Gigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (64th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 36 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 76.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics11% 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 Drive42.3% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Run History
2 years ago, 22 months ago.
SystemGigabyte A320M-H
MotherboardGigabyte GA-A320M-H-CF  (all builds)
Memory3.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1600 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20200826
Uptime1.5 Days
Run DateJul 24 '22 at 05:18
Run Duration173 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing above expectations (64th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G-$75
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
76.3% Very good
Memory 71
1-Core 98.8
2-Core 226
72% 132 Pts
4-Core 470
8-Core 474
63% 472 Pts
64-Core 469
29% 469 Pts
Poor: 46%
This bench: 76.3%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Graphics
Gigabyte(1458 D000) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 20.45.36
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
11% Very poor
Lighting 13.9
Reflection 9.7
Parallax 20.3
11% 14.6 fps
MRender 6.2
Gravity 16.8
Splatting 13.9
10% 12.3 fps
Poor: 6%
This bench: 11%
Great: 13%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
ESA3ASA2HTH2BT240GB 240GB
110GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V6210
SusWrite @10s intervals: 102 78 42 8.3 43 26 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
42.3% Average
Read 462
Write 197
Mixed 244
SusWrite 49.9
52% 238 MB/s
4K Read 30.6
4K Write 26.4
4K Mixed 0.8
61% 19.3 MB/s
DQ Read 182
DQ Write 16.3
DQ Mixed 19.3
34% 72.6 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 42.3%
Great: 76%
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$37
907GB free
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 195 194 198 197 197 196 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
113% Outstanding
Read 199
Write 186
Mixed 81.9
SusWrite 196
121% 166 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.9
167% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 113%
Great: 113%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata DDR4 3000 1x8GB
1 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2666 MHz
Performing below potential (37th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
42.9% Average
MC Read 17.2
MC Write 13.5
MC Mixed 12.1
41% 14.3 GB/s
SC Read 17.7
SC Write 16.6
SC Mixed 14.3
46% 16.2 GB/s
Latency 99.1
40% 99.1 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 42.9%
Great: 58%

 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 2,915 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 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