AMD 970A-D3

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 43%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.89% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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.
Very high background CPU (35%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAMD 970A-D3  (all builds)
Memory14 GB free of 16 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20121018
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 14 '22 at 04:22
Run Duration210 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 35%

 PC Performing as expected (49th 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 below expectations (10th percentile)
43% Average
Memory 80.3
1-Core 41.1
2-Core 57.1
42% 59.5 Pts
4-Core 34.4
8-Core 85.4
7% 59.9 Pts
64-Core 106
6% 106 Pts
Poor: 39%
This bench: 43%
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)
3.89% Terrible
Lighting 4.6
Reflection 7.3
Parallax 1.7
4% 4.53 fps
MRender 7.2
Gravity 5.1
Splatting 3.7
4% 5.33 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.89%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung HD502IJ 500GB-$40
425GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 1AA01112
SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 17 19 22 25 25 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
8.55% Terrible
Read 8
Write 14.2
Mixed 15.6
SusWrite 21.5
11% 14.8 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.3
83% 0.5 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 8.55%
Great: 59%
Seagate ST3160815AS 160GB-$46
149GB free
Firmware: 4.ADA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 71 72 68 70 74 74 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
39.9% Below average
Read 67.1
Write 72.7
Mixed 44.6
SusWrite 71.7
47% 64 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.9
153% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 39.9%
Great: 42%
PNY USB 3.0 to SATA-¢ó 500GB
466GB free, PID 8001
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 208 204 175 197 217 220 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
110% Outstanding
Read 175
Write 216
Mixed 169
SusWrite 203
266% 191 MB/s
4K Read 7.6
4K Write 12.4
4K Mixed 10.7
814% 10.2 MB/s
DQ Read 20.2
DQ Write 29.6
DQ Mixed 23.1
1,867% 24.3 MB/s
Poor: 44%
This bench: 110%
Great: 166%
JMicron Generic 500GB
164GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 131 133 117 128 143 60 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
95.1% Outstanding
Read 178
Write 107
Mixed 92
SusWrite 119
157% 124 MB/s
4K Read 12
4K Write 13.2
4K Mixed 9.1
803% 11.4 MB/s
DQ Read 11.2
DQ Write 15.1
DQ Mixed 12
963% 12.8 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 95.1%
Great: 222%
Generic External 500GB
374GB free, PID 3920
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 98 97 88 95 107 163 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
100% Outstanding
Read 174
Write 191
Mixed 176
SusWrite 108
220% 162 MB/s
4K Read 11.5
4K Write 15.8
4K Mixed 11.3
964% 12.9 MB/s
DQ Read 19.1
DQ Write 28.2
DQ Mixed 21.6
1,765% 23 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 100%
Great: 79%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M378B1G73QH0- 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 800 MHz
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
37.3% Below average
MC Read 13.5
MC Write 10.7
MC Mixed 15.4
38% 13.2 GB/s
SC Read 7.4
SC Write 7.1
SC Mixed 9.6
23% 8.03 GB/s
Latency 79.9
50% 79.9 ns
Poor: 26%
This bench: 37.3%
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 $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