ADD TO PC
BUILD

Gigabyte GA-F2A75M-D3H

Performance Results


Gaming 9% Tree trunk	Desktop 56% Gunboat	Workstation 7% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 55%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics	9.63% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive	86.6% 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.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although 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

7 years ago, 7 years ago, 7 years ago, 7 years ago, 7 years ago, 7 years ago.

Motherboard	Gigabyte GA-F2A75M-D3H (all builds)
Memory	1.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors,
OS	Windows 7
BIOS Date	20131215
Uptime	0.1 Days
Run Date	Apr 01 '17 at 18:08
Run Duration	442 Seconds
Run User	HKG-User
Background CPU	0%

PC Performing above expectations (63^rd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD A8-5600K APU-$250 14,744 User benchmarks, average bench 49% P0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 3.6 GHz Performing above expectations (78^th percentile)	55% Above average	Memory 80.7 1-Core 53.7 2-Core 75.2 48% 69.9 Pts	4-Core 175 8-Core 160 23% 168 Pts	64-Core 186 12% 186 Pts
Poor: 34% ↑ This bench: 55% Great: 59%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 650-$112 69,673 User benchmarks, average bench 8% Gigabyte(1458 3553) 1GB CLim: 1110 MHz, MLim: 1250 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 376.53 Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	9.63% Terrible	Lighting 10.9 Reflection 9.85 Parallax 14.8 9% 11.8 fps	MRender 14.2 Gravity 12.7 Splatting 13.7 11% 13.5 fps
Poor: 8% ↑ This bench: 9.63% Great: 9%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Toshiba Q300 Pro 256GB-$149 1,385 User benchmarks, average bench 80% 238GB free Firmware: JURA Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing above expectations (61^st percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 100 100 0 (03) Spinup time 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 30 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 35 (A7) Unknown 100 100 0 (A8) Unknown 100 100 4 (A9) Unknown 100 100 100 (AD) Unknown 200 200 0 (AF) Unknown 100 100 0 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 26 (C2) HDA temperature 72 60 171800133660 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (F0) Head flying hours 100 100 0	82.4% Excellent	Read 505 Write 455 Mixed 493 108% 484 MB/s	4K Read 17.3 4K Write 44.5 4K Mixed 29.4 87% 30.4 MB/s	DQ Read 190 DQ Write 108 DQ Mixed 71.6 74% 123 MB/s
Poor: 55% ↑ This bench: 82.4% Great: 102%
SanDisk Extreme Pro 240GB-$79 10,862 User benchmarks, average bench 92% 100GB free (System drive) Firmware: X212 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (38^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 253 100 1408 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 1481 (A6) Unknown 100 100 1 (A7) Unknown 100 100 20 (A8) Unknown 100 100 104 (A9) Unknown 100 100 395 (AB) Unknown 100 100 0 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 100 100 29 (AE) Unknown 100 100 737 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BC) Unknown 100 100 2 (C2) HDA temperature 68 48 206159544352 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 0 (D4) Unknown 100 100 5 (E6) GMR head amplitude 100 100 96 (E8) Unknown 100 100 100 (E9) Unknown 100 100 7718 (F1) Unknown 253 253 5123 (F2) Unknown 253 253 7595 (F4) Unknown 0 100 0	86.6% Excellent	Read 509 Write 448 Mixed 428 103% 461 MB/s	4K Read 29.6 4K Write 61.2 4K Mixed 23.6 107% 38.1 MB/s	DQ Read 190 DQ Write 115 DQ Mixed 61 70% 122 MB/s
Poor: 65% ↑ This bench: 86.6% Great: 114%
