Biostar A320MH

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 36%
Jet ski
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (50th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 50 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. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 70.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics51.5% 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 Drive55.3% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Run History
3 years ago, 2 years ago.
MotherboardBiostar A320MH  (all builds)
Memory4.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190718
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 04 '21 at 08:25
Run Duration126 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU4%
Watch Gameplay: 580 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (50th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 1600-$110
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.2 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (51st percentile)
70.5% Very good
Memory 69
1-Core 109
2-Core 214
72% 131 Pts
4-Core 386
8-Core 632
62% 509 Pts
64-Core 850
53% 850 Pts
Poor: 61%
This bench: 70.5%
Great: 78%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 580-$130
CLim: 1366 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 21.3.2
Performing below potential (66th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
51.5% Above average
Lighting 65.4
Reflection 63.7
Parallax 82.7
53% 70.6 fps
MRender 67.1
Gravity 66.8
Splatting 47.4
48% 60.4 fps
Poor: 46%
This bench: 51.5%
Great: 56%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Biostar S120-128GB 128GB
52GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V1.1.5
SusWrite @10s intervals: 99 80 84 75 75 85 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
55.3% Above average
Read 401
Write 135
Mixed 187
SusWrite 82.8
44% 201 MB/s
4K Read 21.4
4K Write 74.5
4K Mixed 26.3
106% 40.7 MB/s
DQ Read 49.1
DQ Write 40
DQ Mixed 70.6
46% 53.2 MB/s
Poor: 41%
This bench: 55.3%
Great: 104%
Seagate ST31000528AS 3 1TB
102GB free
Firmware: GKAOCC46
SusWrite @10s intervals: 52 54 55 55 55 49 MB/s
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
34.4% Below average
Read 66.3
Write 66.1
Mixed 38.4
SusWrite 53.1
41% 56 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1
184% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 34.4%
Great: 47%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 3000 C16 Series 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
40.6% Average
MC Read 15.1
MC Write 13.5
MC Mixed 12.8
39% 13.8 GB/s
SC Read 14.9
SC Write 13.6
SC Mixed 13.2
40% 13.9 GB/s
Latency 104
39% 104 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 40.6%
Great: 58%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A320MH Builds (Compare 1,819 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 37%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 34%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Biostar A320MH

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $328
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.
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 $45SanDisk 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