Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 13%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 66%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 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 64.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics19% 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.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 12 years and 4 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.
High background CPU (28%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus M5A99X EVO R2.0  (all builds)
Memory6.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1862 x 1048 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20140403
Uptime28.8 Days
Run DateNov 26 '21 at 02:37
Run Duration195 Seconds
Run User ARE-User
Background CPU 28%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
AMD FX-6300-$90
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
64.2% Good
Memory 85.8
1-Core 72.4
2-Core 120
60% 92.7 Pts
4-Core 238
8-Core 308
36% 273 Pts
64-Core 332
22% 332 Pts
Poor: 51%
This bench: 64.2%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 650 Ti Boost-$140
Gigabyte(1458 356D) 2GB
CLim: 1254 MHz, MLim: 1502 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 430.86
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
19% Very poor
Lighting 20.5
Reflection 24.5
Parallax 27.7
17% 24.2 fps
MRender 29.7
Gravity 26.7
Splatting 22.5
22% 26.3 fps
Poor: 17%
This bench: 19%
Great: 19%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Seagate ST310005 28AS 1TB
106GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CC38
SusWrite @10s intervals: 86 86 90 107 101 106 MB/s
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
58.4% Above average
Read 108
Write 97.2
Mixed 66
SusWrite 96
68% 91.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.9
159% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 58.4%
Great: 67%
StoreJet Transcend 1TB
274GB free, PID 5106
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 21 23 23 23 23 23 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
15.3% Very poor
Read 30.5
Write 31.5
Mixed 28.2
SusWrite 22.6
38% 28.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
90% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 15.3%
Great: 46%
WD Elements 1TB
118GB free, PID 1021
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 36 37 38 38 38 38 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
19.4% Very poor
Read 36
Write 36
Mixed 29.5
SusWrite 37.4
47% 34.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
91% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 19.4%
Great: 44%
SanDisk Cruzer Spark 16GB
11GB free, PID 55a1
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 8.3 8.8 8.5 8.9 9.2 8.5 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
8.92% Terrible
Read 22.5
Write 8.5
Mixed 2
SusWrite 8.7
11% 10.4 MB/s
4K Read 2.9
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 2.8
140% 2.23 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 8.92%
Great: 18%
ADATA HD720 1TB
74GB free, PID a51a
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
1.26% Terrible
Read 0.8
Write 0.8
Mixed 0.7
SusWrite 0.8
1% 0.77 MB/s
4K Read 0.2
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.3
21% 0.27 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 1.26%
Great: 48%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown 9D7TBNZB-TATP 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 1333 MHz clocked @ 667 MHz
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
38.4% Below average
MC Read 14.1
MC Write 13
MC Mixed 12.5
38% 13.2 GB/s
SC Read 9.3
SC Write 7.9
SC Mixed 10.8
27% 9.33 GB/s
Latency 71.4
56% 71.4 ns

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A99X EVO R2.0 Builds (Compare 3,943 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 37%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 32%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 - $300

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 43% - Average Total price: $838
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $300Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Crucial MX500 250GB $45
Intel Core i5-11600K $220Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
Intel Core i5-11400F $195Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $200
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $76SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $73SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $71G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $649SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback