AMD 970A-D3

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (76th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 24 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 57%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.98% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
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.
High background CPU (22%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAMD 970A-D3  (all builds)
Memory13.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20121018
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 30 '22 at 07:37
Run Duration205 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 22%

 PC Performing above expectations (76th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-4130 Quad-Core-$150
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 3.8 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
57% Above average
Memory 83.7
1-Core 50.9
2-Core 106
52% 80.3 Pts
4-Core 181
8-Core 170
24% 175 Pts
64-Core 165
10% 165 Pts
Poor: 39%
This bench: 57%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 440
Asus(1043 838A) 1GB
CLim: 822 MHz, MLim: 800 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
3.98% Terrible
Lighting 4.7
Reflection 7.5
Parallax 1.6
4% 4.6 fps
MRender 7.2
Gravity 5.2
Splatting 3.9
4% 5.43 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.98%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung HD502IJ 500GB-$40
424GB free
Firmware: 1AA01112
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 92 91 92 92 86 MB/s
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
46.4% Average
Read 72.1
Write 81.2
Mixed 53.4
SusWrite 89.2
54% 74 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.7
4K Mixed 1
186% 1.43 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 46.4%
Great: 59%
Seagate ST3160815AS 160GB-$46
149GB free
Firmware: 4.ADA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 72 72 72 73 74 74 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
40.1% Average
Read 66.7
Write 72.8
Mixed 42.5
SusWrite 72.9
47% 63.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
130% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 40.1%
Great: 42%
PNY USB 3.0 to SATA-�� 500GB
299GB free (System drive), PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 130 128 142 147 161 161 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
137% Outstanding
Read 214
Write 185
Mixed 161
SusWrite 145
233% 176 MB/s
4K Read 15.2
4K Write 23
4K Mixed 17.3
1,427% 18.5 MB/s
DQ Read 13.2
DQ Write 36.4
DQ Mixed 25
2,137% 24.9 MB/s
Poor: 99%
This bench: 137%
Great: 137%
JMicron Generic 500GB
172GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 138 160 164 152 89 60 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
105% Outstanding
Read 132
Write 114
Mixed 119
SusWrite 127
166% 123 MB/s
4K Read 13.8
4K Write 17.8
4K Mixed 11
1,031% 14.2 MB/s
DQ Read 15.7
DQ Write 23.3
DQ Mixed 15.1
1,364% 18 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 105%
Great: 222%
Generic External 500GB
374GB free, PID 3920
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 93 56 57 81 111 73 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
112% Outstanding
Read 153
Write 148
Mixed 148
SusWrite 78.4
176% 132 MB/s
4K Read 15.7
4K Write 22.6
4K Mixed 18
1,439% 18.8 MB/s
DQ Read 20.9
DQ Write 33.2
DQ Mixed 22.8
1,982% 25.6 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 112%
Great: 79%
PNY USB 3.0 to SATA-�� 240GB
223GB free, PID 8001
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 152 146 146 146 160 160 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
128% Outstanding
Read 194
Write 182
Mixed 176
SusWrite 152
237% 176 MB/s
4K Read 15.8
4K Write 20.5
4K Mixed 17.4
1,348% 17.9 MB/s
DQ Read 21.7
DQ Write 36.7
DQ Mixed 25.7
2,203% 28 MB/s
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M378B1G73QH0- 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 800 MHz
Performing as expected (51st percentile)
45.4% Average
MC Read 19.2
MC Write 12
MC Mixed 17.4
46% 16.2 GB/s
SC Read 9.2
SC Write 8.7
SC Mixed 13
29% 10.3 GB/s
Latency 74
54% 74 ns
Poor: 26%
This bench: 45.4%
Great: 54%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 970A-D3 Builds (Compare 49 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: AMD 970A-D3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 35% - Below average Total price: $407
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 $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