Asrock FM2A75 Pro4-M

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 6%
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 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 59.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics7.81% 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 Drive32% 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.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
6 years ago, 6 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A75 Pro4-M  (all builds)
Memory3.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130711
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateApr 15 '18 at 17:06
Run Duration111 Seconds
Run User GRC-User
Background CPU 24%

 PC Performing below expectations (36th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-6600K APU-$88
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 4.2 GHz, turbo 4.15 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
59.8% Above average
Memory 84.6
1-Core 69.2
2-Core 130
59% 94.7 Pts
4-Core 202
8-Core 217
28% 210 Pts
64-Core 212
13% 212 Pts
Poor: 36%
This bench: 59.8%
Great: 60%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R7 250
Gigabyte(1458 22CA) 2GB
CLim: 970 MHz, MLim: 800 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 18.3.3
Performing below expectations (37th percentile)
7.81% Terrible
Lighting 9.93
Reflection 10.5
Parallax 13.2
8% 11.2 fps
MRender 7.38
Gravity 9.23
Splatting 9.61
7% 8.74 fps
Poor: 8%
This bench: 7.81%
Great: 10%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Patriot Flare 60GB
19GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFM21.1 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
32% Below average
Read 156
Write 253
Mixed 289
53% 233 MB/s
4K Read 17.8
4K Write 6.32
4K Mixed 4.73
36% 9.61 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 32%
Great: 86%
Toshiba DT01ACA050 500GB-$25
223GB free
Firmware: MS1OA750 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
70.5% Very good
Read 123
Write 123
Mixed 126
94% 124 MB/s
4K Read 0.66
4K Write 1.65
4K Mixed 0.18
78% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 70.5%
Great: 103%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1866C9D3/4GX KHX1866C10D3/4G 8GB
667, 933 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
20.5% Poor
MC Read 7.9
MC Write 4.2
MC Mixed 6.3
18% 6.13 GB/s
SC Read 6.4
SC Write 2.9
SC Mixed 7
16% 5.43 GB/s
Latency 72.5
55% 72.5 ns
Poor: 15%
This bench: 20.5%
Great: 56%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A75 Pro4-M Builds (Compare 36 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 49%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A75 Pro4-M

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 55% - Above average Total price: $146
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 $45
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