Biostar A320MH

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 22%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (53rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 47 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 92.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics17.2% 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 Drive39.6% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait 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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago.
MotherboardBiostar A320MH  (all builds)
Memory11.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 3.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20211203
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 10 '22 at 02:21
Run Duration130 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU1%

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE Graphics
AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (79th percentile)
92.3% Outstanding
Memory 78.8
1-Core 145
2-Core 289
92% 171 Pts
4-Core 568
8-Core 921
91% 744 Pts
64-Core 1,053
65% 1,053 Pts
Poor: 76%
This bench: 92.3%
Great: 95%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX Vega 8 4000 (iGPU)
Biostar(1565 170B) 1GB
Ram: 1GB, Driver: 22.2.3
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
17.2% Very poor
Lighting 21.6
Reflection 20.1
Parallax 29.4
18% 23.7 fps
MRender 15.3
Gravity 22.8
Splatting 21.5
16% 19.9 fps
Poor: 8%
This bench: 17.2%
Great: 17%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Green 240GB (2018)-$55
53GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UF220400
SusWrite @10s intervals: 146 134 37 22 14 9 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
39.6% Below average
Read 450
Write 352
Mixed 300
SusWrite 60.4
65% 291 MB/s
4K Read 13.1
4K Write 30
4K Mixed 7.8
46% 17 MB/s
DQ Read 115
DQ Write 88.1
DQ Mixed 18.3
36% 73.7 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 39.6%
Great: 55%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
118GB free
Firmware: 02.01A02
SusWrite @10s intervals: 138 139 143 143 133 142 MB/s
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
78.1% Very good
Read 132
Write 134
Mixed 89.4
SusWrite 140
91% 124 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 1.1
217% 1.53 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 78.1%
Great: 109%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Golden Empire CL19-19-19 D4-2666 Micron DDR4 8GB 2666MHz 16GB
3333, 3333 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
81.8% Excellent
MC Read 31
MC Write 22.6
MC Mixed 30
80% 27.9 GB/s
SC Read 23.7
SC Write 45.8
SC Mixed 27.5
92% 32.3 GB/s
Latency 82.9
48% 82.9 ns
Poor: 80%
This bench: 81.8%
Great: 88%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A320MH Builds (Compare 1,817 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 37%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 34%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Biostar A320MH

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $328
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 $122Nvidia 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) $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