ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus M5A97

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing CPU, GPU, RAM
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (28th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 72 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.
Boot Drive	46.9% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 11 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.

Motherboard	Asus M5A97 (all builds)
Memory	3.3 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 7
BIOS Date	20121025
Uptime	2.5 Days
Run Date	Nov 16 '15 at 01:17
Run Duration	432 Seconds
Run User	CAN-User
Background CPU	7%

PC Performing below expectations (28^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T-$175 23,835 User benchmarks, average bench 54% Socket 942, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 6 threads Base clock 3.65 GHz Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete		1-Core 66.8 2-Core 132 45% 99.2 Pts	4-Core 263 8-Core 391 41% 327 Pts	64-Core 393 24% 393 Pts
Poor: 46% Great: 61%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
AMD HD 5850 15,020 User benchmarks, average bench 15% XFX(1682 2972) 1GB Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.201.1151.1007 Relative performance n/a - atypical extreme
Poor: 14% Great: 16%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Crucial M4 128GB-$116 34,516 User benchmarks, average bench 60% 2GB free (System drive) Firmware: 0309 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below potential (10^th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 33037 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 135 (AA) Unknown 100 100 0 (AB) Unknown 100 100 0 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 92 92 247 (AE) Unknown 100 100 0 (B5) Unknown 100 100 13069705086146 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BC) Unknown 100 100 0 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 81 (C2) HDA temperature 100 100 0 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 100 100 0 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 180 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 92 92 8 (CE) Flying height 100 100 0	46.9% Average	Read 156 Write 193 Mixed 178 39% 175 MB/s	4K Read 20.1 4K Write 73.5 4K Mixed 13.3 86% 35.6 MB/s	DQ Read 55.2 DQ Write 118 DQ Mixed 13 31% 61.9 MB/s
Poor: 44% ↑ This bench: 46.9% Great: 72%
WD Green 2TB (2010)-$100 5,498 User benchmarks, average bench 50% 410GB free Firmware: 51.0 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing above expectations (63^rd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 1 (03) Spinup time 172 171 6366 (04) Start/Stop count 93 93 7875 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 253 0 (09) Power-on hours count 51 51 36306 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 534 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 433 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 178 178 66650 (C2) HDA temperature 118 109 32 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	55.5% Above average	Read 114 Write 79.3 Mixed 92.5 72% 95.3 MB/s	4K Read 0.71 4K Write 1.56 4K Mixed 0.22 84% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 27% ↑ This bench: 55.5% Great: 68%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1.5TB-$88 40,945 User benchmarks, average bench 55% 329GB free Firmware: CC3G Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing below expectations (29^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 109 99 23742940 (03) Spinup time 90 90 0 (04) Start/Stop count 94 94 6174 (05) Reallocated sector count 99 99 59 (07) Seek error rate 79 60 86032506 (09) Power-on hours count 35 35 57446 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 6 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 926 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BC) Unknown 100 99 1 (BD) vendor-specific 62 62 38 (BE) vendor-specific 60 55 756613160 (C2) HDA temperature 40 45 25769803816 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 35 21 23742940 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 195 484 (F0) Head flying hours 100 253 -103753524933850 (F1) Unknown 100 253 2044098042 (F2) Unknown 100 253 1980443878	48.8% Average	Read 85.2 Write 84.8 Mixed 72.7 61% 80.9 MB/s	4K Read 0.71 4K Write 1.43 4K Mixed 0.41 102% 0.85 MB/s
Poor: 29% ↑ This bench: 48.8% Great: 70%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB-$80 31,610 User benchmarks, average bench 34% 24GB free Firmware: 3.AA Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing below expectations (35^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 116 96 223344838 (03) Spinup time 96 95 0 (04) Start/Stop count 89 89 11696 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 86 60 426966737 (09) Power-on hours count 30 30 62184 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 1135 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 61 56 656867367 (C2) HDA temperature 39 44 42949672999 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 69 58 137063480 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 100 253 0 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 100 253 0	31.4% Below average	Read 63.9 Write 45.3 Mixed 52.3 41% 53.9 MB/s	4K Read 0.47 4K Write 1.14 4K Mixed 0.3 75% 0.64 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 31.4% Great: 43%
Hitachi HDS723020BLA642 2TB 113 User benchmarks, average bench 18% 671GB free, PID 1011 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing below expectations (21^st percentile)	14.2% Very poor	Read 28 Write 26.3 Mixed 13.3 27% 22.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.51 4K Write 1.41 4K Mixed 0.23 58% 0.72 MB/s
Poor: 14% ↑ This bench: 14.2% Great: 20%
Apple iPod 60GB 64 User benchmarks, average bench 7% 37GB free, PID 1209 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing way below expectations (13^th percentile)	4.44% Terrible	Read 4.9 Write 5.31 Mixed 4.66 6% 4.96 MB/s	4K Read 0.13 4K Write 0.83 4K Mixed 0.11 32% 0.36 MB/s
Poor: 4% ↑ This bench: 4.44% Great: 8%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical M5A97 Builds (Compare 318 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 32%

Sail boat

Desktop

Desktop 68%

Battle cruiser

Workstation

Workstation 26%

Raft

Motherboard: Asus M5A97 - $89

CPU
FX-8350AMD $130Bench 61%, 313,196 samples	52x
FX-4100AMD $110Bench 51%, 32,471 samples	43x
FX-6100AMD $68Bench 54%, 44,863 samples	41x

GPU
GTX 970Nvidia $200Bench 49%, 834,238 samples	20x
GTX 1050-TiNvidia $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples	18x
RX 580AMD $130Bench 52%, 360,351 samples	16x

SSD
860 Evo 500GBSamsung $80Bench 105%, 762,998 samples	12x
A400 480GBKingston $38Bench 74%, 237,487 samples	11x
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	8x

RAM
16GBUnknownBench 41%, 70,565 samples	134x
8GBUnknownBench 34%, 82,857 samples	86x
12GBUnknownBench 35%, 85,415 samples	31x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 57% - Above average

Total price: $499

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

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $149	Nvidia RTX 4060 $290	WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388	WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110	Nvidia RTX 4070 $520	Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $363

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback