Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 26%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 21%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (71st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 29 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 63.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics34.6% 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)
Boot Drive42.6% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsus M5A99X EVO R2.0  (all builds)
Memory12.5 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140403
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateSep 18 '21 at 14:10
Run Duration209 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 12%

 PC Performing above expectations (71st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6300-$90
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.65 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
63.2% Good
Memory 89.5
1-Core 72.3
2-Core 113
59% 91.6 Pts
4-Core 203
8-Core 287
31% 245 Pts
64-Core 287
18% 287 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 63.2%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 960-$198
Gigabyte(1458 36D2) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1542 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 471.96
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
34.6% Below average
Lighting 44.1
Reflection 48.7
Parallax 43.6
36% 45.5 fps
MRender 36.9
Gravity 42.6
Splatting 38
32% 39.2 fps
Poor: 30%
This bench: 34.6%
Great: 36%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk PLUS 240GB
83GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UF2204RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 246 88 46 33 32 29 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
42.6% Average
Read 411
Write 339
Mixed 275
SusWrite 78.8
61% 276 MB/s
4K Read 19.2
4K Write 35.9
4K Mixed 9.2
60% 21.4 MB/s
DQ Read 115
DQ Write 67.5
DQ Mixed 25.3
36% 69.2 MB/s
Poor: 33%
This bench: 42.6%
Great: 56%
Intenso SATAIII 256GB
64GB free
Firmware: S0222A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 212 251 109 46 57 93 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
68.4% Good
Read 436
Write 372
Mixed 368
SusWrite 128
73% 326 MB/s
4K Read 25.6
4K Write 74.4
4K Mixed 25.2
110% 41.7 MB/s
DQ Read 212
DQ Write 232
DQ Mixed 43.5
82% 162 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 68.4%
Great: 98%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL RipjawsX DDR3 2133 C10 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 2133 MHz clocked @ 1066 MHz
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
53.6% Above average
MC Read 24.1
MC Write 13.1
MC Mixed 20.9
55% 19.4 GB/s
SC Read 12.1
SC Write 8.8
SC Mixed 14.3
34% 11.7 GB/s
Latency 67.8
59% 67.8 ns
Poor: 33%
This bench: 53.6%
Great: 79%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 59: 7R 7G 3B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
59% 19% 90 298 230 60 21.5" 1920 1080 AOC2200 F22
History: Score 24: 3R 1G 6B | Score 59: 7R 7G 3B
Typical M5A99X EVO R2.0 Builds (Compare 757 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 - $300

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 53% - Above average Total price: $729
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, UserBenchmark's data exposes the youtubers that 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 dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176Nvidia 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