Asrock A520M-ITX/ac

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 90%
Nuclear submarine
Desktop
Desktop 93%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 84%
Aircraft carrier
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (56th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 44 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 87.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics98.7% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive174% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
MotherboardAsrock A520M-ITX/ac  (all builds)
Memory11.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210513
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateSep 15 '21 at 16:11
Run Duration155 Seconds
Run User PHL-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing as expected (56th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 3600-$86
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.9 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
87.6% Excellent
Memory 80
1-Core 142
2-Core 275
90% 166 Pts
4-Core 511
8-Core 784
80% 648 Pts
64-Core 1,032
64% 1,032 Pts
Poor: 73%
This bench: 87.6%
Great: 92%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 3060-$266
PNY(196E 138F) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3750 MHz, Ram: 12GB, Driver: 471.96
Performing below potential (38th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
98.7% Outstanding
Lighting 129
Reflection 116
Parallax 134
105% 126 fps
MRender 140
Gravity 99.3
Splatting 85.9
86% 108 fps
Poor: 90%
This bench: 98.7%
Great: 106%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
PNY CS3030 250GB SSD
154GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CS303320
SusWrite @10s intervals: 407 278 264 278 274 270 MB/s
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
174% Outstanding
Read 1,591
Write 976
Mixed 1,133
SusWrite 295
222% 999 MB/s
4K Read 50.3
4K Write 103
4K Mixed 63
211% 72.1 MB/s
DQ Read 760
DQ Write 414
DQ Mixed 289
295% 488 MB/s
Poor: 94%
This bench: 174%
Great: 214%
WD Blue 2.5" 750GB (2010)-$55
623GB free
Firmware: 03.01A03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 81 85 89 89 89 89 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
49.5% Average
Read 85.6
Write 77.4
Mixed 51.8
SusWrite 86.8
55% 75.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.5
102% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 19%
This bench: 49.5%
Great: 54%
Seagate ST1000LM048-2E7172 1TB
739GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 84 89 87 85 85 92 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
42.7% Average
Read 61.2
Write 71.3
Mixed 65.9
SusWrite 87
53% 71.3 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.5
137% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 71%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown MR[ABC]4U400JNNM8G 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 4000 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
91% Outstanding
MC Read 33.9
MC Write 26.9
MC Mixed 37.5
94% 32.8 GB/s
SC Read 24.2
SC Write 25.7
SC Mixed 34.8
81% 28.2 GB/s
Latency 80.5
50% 80.5 ns
Poor: 80%
This bench: 91%
Great: 135%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 12 10 75 23.8" 1280 720 HLA2380 M40
Typical A520M-ITX/ac Builds (Compare 337 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 87%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 22%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock A520M-ITX/ac

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 128% - Outstanding Total price: $131
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. 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 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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