Asrock 970A-G/3.1

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (65th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 35 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 66.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
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.
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.
High background CPU (23%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
6 years ago, 6 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock 970A-G/3.1  (all builds)
Memory14 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.9 GHz
Display1024 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160112
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJun 23 '17 at 11:24
Run Duration88 Seconds
Run User IDN-User
Background CPU 23%

 PC Performing above expectations (65th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6100-$68
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 3.8 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
66.3% Good
Memory 91.2
1-Core 70.8
2-Core 134
62% 98.5 Pts
4-Core 231
8-Core 304
34% 267 Pts
64-Core 305
19% 305 Pts
Poor: 41%
This bench: 66.3%
Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate ST332031 1CS 320GB
34GB free
Firmware: SC13 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing as expected (47th percentile)
38.3% Below average
Read 65.7
Write 67.7
Mixed 67
50% 66.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.56
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.5
106% 0.85 MB/s
Poor: 19%
This bench: 38.3%
Great: 51%
Seagate ST3320613AS 320GB-$30
22GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SD22 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
50.1% Above average
Read 84.6
Write 90.1
Mixed 85.5
65% 86.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.47
4K Write 1.03
4K Mixed 0.35
77% 0.62 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 50.1%
Great: 65%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Team Dark-2400 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 1866 MHz clocked @ 933 MHz
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
55.6% Above average
MC Read 24.7
MC Write 16
MC Mixed 19.8
58% 20.2 GB/s
SC Read 10.7
SC Write 9.6
SC Mixed 14.9
34% 11.7 GB/s
Latency 65.5
61% 65.5 ns
Poor: 31%
This bench: 55.6%
Great: 84%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 970A-G/3.1 Builds (Compare 353 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 20%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 17%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock 970A-G/3.1

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $265
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit 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 the youtubers that are paid to promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly 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 PC brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively 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