Asus F1A75-V EVO

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 43%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
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 below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 45.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics5.94% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
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.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Run History
MotherboardAsus F1A75-V EVO  (all builds)
Memory3 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1024 x 768 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20140527
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 01 '21 at 18:04
Run Duration126 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing as expected (50th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A6-3500 APU-$60
FM1 , 1 CPU, 3 cores, 3 threads
Base clock 2.1 GHz
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
45.8% Average
Memory 74.2
1-Core 37.7
2-Core 69.8
41% 60.6 Pts
4-Core 104
8-Core 105
14% 105 Pts
64-Core 105
6% 105 Pts
Poor: 27%
This bench: 45.8%
Great: 47%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI Radeon HD 3800
Asus(1043 0234) 512MB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.970.100.1100
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
5.94% Terrible
Lighting 7.8
Reflection 10.9
Parallax 2.1
6% 6.93 fps
MRender 6.8
Gravity 3
Splatting 8.3
5% 6.03 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 5.94%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 250GB (2010)-$37
206GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 19.01H19
SusWrite @10s intervals: 65 87 102 108 105 111 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
39.6% Below average
Read 41.4
Write 110
Mixed 61.6
SusWrite 96.2
57% 77.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.9
164% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 39.6%
Great: 70%
Seagate BUP RD 4TB
2.5TB free, PID ab30
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 22 29 30 30 30 30 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
19.8% Very poor
Read 26.8
Write 29.7
Mixed 24.8
SusWrite 28.4
38% 27.4 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 3.1
4K Mixed 0.6
130% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 19.8%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905474-037.A00LF 1x4GB
1 of 4 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR3 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (25th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
23.9% Poor
MC Read 9.4
MC Write 7.4
MC Mixed 6.3
22% 7.7 GB/s
SC Read 6.6
SC Write 7.7
SC Mixed 6.2
20% 6.83 GB/s
Latency 92
44% 92 ns
Poor: 19%
This bench: 23.9%
Great: 33%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical F1A75-V EVO Builds (Compare 21 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asus F1A75-V EVO

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 55% - Above average Total price: $118
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 $170Nvidia 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