Asrock FM2A68M-HD+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 49%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (59th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 41 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 48.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics5.94% 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 Drive80.5% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (37%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A68M-HD+  (all builds)
Memory2.7 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160112
Uptime1.8 Days
Run DateAug 21 '19 at 15:16
Run Duration156 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 37%

 PC Performing as expected (59th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A8-7600 APU (2014 D.Ka)
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.1 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
48.5% Average
Memory 65.1
1-Core 62.8
2-Core 106
48% 77.9 Pts
4-Core 188
8-Core 176
25% 182 Pts
64-Core 177
11% 177 Pts
Poor: 29%
This bench: 48.5%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
ASRock(1849 1313) 1GB
Ram: 1GB, Driver: 19.4.3
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
5.94% Terrible
Lighting 7.2
Reflection 8.12
Parallax 9.75
6% 8.36 fps
MRender 6.24
Gravity 7.27
Splatting 8.35
6% 7.28 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5.94%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$80
211GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 307 309 309 304 307 306 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
80.5% Excellent
Read 402
Write 317
Mixed 296
SusWrite 307
74% 331 MB/s
4K Read 26.6
4K Write 74.2
4K Mixed 31.4
120% 44.1 MB/s
DQ Read 217
DQ Write 184
DQ Mixed 170
136% 190 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 80.5%
Great: 129%
WD RE4 1TB (2010)-$38
928GB free
Firmware: 01.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 112 109 116 108 108 108 MB/s
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
63.9% Good
Read 112
Write 107
Mixed 66.5
SusWrite 110
73% 99 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
183% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 36%
This bench: 63.9%
Great: 76%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown EWB8GB681PAE-16IC CT51264BA160BJ.C8F 12GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
29.3% Poor
MC Read 11.8
MC Write 8.3
MC Mixed 10.8
29% 10.3 GB/s
SC Read 6.5
SC Write 7.2
SC Mixed 8.1
21% 7.27 GB/s
Latency 114
35% 114 ns
Poor: 24%
This bench: 29.3%
Great: 29%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A68M-HD+ Builds (Compare 223 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 45%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A68M-HD+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 12% - Very poor Total price: $28
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 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 $163Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $383
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