Asus EX-A320M-GAMING

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (67th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 33 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 58%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.85% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive63.4% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (13%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus EX-A320M-GAMING  (all builds)
Memory2.2 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20200728
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 27 '22 at 17:11
Run Duration247 Seconds
Run User PHL-User
Background CPU 13%

 PC Performing above expectations (67th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon PRO 200GE w/ Radeon Vega Graphics
AM4, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.2 GHz, turbo 3.15 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
58% Above average
Memory 73.2
1-Core 90.8
2-Core 164
64% 109 Pts
4-Core 246
8-Core 259
34% 253 Pts
64-Core 222
14% 222 Pts
Poor: 42%
This bench: 58%
Great: 61%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX Vega 3 (Ryzen iGPU)
Asus(1043 876B) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 22.2.3
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
4.85% Terrible
Lighting 5.1
Reflection 8
Parallax 7.1
4% 6.73 fps
MRender 5.9
Gravity 5.2
Splatting 10.4
6% 7.17 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 4.85%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 240GB-$28
70GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 03180000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 355 48 35 43 46 45 MB/s
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
63.4% Good
Read 444
Write 398
Mixed 338
SusWrite 95.2
71% 319 MB/s
4K Read 24.2
4K Write 49.5
4K Mixed 33
105% 35.6 MB/s
DQ Read 158
DQ Write 144
DQ Mixed 127
102% 143 MB/s
Poor: 33%
This bench: 63.4%
Great: 100%
WD Blue 250GB (2010)-$37
223GB free
Firmware: 19.01H19
SusWrite @10s intervals: 116 120 119 121 121 121 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
67.1% Good
Read 114
Write 111
Mixed 73.1
SusWrite 120
77% 105 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1.1
187% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 67.1%
Great: 70%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
MAXSUN MSD48G26Q3 1x8GB
1 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2666 MHz
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
47.2% Average
MC Read 18.4
MC Write 16.6
MC Mixed 13.9
47% 16.3 GB/s
SC Read 15.4
SC Write 14.7
SC Mixed 15.8
44% 15.3 GB/s
Latency 94.2
42% 94.2 ns
Poor: 36%
This bench: 47.2%
Great: 50%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical EX-A320M-GAMING Builds (Compare 1,227 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 43%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 86%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 41%
Speed boat

Motherboard: Asus EX-A320M-GAMING

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 86% - Excellent Total price: $244
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 $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 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 $45SanDisk 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