Asrock FM2A68M-DG3+

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 49%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (47th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 53 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 49.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.54% 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.
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.
High background CPU (27%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock FM2A68M-DG3+  (all builds)
Memory5.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kleuren
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160112
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 21 '17 at 14:46
Run Duration130 Seconds
Run User BEL-User
Background CPU 27%

 PC Performing as expected (47th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A4-6300 APU-$51
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 3.7 GHz, turbo 3.9 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
49.4% Average
Memory 83.4
1-Core 65.7
2-Core 95.2
54% 81.4 Pts
4-Core 93.5
8-Core 91.3
12% 92.4 Pts
64-Core 58.2
4% 58.2 Pts
Poor: 21%
This bench: 49.4%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R7 240
Asus(1043 04CF) 1GB
CLim: 580 MHz, MLim: 790 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 17.7
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
3.54% Terrible
Lighting 4.7
Reflection 3.77
Parallax 6.44
4% 4.97 fps
MRender 3.52
Gravity 4.67
Splatting 3
3% 3.73 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 3.54%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Toshiba DT01ACA050 500GB-$25
334GB free (System drive)
Firmware: MS1OA750 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
84.7% Excellent
Read 137
Write 159
Mixed 152
113% 149 MB/s
4K Read 0.38
4K Write 1.46
4K Mixed 0.14
58% 0.66 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 84.7%
Great: 103%
Seagate ST3400320AS 400GB
288GB free
Firmware: 3.AAM Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
32% Below average
Read 58.4
Write 53.1
Mixed 43.4
39% 51.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.49
4K Write 0.72
4K Mixed 0.27
64% 0.49 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 32%
Great: 46%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CT51264BD160B.C16F CT51264BD160BJ.C8F 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (33rd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
26.8% Poor
MC Read 10.4
MC Write 6.1
MC Mixed 9
24% 8.5 GB/s
SC Read 7.1
SC Write 6.7
SC Mixed 9.3
22% 7.7 GB/s
Latency 74.5
54% 74.5 ns
Poor: 20%
This bench: 26.8%
Great: 46%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A68M-DG3+ Builds (Compare 547 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A68M-DG3+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 21% - Poor Total price: $28
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 $50
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39SanDisk 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