Asrock FM2A75M-HD+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 54%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 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 43.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics20.5% 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 Drive39.1% 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.
Very high background CPU (43%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock FM2A75M-HD+  (all builds)
Memory6 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display3840x2160x4294967296 szín
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20131120
Uptime0.5 Days
Run DateOct 25 '23 at 18:28
Run Duration120 Seconds
Run User HUN-User
Background CPU 43%

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-5600K APU-$250
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
43.2% Average
Memory 66.3
1-Core 38.5
2-Core 80.7
40% 61.8 Pts
4-Core 116
8-Core 130
16% 123 Pts
64-Core 134
8% 134 Pts
Poor: 34%
This bench: 43.2%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 460-$90
CLim: 1236 MHz, MLim: 1750 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 23.9.1
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
20.5% Poor
Lighting 25.3
Reflection 28.3
Parallax 34.1
21% 29.2 fps
MRender 27.5
Gravity 28.3
Splatting 20.2
20% 25.3 fps
Poor: 17%
This bench: 20.5%
Great: 22%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intenso SSD 128GB
58GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V1028B0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 107 84 100 95 55 21 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
39.1% Below average
Read 396
Write 308
Mixed 193
SusWrite 77
54% 243 MB/s
4K Read 15.7
4K Write 34.4
4K Mixed 0.7
43% 16.9 MB/s
DQ Read 114
DQ Write 203
DQ Mixed 30.4
59% 116 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 39.1%
Great: 91%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5474-023.A00LF Hynix HMT451U6AFR8C-PB 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
30.8% Below average
MC Read 14.9
MC Write 6.2
MC Mixed 11
31% 10.7 GB/s
SC Read 8.2
SC Write 7.1
SC Mixed 10
24% 8.43 GB/s
Latency 112
36% 112 ns
Poor: 25%
This bench: 30.8%
Great: 57%

 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 69 57 60 32" 1280 720 UMC0030 ST4251D01_3
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 thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/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 popular with 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 $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 $50
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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