Biostar A58MD

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 47%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 40.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics6.79% 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 Drive65.8% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardBiostar A58MD  (all builds)
Memory4.9 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20131009
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 30 '18 at 16:31
Run Duration133 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing as expected (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A4-5300 APU-$36
P0, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
40.3% Average
Memory 65.6
1-Core 61.5
2-Core 90.3
46% 72.5 Pts
4-Core 88.9
8-Core 93.2
12% 91.1 Pts
64-Core 92.5
6% 92.5 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 40.3%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R7 240
Sapphire(174B E266) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 22.19.662.4
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
6.79% Terrible
Lighting 7.7
Reflection 9.42
Parallax 9.28
6% 8.8 fps
MRender 10.4
Gravity 6.43
Splatting 11.2
8% 9.33 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 6.79%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
166GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
65.8% Good
Read 263
Write 205
Mixed 217
51% 228 MB/s
4K Read 27.5
4K Write 53.1
4K Mixed 35.8
116% 38.8 MB/s
DQ Read 171
DQ Write 120
DQ Mixed 71.3
73% 121 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 65.8%
Great: 124%
Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB-$60
1.5TB free
Firmware: MX4O Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
65.1% Good
Read 104
Write 123
Mixed 157
98% 128 MB/s
4K Read 0.71
4K Write 1.83
4K Mixed 0.16
82% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 65.1%
Great: 108%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x4GB
1 of 2 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing below potential (34th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
20.6% Poor
MC Read 8.6
MC Write 4.2
MC Mixed 6.9
19% 6.57 GB/s
SC Read 8
SC Write 5
SC Mixed 7
19% 6.67 GB/s
Latency 112
36% 112 ns
Poor: 13%
This bench: 20.6%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A58MD Builds (Compare 20 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 45%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Biostar A58MD

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 32% - Below average Total price: $38
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