Asrock 870iCafe R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 47%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (32nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 68 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
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 39%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics22.9% 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 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.
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.
Very high background CPU (62%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock 870iCafe R2.0  (all builds)
Memory5.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.8 GHz
DisplayЦвета: 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130702
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateAug 24 '17 at 19:26
Run Duration155 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 62%

 PC Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6100-$68
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 1.85 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
39% Below average
Memory 62.2
1-Core 33.5
2-Core 51.4
34% 49 Pts
4-Core 88.7
8-Core 121
13% 105 Pts
64-Core 114
7% 114 Pts
Poor: 41%
This bench: 39%
Great: 60%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R9 270-$140
CLim: 975 MHz, MLim: 1400 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 17.8.1
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
22.9% Poor
Lighting 26.2
Reflection 30.2
Parallax 44.1
21% 33.5 fps
MRender 27.9
Gravity 28.7
Splatting 36.5
26% 31 fps
Poor: 22%
This bench: 22.9%
Great: 26%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD WD1600JS-75NCB1 160GB
71GB free
Firmware: 02.01C03 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
31.6% Below average
Read 54.3
Write 55.1
Mixed 55.4
41% 54.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.58
4K Write 2.19
4K Mixed 0.48
118% 1.08 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 31.6%
Great: 35%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$28
54GB free
Firmware: CC4C Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
70.7% Very good
Read 118
Write 128
Mixed 116
91% 121 MB/s
4K Read 0.67
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.36
90% 0.74 MB/s
Poor: 55%
This bench: 70.7%
Great: 112%
WD Green 500GB (2012)
26GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
57.4% Above average
Read 111
Write 89.1
Mixed 85.9
71% 95.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.53
4K Write 2.32
4K Mixed 0.14
81% 1 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 57.4%
Great: 79%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Nanya M2X4G64CB8HG5N-DG 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 800 MHz
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
25.8% Poor
MC Read 9.4
MC Write 8.9
MC Mixed 8.9
26% 9.07 GB/s
SC Read 5.7
SC Write 5.4
SC Mixed 7.3
18% 6.13 GB/s
Latency 121
33% 121 ns
Poor: 33%
This bench: 25.8%
Great: 61%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 870iCafe R2.0 Builds (Compare 9 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 52%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock 870iCafe R2.0

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 4% - Terrible Total price: $57
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing charade so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit a lot from 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 sponsor youtubers, so they've no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to market inferior products. UserBenchmark's data challenges the marketing and exposes the youtubers' biases.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. The 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data which saves our users millions every year.
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