Today's hottest deals

Asrock FM2A55M-VG3+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 43%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (21st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 79 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 below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 36.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics12.3% 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 Drive25.1% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce 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.
Run History
14 months ago, 13 months ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A55M-VG3+  (all builds)
Memory4.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20131014
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateSep 02 '23 at 00:16
Run Duration142 Seconds
Run User ARG-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing below expectations (21st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A4-5300 APU-$36
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
36.2% Below average
Memory 62.4
1-Core 34.6
2-Core 47.1
34% 48 Pts
4-Core 60.2
8-Core 66.1
8% 63.2 Pts
64-Core 75
5% 75 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 36.2%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD HD 6850
Gigabyte(1458 21F8) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1062.1002
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
12.3% Very poor
Lighting 16.8
Reflection 19.8
Parallax 16.8
14% 17.8 fps
MRender 12.9
Gravity 12.4
Splatting 10.7
10% 12 fps
Poor: 11%
This bench: 12.3%
Great: 13%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Green 480GB (2018)-$69
182GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UG220400
SusWrite @10s intervals: 136 86 56 95 68 103 MB/s
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
25.1% Poor
Read 182
Write 159
Mixed 159
SusWrite 90.5
33% 148 MB/s
4K Read 8.3
4K Write 16.4
4K Mixed 5.1
28% 9.93 MB/s
DQ Read 106
DQ Write 79
DQ Mixed 31.3
40% 72.2 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 25.1%
Great: 60%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5474-026.A00LF 99U5474-016.A00LF 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
22.3% Poor
MC Read 8.3
MC Write 5.6
MC Mixed 8.2
21% 7.37 GB/s
SC Read 6.9
SC Write 6.1
SC Mixed 7.5
20% 6.83 GB/s
Latency 121
33% 121 ns
Poor: 25%
This bench: 22.3%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 62 46 60 24" 1920 1080 SAM0947 T24B530
Typical FM2A55M-VG3+ Builds (Compare 71 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 44%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A55M-VG3+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 45% - Average Total price: $171
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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 obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or 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 the gold standard for 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 $165Nvidia RTX 4060 $295WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $389WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $85
Intel Core i5-13600K $200Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $350
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback