Today's hottest deals

Asrock B75 Pro3-M

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 27%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (19th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 81 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 relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 28.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.5% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive22.5% is an extremely low SSD score, this system will benefit from a faster SSD.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (79%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock B75 Pro3-M  (all builds)
Memory0.8 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kleuren
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20131224
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateNov 19 '18 at 21:09
Run Duration231 Seconds
Run User NLD-User
Background CPU 79%

 PC Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Pentium G2020-$92
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 1.25 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
28.2% Poor
Memory 48.3
1-Core 23.1
2-Core 28.4
25% 33.3 Pts
4-Core 49.1
8-Core 49.3
7% 49.2 Pts
64-Core 29.1
2% 29.1 Pts
Poor: 34%
This bench: 28.2%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia Quadro FX 370
Nvidia(10DE 0491) 256MB
Ram: 256MB, Driver: 342.1
Performing above expectations (60th percentile)
0.5% Terrible
Lighting 0.63
Reflection 1.27
Parallax 0.19
0% 0.7 fps
MRender 0.19
Gravity 0.6
Splatting 0.83
0% 0.54 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.5%
Great: 1%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Evo 120GB-$85
18GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EXT0BB6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 49 42 45 69 57 25 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
22.5% Poor
Read 163
Write 83.6
Mixed 90.1
SusWrite 47.9
21% 96.2 MB/s
4K Read 9.2
4K Write 10.2
4K Mixed 12.5
35% 10.6 MB/s
DQ Read 40.8
DQ Write 39
DQ Mixed 37.5
29% 39.1 MB/s
Poor: 63%
This bench: 22.5%
Great: 108%
Seagate ST3320820AS 320GB-$55
93GB free
Firmware: 3.AAC
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 34 37 49 41 40 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
27.3% Poor
Read 55
Write 53.3
Mixed 34.9
SusWrite 39.8
34% 45.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.7
127% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 27.3%
Great: 44%
Philips USB Flash Drive 16GB
5GB free, PID 4100
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.9 0.8 3.8 4.8 4.3 6.2 MB/s
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
3.73% Terrible
Read 12
Write 7
Mixed 5.8
SusWrite 3.6
9% 7.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.2
21% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.73%
Great: 9%
ST332082 0AS 320GB
86GB free, PID 2336
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 16 16 16 19 18 17 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
10.4% Very poor
Read 22.5
Write 14
Mixed 19.2
SusWrite 16.9
24% 18.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.6
60% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 10.4%
Great: 19%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5458-005.A01LF 1x4GB
1 of 4 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing way below expectations (0th percentile)
9.73% Terrible
MC Read 3
MC Write 3.8
MC Mixed 2.7
9% 3.17 GB/s
SC Read 0.2
SC Write 4.7
SC Mixed 0.2
5% 1.7 GB/s
Latency 167
24% 167 ns
Poor: 19%
This bench: 9.73%
Great: 30%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical B75 Pro3-M Builds (Compare 574 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock B75 Pro3-M - $85

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 64% - Good Total price: $407
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 $155Nvidia RTX 4060 $299WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $375WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i5-13600K $230Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $350
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