WD Green 3TB (2011)-$59 112,929 User benchmarks, average bench 62% 1.5TB free Firmware: 80.0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (24^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 190 176 5483 (04) Start/Stop count 99 99 1702 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 93 93 5442 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 865 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 174 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 180 180 61495 (C2) HDA temperature 115 103 35 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	52.3% Above average	Read 90.5 Write 91.2 Mixed 94.5 70% 92.1 MB/s	4K Read 0.76 4K Write 2.14 4K Mixed 0.29 103% 1.06 MB/s
Poor: 40% ↑ This bench: 52.3% Great: 83%
WD Black 1.5TB (2010) 6,983 User benchmarks, average bench 65% 506GB free Firmware: 05.0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 253 253 7841 (04) Start/Stop count 96 96 4773 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 80 80 14841 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 98 98 2562 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 677 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 199 199 4095 (C2) HDA temperature 108 94 44 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 1	91.6% Outstanding	Read 202 Write 117 Mixed 121 110% 147 MB/s	4K Read 0.79 4K Write 2.35 4K Mixed 0.32 112% 1.15 MB/s
Poor: 44% ↑ This bench: 91.6% Great: 85%
INTEL SS DSC2BF240A4H 240GB 91 User benchmarks, average bench 38% 186GB free, PID 2329 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing above expectations (80^th percentile)	51.5% Above average	Read 36.7 Write 37.2 Mixed 36.6 48% 36.8 MB/s	4K Read 9.47 4K Write 11.6 4K Mixed 6.98 669% 9.36 MB/s	DQ Read 12.6 DQ Write 18.1 DQ Mixed 7.77 928% 12.8 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 51.5% Great: 71%
SanDisk Extreme USB 3.0 64GB-$72 6,221 User benchmarks, average bench 74% 35GB free, PID 5580 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed Performing way below expectations (11^th percentile)	29.8% Poor	Read 35.1 Write 28 Mixed 17.5 32% 26.8 MB/s	4K Read 4.95 4K Write 5.68 4K Mixed 2.83 308% 4.49 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 29.8% Great: 111%
Kingston DT microDuo 3.0 32GB 1,354 User benchmarks, average bench 15% 26GB free, PID 16a3 Operating at USB 3.0 Speed Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	26.7% Poor	Read 115 Write 22.9 Mixed 24.4 51% 54.1 MB/s	4K Read 5.14 4K Write 1.24 4K Mixed 1.08 98% 2.48 MB/s
Poor: 8% ↑ This bench: 26.7% Great: 24%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Adata DDR3 1866G 2O 2x4GB 411 User benchmarks, average bench 35% 2 of 4 slots used 8GB DIMM DDR3 1333 MHz clocked @ 1866 MHz Performing below potential (36^th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP	32.6% Below average	MC Read 15.7 MC Write 6.9 MC Mixed 12.5 33% 11.7 GB/s	SC Read 4.6 SC Write 4.6 SC Mixed 6.6 15% 5.27 GB/s	Latency 79.2 50% 79.2 ns
Poor: 29% ↑ This bench: 32.6% Great: 39%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical GA-F2A75M-D3H Builds (Compare 78 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 7%

Tree trunk

Desktop

Desktop 51%

Yacht

Workstation

Workstation 6%

Tree trunk

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-F2A75M-D3H

CPU
Athlon II X4 740KAMDBench 49%, 4,318 samples	23x
A4-5300 APUAMD $36Bench 40%, 7,032 samples	9x
A10-5800K APU (2012 D.Tr)AMD $119Bench 50%, 18,312 samples	9x

GPU
HD 7750AMDBench 8%, 22,655 samples	12x
GTX 650Nvidia $112Bench 8%, 69,673 samples	9x
Radeon HD 7660DAMDBench 5%, 7,665 samples	6x

SSD
0 500GBCt500mx5Bench 92%, 2,476 samples	4x
MX500 1TBCrucial $88Bench 106%, 202,785 samples	4x
M550 mSATA 512GBCrucial $458Bench 87%, 441 samples	4x

RAM
99P5471-002.A 4x2GBKingstonBench 29%, 47 samples	4x
SHARETRONIC 1x4GBUnknownBench 27%, 954 samples	4x
DDR3 1600G 4x2GBAdataBench 43%, 200 samples	4x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.

Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?

Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.

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.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $252	Nvidia RTX 4070 $549	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback