TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus M5A97 R2.0

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 12%
Tree trunk
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 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 65.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics14.4% 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 Drive93.3% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum 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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
High background CPU (25%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus M5A97 R2.0  (all builds)
Memory1 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display3200 x 1800 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20140407
Uptime16.1 Days
Run DateApr 01 '23 at 16:25
Run Duration126 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 25%

 PC Performing as expected (42nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8320-$75
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.6 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
65.2% Good
Memory 88.6
1-Core 65.4
2-Core 130
59% 94.5 Pts
4-Core 228
8-Core 350
36% 289 Pts
64-Core 350
22% 350 Pts
Poor: 47% ↑
This bench: 65.2%
 Great: 65%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-$120
Nvidia(10DE 1381) 2GB
CLim: 1293 MHz, MLim: 1252 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 526.86
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
14.4% Very poor
Lighting 17.4
Reflection 16.4
Parallax 16.2
14% 16.7 fps
MRender 22.4
Gravity 18.3
Splatting 15
15% 18.6 fps
Poor: 13% ↑
This bench: 14.4%
 Great: 16%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 870 EVO 500GB-$68
207GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SVT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 252 241 219 230 283 220 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
93.3% Outstanding
Read 491
Write 214
Mixed 432
SusWrite 241
77% 345 MB/s
4K Read 38.4
4K Write 68.9
4K Mixed 48.1
156% 51.8 MB/s
DQ Read 275
DQ Write 174
DQ Mixed 34.3
77% 161 MB/s
Poor: 73% ↑
This bench: 93.3%
 Great: 130%
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$23
129GB free
Firmware: 18.01H18
SusWrite @10s intervals: 62 61 61 61 62 61 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
36.9% Below average
Read 67
Write 70.5
Mixed 53.8
SusWrite 61.3
47% 63.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.6
114% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 24% ↑
This bench: 36.9%
 Great: 69%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CT51264BA160B.C16F Kingston 99U5584-005.A00LF 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
45.8% Average
MC Read 19.6
MC Write 14.1
MC Mixed 15.1
46% 16.3 GB/s
SC Read 9.9
SC Write 8.5
SC Mixed 11.9
29% 10.1 GB/s
Latency 68.9
58% 68.9 ns
Poor: 38% ↑
This bench: 45.8%
 Great: 59%
Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM MBD
Typical M5A97 R2.0 Builds (Compare 2,840 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus M5A97 R2.0 - $89

CPU
FX-8350AMD  $130Bench 61%, 313,196 samples875x
FX-6300AMD  $90Bench 55%, 261,607 samples649x
FX-8320AMD  $75Bench 59%, 106,454 samples441x
GPU
GTX 1050-TiNvidia  $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples187x
GTX 1060-6GBNvidia  $117Bench 56%, 1,368,019 samples161x
RX 480AMD  $75Bench 46%, 261,163 samples122x
SSD
860 Evo 500GBSamsung  $76Bench 105%, 762,998 samples86x
A400 240GBKingston  $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples85x
A400 480GBKingston  $38Bench 74%, 237,487 samples77x
RAM
Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x8GBHyperXBench 59%, 122,541 samples85x
Savage DDR3 1600 C9 2x4GBHyperXBench 51%, 78,181 samples56x
Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x4GBHyperX  $35Bench 51%, 38,490 samples50x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $354
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial 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
Amazon Ebay
deals
CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD
Build Test EFps
Can You Run It?
►
YouTube
*NEW*
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback