Asrock FM2A88M Extreme4+

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 16%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 12%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 50%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics26.6% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive75.1% 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 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.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock FM2A88M Extreme4+  (all builds)
Memory6.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1440 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20160205
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 10 '19 at 10:26
Run Duration113 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU4%

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A10-6790K APU (2013 D.Ri)
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 4.7 GHz
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
50% Above average
Memory 84.6
1-Core 82
2-Core 123
61% 96.6 Pts
4-Core 92.5
8-Core 102
13% 97.1 Pts
64-Core 99.1
6% 99.1 Pts
Poor: 42%
This bench: 50%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 950-$100
Gigabyte(1458 36C3) 2GB
CLim: 1430 MHz, MLim: 1652 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 441.41
Performing above expectations (85th percentile)
26.6% Poor
Lighting 32.2
Reflection 30
Parallax 23.6
26% 28.6 fps
MRender 37
Gravity 31.5
Splatting 32.5
27% 33.6 fps
Poor: 22%
This bench: 26.6%
Great: 28%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Maxtor Z 1 SSD 240GB
147GB free (System drive)
Firmware: STKS
SusWrite @10s intervals: 353 119 100 102 103 101 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
75.1% Very good
Read 410
Write 141
Mixed 303
SusWrite 146
56% 250 MB/s
4K Read 32.8
4K Write 74.5
4K Mixed 32.7
131% 46.7 MB/s
DQ Read 214
DQ Write 232
DQ Mixed 177
146% 208 MB/s
Poor: 47%
This bench: 75.1%
Great: 75%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown Atermiter 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (18th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
36.5% Below average
MC Read 17.7
MC Write 7.1
MC Mixed 12.6
36% 12.5 GB/s
SC Read 8.5
SC Write 7.8
SC Mixed 10.9
26% 9.07 GB/s
Latency 72.5
55% 72.5 ns
Poor: 28%
This bench: 36.5%
Great: 61%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical FM2A88M Extreme4+ Builds (Compare 90 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock FM2A88M Extreme4+ - $93

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 41% - Average Total price: $375
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 $162Nvidia RTX 4060 $289WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $380
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