CMS 7200-5401A

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 19%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 53%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 37.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics43.4% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive73.3% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system 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.
Very high background CPU (59%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemCMS 7200-5401A  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK PRIME A320M-K
Memory5.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180419
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 22 '23 at 13:08
Run Duration121 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 59%
Watch Gameplay: 1650 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A10-9700 APU (2016 M.BR)
AM4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.7 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
37.2% Below average
Memory 47.7
1-Core 67.5
2-Core 125
45% 80.1 Pts
4-Core 149
8-Core 191
22% 170 Pts
64-Core 192
12% 192 Pts
Poor: 26%
This bench: 37.2%
Great: 52%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1650-$155
CLim: 2175 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 457.51
Performing below potential (66th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
43.4% Average
Lighting 56
Reflection 57.6
Parallax 49.2
46% 54.3 fps
MRender 41
Gravity 52.9
Splatting 48
39% 47.3 fps
Poor: 39%
This bench: 43.4%
Great: 46%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Liteon LCH-256V2S-HP 256GB
181GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2C03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 236 217 253 262 276 276 MB/s
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
73.3% Very good
Read 433
Write 266
Mixed 264
SusWrite 253
68% 304 MB/s
4K Read 17.9
4K Write 55.9
4K Mixed 27.7
92% 33.8 MB/s
DQ Read 298
DQ Write 231
DQ Mixed 194
164% 241 MB/s
Poor: 53%
This bench: 73.3%
Great: 92%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CT4G4DFS824A.M8FE CT4G4DFS824A.M8FB 8GB
2400, 2400 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
32.3% Below average
MC Read 14.3
MC Write 8.2
MC Mixed 13.6
34% 12 GB/s
SC Read 7.5
SC Write 5.4
SC Mixed 8.9
21% 7.27 GB/s
Latency 169
24% 169 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 32.3%
Great: 93%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 68 54 144 27" 1280 720 SAM105C LC27G7xT
Typical 7200-5401A Builds (Compare 15 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk

System: CMS 7200-5401A

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 174% - Outstanding Total price: $40
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 youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
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 keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $28Corsair 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