Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (73rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 27 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 67.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics53% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (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.
Run History
MotherboardAsus M5A99X EVO R2.0  (all builds)
Memory12.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20140403
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 24 '22 at 22:09
Run Duration184 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU2%
Watch Gameplay: 580 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8350-$130
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
67.4% Good
Memory 91.6
1-Core 67.7
2-Core 132
61% 97 Pts
4-Core 237
8-Core 333
36% 285 Pts
64-Core 350
22% 350 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 67.4%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 580-$130
CLim: 1411 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 22.11.1
Performing below potential (79th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
53% Above average
Lighting 67.5
Reflection 64.9
Parallax 97.8
55% 76.7 fps
MRender 58.5
Gravity 76.6
Splatting 48.5
49% 61.2 fps
Poor: 46%
This bench: 53%
Great: 56%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Green SN350 1TB
680GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 33006000
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,089
Write 158
Mixed 204
103% 484 MB/s
4K Read 33.9
4K Write 49.6
4K Mixed 36
124% 39.8 MB/s
DQ Read 431
DQ Write 236
DQ Mixed 169
170% 279 MB/s
Poor: 157% Great: 350%
WDC WDBNCE0010PNC 1TB
202GB free
Firmware: 415020RL
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 428
Write 383
Mixed 346
86% 386 MB/s
4K Read 25.8
4K Write 48
4K Mixed 30.1
103% 34.6 MB/s
DQ Read 281
DQ Write 244
DQ Mixed 233
183% 253 MB/s
Poor: 70% Great: 117%
Generic Flash Disk 16GB
15GB free, PID 6387
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 20.2
Write 2.5
Mixed 4.2
8% 8.97 MB/s
4K Read 4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
15% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 2% Great: 8%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
AMD R934G2130U1S 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 2133 MHz clocked @ 1066 MHz
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
50.5% Above average
MC Read 22.7
MC Write 14.2
MC Mixed 17.2
52% 18 GB/s
SC Read 11
SC Write 7.9
SC Mixed 14.4
32% 11.1 GB/s
Latency 64.8
62% 64.8 ns
Poor: 37%
This bench: 50.5%
Great: 80%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A99X EVO R2.0 Builds (Compare 757 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 - $300

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 53% - Above average Total price: $729
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) $29Corsair 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