Asus PRIME A320M-K

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 18%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (53rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 47 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 68.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics28.6% 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)
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.
MotherboardAsus PRIME A320M-K  (all builds)
Memory10.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20181207
Uptime1.1 Days
Run DateMar 14 '21 at 18:37
Run Duration127 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU10%
Watch Gameplay: 1050-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G-$104
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
68.4% Good
Memory 72.1
1-Core 94.3
2-Core 190
67% 119 Pts
4-Core 372
8-Core 383
50% 378 Pts
64-Core 383
24% 383 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 68.4%
Great: 72%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1050-Ti-$59
Asus(1043 862A) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 460.89
Performing below potential (59th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
28.6% Poor
Lighting 35.8
Reflection 40.2
Parallax 37
29% 37.7 fps
MRender 38
Gravity 38.1
Splatting 27.2
27% 34.4 fps
Poor: 27%
This bench: 28.6%
Great: 33%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk PLUS 240GB
10GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UF5000RL
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 430
Write 325
Mixed 238
73% 331 MB/s
4K Read 13.4
4K Write 34.3
4K Mixed 11.5
53% 19.7 MB/s
DQ Read 118
DQ Write 48.2
DQ Mixed 30.1
36% 65.5 MB/s
Poor: 33% Great: 56%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$39
253GB free
Firmware: 02.01A02
SusWrite @10s intervals: 90 87 88 91 85 91 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
75% Very good
Read 172
Write 170
Mixed 98.5
SusWrite 88.5
98% 132 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1.2
238% 1.7 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 75%
Great: 109%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial BLS8G4D26BFSCK.8FD Corsair CMK8GX4M1A2666C16 16GB
2133, 2133 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (33rd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
68.6% Good
MC Read 25.3
MC Write 24.6
MC Mixed 24.7
71% 24.9 GB/s
SC Read 18
SC Write 22.3
SC Mixed 19.5
57% 19.9 GB/s
Latency 96.7
41% 96.7 ns
Poor: 39%
This bench: 68.6%
Great: 97%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical PRIME A320M-K Builds (Compare 12,149 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 29%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 27%
Raft

Motherboard: Asus PRIME A320M-K - $66

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 99% - Outstanding Total price: $343
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 $159Nvidia 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