Asrock FM2A88M Pro3+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 43%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (33rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 67 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 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 48.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.93% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive88.4% 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.
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.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A88M Pro3+  (all builds)
Memory4.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160111
Uptime0.9 Days
Run DateFeb 06 '19 at 20:34
Run Duration213 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU7%

 PC Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon X4 845-$50
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.2 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
48.7% Average
Memory 62.5
1-Core 34.6
2-Core 68.8
36% 55.3 Pts
4-Core 198
8-Core 227
28% 213 Pts
64-Core 219
14% 219 Pts
Poor: 33%
This bench: 48.7%
Great: 54%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 710
Asus(1043 8572) 2GB
CLim: 954 MHz, MLim: 450 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 388.31
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
3.93% Terrible
Lighting 4.7
Reflection 4.38
Parallax 4.44
4% 4.51 fps
MRender 4.62
Gravity 3.9
Splatting 6.17
4% 4.9 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.93%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
152GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 340 245 233 238 235 233 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
88.4% Excellent
Read 432
Write 375
Mixed 340
SusWrite 254
78% 350 MB/s
4K Read 32.9
4K Write 79.2
4K Mixed 39.9
143% 50.7 MB/s
DQ Read 274
DQ Write 240
DQ Mixed 255
192% 256 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 88.4%
Great: 124%
SanDisk X110 64GB-$25
56GB free
Firmware: X231600
SusWrite @10s intervals: 95 93 97 97 98 96 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
47.2% Average
Read 318
Write 151
Mixed 142
SusWrite 95.9
39% 177 MB/s
4K Read 17.8
4K Write 58.6
4K Mixed 21.6
86% 32.7 MB/s
DQ Read 25.4
DQ Write 84.4
DQ Mixed 30.4
30% 46.7 MB/s
Poor: 50%
This bench: 47.2%
Great: 79%
WD Red 3TB (2012)-$86
2.5TB free
Firmware: 82.00A82
SusWrite @10s intervals: 43 60 51 49 49 61 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
54.2% Above average
Read 136
Write 36.7
Mixed 47.5
SusWrite 52.3
50% 68.2 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.6
137% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 42%
This bench: 54.2%
Great: 88%
WD Blue 3TB (2015)-$80
315GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 94 91 97 98 98 97 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
54.1% Above average
Read 92.8
Write 100
Mixed 62.3
SusWrite 95.7
64% 87.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.8
149% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 54.1%
Great: 96%
WD Green 2TB (2012)-$49
457GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 102 95 98 97 92 92 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
54.6% Above average
Read 94.7
Write 95.5
Mixed 51.2
SusWrite 95.9
62% 84.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.6
4K Mixed 0.6
99% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 54.6%
Great: 84%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 3TB
892GB free, PID a202
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 89 94 94 93 94 93 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
40.3% Average
Read 95.2
Write 87
Mixed 38.5
SusWrite 92.7
104% 78.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.7
94% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 40.3%
Great: 53%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Transcend TS512MLK72V3N 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing below potential (7th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
34.4% Below average
MC Read 14.9
MC Write 8.1
MC Mixed 14.9
36% 12.6 GB/s
SC Read 6.1
SC Write 7.2
SC Mixed 8.5
21% 7.27 GB/s
Latency 121
33% 121 ns
Poor: 34%
This bench: 34.4%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A88M Pro3+ Builds (Compare 40 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 49%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A88M Pro3+

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 33% - Below average Total price: $131
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $79G.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