Asrock 970 Performance

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 17%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 66%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (45th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 55 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 58.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics22% 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 Drive28.3% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock 970 Performance  (all builds)
Memory28.4 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150319
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 16 '23 at 02:08
Run Duration112 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 24%

 PC Performing as expected (45th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8350-$130
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
58.8% Above average
Memory 79.9
1-Core 67.3
2-Core 128
56% 91.7 Pts
4-Core 205
8-Core 388
35% 297 Pts
64-Core 396
24% 396 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 58.8%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R7 370-$153
CLim: 1050 MHz, MLim: 1400 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 22.6.1
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
22% Poor
Lighting 28.2
Reflection 34.5
Parallax 31.7
23% 31.5 fps
MRender 27.6
Gravity 23.2
Splatting 23.2
20% 24.7 fps
Poor: 19%
This bench: 22%
Great: 23%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 240GB-$28
82GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFKB1D1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 196 152 32 134 31 109 MB/s
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
28.3% Poor
Read 187
Write 105
Mixed 90.8
SusWrite 109
27% 123 MB/s
4K Read 13.1
4K Write 19.9
4K Mixed 10.8
44% 14.6 MB/s
DQ Read 17.5
DQ Write 18.8
DQ Mixed 16.9
13% 17.7 MB/s
Poor: 33%
This bench: 28.3%
Great: 100%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown BLS8G3D1609DS1S00. BLS8G3D1609DS1S00. 32GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
45.8% Average
MC Read 19.1
MC Write 14.5
MC Mixed 16.1
47% 16.6 GB/s
SC Read 9.9
SC Write 8.3
SC Mixed 12.1
29% 10.1 GB/s
Latency 80.8
50% 80.8 ns
Poor: 29%
This bench: 45.8%
Great: 48%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 970 Performance Builds (Compare 57 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 16%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 14%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock 970 Performance

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 49% - Average Total price: $311
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