Today's hottest deals

Asrock FM2A55M-VG3+

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 39%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 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 37.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics4.52% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (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.
Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A55M-VG3+  (all builds)
Memory3.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1280 x 720 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20131014
Uptime1 Days
Run DateJun 19 '19 at 15:50
Run Duration129 Seconds
Run User URY-User
Background CPU 100%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A6-7400K APU (2014 D.Ka)
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (60th percentile)
37.2% Below average
Memory 57.6
1-Core 61.9
2-Core 103
45% 74.3 Pts
4-Core 99.5
8-Core 97.3
13% 98.4 Pts
64-Core 99.4
6% 99.4 Pts
Poor: 20%
This bench: 37.2%
Great: 45%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
ASRock(1849 1315) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 17.1.1
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
4.52% Terrible
Lighting 5.3
Reflection 7.27
Parallax 7.31
4% 6.63 fps
MRender 4.81
Gravity 4.83
Splatting 7.65
5% 5.77 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.52%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung HD322HJ 320GB-$44
239GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 1AC01113
SusWrite @10s intervals: 58 28 72 68 83 50 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
38.7% Below average
Read 74.6
Write 19.3
Mixed 54.8
SusWrite 59.7
39% 52.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 1
177% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 38.7%
Great: 62%
Samsung HD161HJ 160GB-$40
149GB free
Firmware: GF100-07
SusWrite @10s intervals: 65 53 64 18 0.6 1 MB/s
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
29.2% Poor
Read 67.7
Write 40.7
Mixed 45.5
SusWrite 33.6
35% 46.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 29.2%
Great: 42%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905474-060.A00LF 99U5471-012.A00LF 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (8th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
26.9% Poor
MC Read 10.6
MC Write 7
MC Mixed 10.6
27% 9.4 GB/s
SC Read 6.4
SC Write 6.9
SC Mixed 8.8
21% 7.37 GB/s
Latency 135
30% 135 ns
Poor: 27%
This bench: 26.9%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A55M-VG3+ Builds (Compare 71 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 44%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A55M-VG3+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 45% - Average Total price: $171
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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 obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or 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 the gold standard for 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 $167Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-13600K $210Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $389WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $84
Intel Core i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $406
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback