Asrock 970A-G/3.1

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 34%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 27%
Raft
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (68th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 32 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 63.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics47.5% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive163% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
Memory24GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 24GB 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.
Very high background CPU (34%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsrock 970A-G/3.1  (all builds)
Memory20.9 GB free of 24 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160112
Uptime0 Days
Run DateFeb 13 '24 at 10:24
Run Duration186 Seconds
Run User IDN-User
Background CPU 34%

 PC Performing above expectations (68th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-6300-$90
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 4.7 GHz, turbo 4.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
63.6% Good
Memory 84.4
1-Core 74.7
2-Core 155
63% 105 Pts
4-Core 244
8-Core 280
34% 262 Pts
64-Core 282
17% 282 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 63.6%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 970-$200
Nvidia(10DE 1116) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1430 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 551.23
Performing below potential (37th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
47.5% Average
Lighting 57.2
Reflection 68.7
Parallax 60.7
47% 62.2 fps
MRender 67.4
Gravity 60
Splatting 54.9
49% 60.8 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 47.5%
Great: 54%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Lexar NM620 256GB
198GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 9846
SusWrite @10s intervals: 931 958 397 293 285 254 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
163% Outstanding
Read 1233
Write 1,024
Mixed 1,004
SusWrite 520
212% 945 MB/s
4K Read 51
4K Write 90.9
4K Mixed 61.6
204% 67.8 MB/s
DQ Read 467
DQ Write 341
DQ Mixed 441
320% 417 MB/s
Poor: 121%
This bench: 163%
Great: 254%
Toshiba THNSNK128GVN8 128GB
60GB free
Firmware: K8TA4101
SusWrite @10s intervals: 132 134 134 134 133 133 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
65.6% Good
Read 358
Write 132
Mixed 156
SusWrite 133
43% 195 MB/s
4K Read 21.3
4K Write 73.6
4K Mixed 31.2
111% 42 MB/s
DQ Read 265
DQ Write 127
DQ Mixed 139
118% 177 MB/s
Poor: 41%
This bench: 65.6%
Great: 74%
SSD 240G 240GB
223GB free
Firmware: FW200807
SusWrite @10s intervals: 339 360 365 370 369 372 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
75.6% Very good
Read 396
Write 342
Mixed 321
SusWrite 362
80% 355 MB/s
4K Read 33.7
4K Write 64.9
4K Mixed 13.2
102% 37.3 MB/s
DQ Read 167
DQ Write 212
DQ Mixed 20.3
62% 133 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 75.6%
Great: 89%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
554GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 170 175 176 175 175 176 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
102% Outstanding
Read 181
Write 167
Mixed 104
SusWrite 174
115% 157 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1.1
214% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 102%
Great: 109%
USB SanDisk 3.2Gen1 16GB
9GB free, PID null, sandisk CRUSER 3.1 16Gb
SusWrite @10s intervals: 19 20 22 29 30 27 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 13% Great: 51%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown Kingston HX316C10FRK2/16 Kingston HX316C10FRK2/16 24GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 8192, 4096, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
50.6% Above average
MC Read 21.8
MC Write 14.5
MC Mixed 18.4
52% 18.2 GB/s
SC Read 11.1
SC Write 9.3
SC Mixed 14.1
33% 11.5 GB/s
Latency 73.7
54% 73.7 ns

 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 71 58 0 40" 1280 720 SAM0C39 SAMSUNG
Typical 970A-G/3.1 Builds (Compare 353 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 20%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 17%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock 970A-G/3.1

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $265
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