 37.7%
Great: 91%
HGST Travelstar 5K1000 2.5" 1TB
336GB free
Firmware: JA0OA710
SusWrite @10s intervals: 59 63 65 64 65 64 MB/s
Performing below expectations (26th percentile)
36.1% Below average
Read 62.3
Write 64.5
Mixed 27.3
SusWrite 63.3
40% 54.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.6
113% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 36.1%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Hynix HMT451U6AFR8A-PB Kingston 99U5584-005.A00LF 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
28% Poor
MC Read 13.4
MC Write 5.8
MC Mixed 9.7
28% 9.63 GB/s
SC Read 8.8
SC Write 7.5
SC Mixed 10.2
25% 8.83 GB/s
Latency 142
28% 142 ns
Poor: 29%
This bench: 28%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A58M-HD+ Builds (Compare 21 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 19%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A58M-HD+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 77% - Very good Total price: $172
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate a lot of reddit accounts. UserBenchmark exposes their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. 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+ reviews on trustpilot are written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which saves our users millions.
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 $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