Asrock FM2A75M-HD+

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (36th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 64 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 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 48.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics20.1% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Very high background CPU (62%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock FM2A75M-HD+  (all builds)
Memory5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20150522
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 03 '17 at 16:16
Run Duration92 Seconds
Run User HRV-User
Background CPU 62%

 PC Performing below expectations (36th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X4 750K-$45
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
48.2% Average
Memory 74
1-Core 55.7
2-Core 97
48% 75.6 Pts
4-Core 132
8-Core 136
18% 134 Pts
64-Core 162
10% 162 Pts
Poor: 40%
This bench: 48.2%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R7 260X-$120
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 22.19.662.4
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
20.1% Poor
Lighting 23.7
Reflection 27.8
Parallax 33.3
19% 28.3 fps
MRender 25.5
Gravity 22.3
Splatting 29.7
22% 25.8 fps
Poor: 18%
This bench: 20.1%
Great: 22%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Green 1TB (2011)-$64
189GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
61.6% Good
Read 113
Write 101
Mixed 117
84% 111 MB/s
4K Read 0.15
4K Write 1.49
4K Mixed 0.1
45% 0.58 MB/s
Poor: 38%
This bench: 61.6%
Great: 85%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1600 CL9 Series 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
29.4% Poor
MC Read 14.2
MC Write 6
MC Mixed 10.2
29% 10.1 GB/s
SC Read 7
SC Write 6
SC Mixed 8.3
20% 7.1 GB/s
Latency 92.6
43% 92.6 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 29.4%
Great: 64%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A75M-HD+ Builds (Compare 20 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A75M-HD+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 57% - Above average Total price: $116
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes the youtubers that are paid to promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
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) $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