Asrock FM2A55M-VG3

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 15%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 11%
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 an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 48.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics32.1% 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 DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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 (28%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A55M-VG3  (all builds)
Memory4.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1360 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130503
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateJul 09 '18 at 02:18
Run Duration110 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 28%

 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 3.9 GHz, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
48.7% Average
Memory 74.7
1-Core 54.5
2-Core 101
49% 76.8 Pts
4-Core 131
8-Core 153
18% 142 Pts
64-Core 170
10% 170 Pts
Poor: 36%
This bench: 48.7%
Great: 60%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 680-$360
Palit(1569 1180) 2GB
CLim: 1202 MHz, MLim: 1502 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 398.36
Performing below potential (71st percentile) - GPU OC Guide
32.1% Below average
Lighting 38
Reflection 36.7
Parallax 48.4
31% 41 fps
MRender 49.9
Gravity 44.6
Splatting 34.6
34% 43 fps
Poor: 29%
This bench: 32.1%
Great: 35%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$29
666GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 76 81 106 113 122 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
65% Good
Read 130
Write 95.2
Mixed 56.7
SusWrite 96.6
69% 94.6 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.8
176% 1.37 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 65%
Great: 109%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingmax FLFF65F-D8KQ9 8GB
667, 667 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
25.9% Poor
MC Read 12.7
MC Write 5.1
MC Mixed 8.7
25% 8.83 GB/s
SC Read 5.2
SC Write 4.5
SC Mixed 7.6
16% 5.77 GB/s
Latency 90.9
44% 90.9 ns
Poor: 26%
This bench: 25.9%
Great: 49%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A55M-VG3 Builds (Compare 19 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A55M-VG3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 48% - Average Total price: $278
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair 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