Asrock A320M-HDV R4.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 36%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (22nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 78 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 31.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics5.48% 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 Drive68.8% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait 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.
Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
15 months ago, 15 months ago.
MotherboardAsrock A320M-HDV R4.0  (all builds)
Memory3 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190626
Uptime0 Days
Run DateFeb 19 '23 at 13:48
Run Duration133 Seconds
Run User IDN-User
Background CPU 100%

 PC Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-9600 APU (2016 D.BR)
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.1 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
31.2% Below average
Memory 39.3
1-Core 52.1
2-Core 97.8
36% 63.1 Pts
4-Core 130
8-Core 156
19% 143 Pts
64-Core 150
9% 150 Pts
Poor: 25%
This bench: 31.2%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
AMD(1002 1E20) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 22.6.1
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
5.48% Terrible
Lighting 6.8
Reflection 7
Parallax 10.9
6% 8.23 fps
MRender 3.1
Gravity 8.9
Splatting 7.1
5% 6.37 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 5.48%
Great: 8%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
KZ256 256GB
152GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V0530B0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 423 126 181 110 196 125 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
68.8% Good
Read 248
Write 435
Mixed 427
SusWrite 194
74% 326 MB/s
4K Read 27.8
4K Write 65.8
4K Mixed 25.6
110% 39.7 MB/s
DQ Read 428
DQ Write 201
DQ Mixed 279
216% 303 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 68.8%
Great: 201%
Toshiba DT01ACA050 500GB-$25
271GB free
Firmware: MS1OA750
SusWrite @10s intervals: 119 118 122 123 120 120 MB/s
Performing below expectations (26th percentile)
64.8% Good
Read 105
Write 87.4
Mixed 23.1
SusWrite 120
61% 84.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.6
133% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 64.8%
Great: 103%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
21.5% Poor
MC Read 8.7
MC Write 6.8
MC Mixed 8.2
23% 7.9 GB/s
SC Read 4
SC Write 4.3
SC Mixed 5.8
13% 4.7 GB/s
Latency 206
19% 206 ns
Poor: 21%
This bench: 21.5%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A320M-HDV R4.0 Builds (Compare 6,035 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 39%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 36%
Jet ski

Motherboard: Asrock A320M-HDV R4.0

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 90% - Excellent Total price: $348
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $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) $39Corsair 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