Gigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 13%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 72%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 12%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (72nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 28 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 67.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics11.3% 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 Drive221% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago.
SystemGigabyte A320M-H
MotherboardGigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF  (all builds)
Memory2.3 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit kolorów
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20200803
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 23 '22 at 18:14
Run Duration168 Seconds
Run User POL-User
Background CPU10%

 PC Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 3200GE Vega Graphics
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
67.9% Good
Memory 60.3
1-Core 113
2-Core 228
72% 134 Pts
4-Core 434
8-Core 434
58% 434 Pts
64-Core 421
26% 421 Pts
Poor: 50%
This bench: 67.9%
Great: 77%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Graphics
Gigabyte(1458 D000) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 21.30.14
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
11.3% Very poor
Lighting 14.7
Reflection 13.2
Parallax 20.2
12% 16 fps
MRender 6.6
Gravity 16.2
Splatting 13.4
10% 12.1 fps
Poor: 6%
This bench: 11.3%
Great: 13%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
PNY CS3030 500GB SSD
433GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CS303121
SusWrite @10s intervals: 917 589 592 591 591 600 MB/s
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
221% Outstanding
Read 1,840
Write 1,951
Mixed 1,444
SusWrite 647
330% 1,470 MB/s
4K Read 43.5
4K Write 134
4K Mixed 56.2
209% 77.9 MB/s
DQ Read 1137
DQ Write 850
DQ Mixed 965
729% 984 MB/s
Poor: 119%
This bench: 221%
Great: 266%
USB Disk 3.0 64GB
51GB free, PID 0918
Operating at USB 3.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 13 2 16 17 31 28 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
28% Poor
Read 100
Write 15.5
Mixed 19.4
SusWrite 17.9
38% 38.2 MB/s
4K Read 11.9
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 2.7
211% 5.6 MB/s
Poor: 5%
This bench: 28%
Great: 28%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata 1x8GB
1 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2666 MHz
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
44.6% Average
MC Read 17.4
MC Write 15
MC Mixed 15.1
45% 15.8 GB/s
SC Read 14.3
SC Write 11.6
SC Mixed 15.5
39% 13.8 GB/s
Latency 127
32% 127 ns
Poor: 21%
This bench: 44.6%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-A320M-H-CF Builds (Compare 2,918 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 29%
Raft

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 77% - Very good Total price: $233
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia 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 $45SanDisk 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