Today's hottest deals

Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 49%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 40%
Jet ski
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 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 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 67.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics74.8% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
MotherboardAsus M5A99X EVO R2.0  (all builds)
Memory12.9 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1200 - 32 Bit kleuren
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140403
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateMar 21 '20 at 13:38
Run Duration217 Seconds
Run User NLD-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing below expectations (30th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8350-$127
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
67.6% Good
Memory 90.1
1-Core 71.3
2-Core 115
59% 92.2 Pts
4-Core 245
8-Core 425
40% 335 Pts
64-Core 406
25% 406 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 67.6%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 980-Ti-$449
Nvidia(10DE 1151) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1392 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 442.59
Performing below potential (29th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
74.8% Very good
Lighting 96
Reflection 101
Parallax 99.9
78% 99 fps
MRender 86
Gravity 88.7
Splatting 77.9
68% 84.2 fps
Poor: 70%
This bench: 74.8%
Great: 87%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Momentus 2.5" 1TB
292GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2AR10002
SusWrite @10s intervals: 77 61 25 84 88 92 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
49.5% Average
Read 102
Write 95
Mixed 52
SusWrite 71.2
59% 79.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.5
88% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 49.5%
Great: 59%
WD Blue 640GB (2008)-$33
107GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 57 59 60 59 60 60 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
37% Below average
Read 69
Write 68
Mixed 50.7
SusWrite 59.3
46% 61.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 37%
Great: 62%
WD Blue 500GB (2008)-$24
63GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 65 66 69 68 68 67 MB/s
Performing below expectations (26th percentile)
38.4% Below average
Read 66.2
Write 72.7
Mixed 53.5
SusWrite 67.1
48% 64.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.9
171% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 38.4%
Great: 69%
Seagate ST3500414CS 500GB
24GB free
Firmware: SC13
SusWrite @10s intervals: 53 53 53 53 54 54 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
37.8% Below average
Read 78.5
Write 74
Mixed 47.7
SusWrite 53.1
47% 63.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
144% 1 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 37.8%
Great: 61%
SAMSUNG HD753LJ 750GB
218GB free, PID 2338
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.1 7.1 7 7.1 7 7 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
13.5% Very poor
Read 28.5
Write 23
Mixed 26.8
SusWrite 7
28% 21.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1
122% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 13.5%
Great: 23%
TOSHIBA USB 3.5"-HDD 1TB
117GB free, PID 0b09
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7 7 7 7 7 7.3 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
10.9% Very poor
Read 30
Write 20.5
Mixed 27.2
SusWrite 7
27% 21.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.7
80% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 10.9%
Great: 20%
WDC WD20 EARX-00PASB0 2TB
416GB free, PID 2339
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 6.8 6.9 7 7 7 7 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
11.8% Very poor
Read 29.5
Write 24.3
Mixed 23.8
SusWrite 6.9
27% 21.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
91% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 11.8%
Great: 19%
SAMSUNG HD204UI 2TB
272GB free, PID 2338
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.1 7.1 7 7.1 7 7.1 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
9.41% Terrible
Read 28
Write 28.2
Mixed 25
SusWrite 7.1
29% 22.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.8
70% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 9.41%
Great: 22%
WDC WD20 EZRZ-00Z5HB0 2TB
42GB free, PID 2338
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7 7 7 7 7 7 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
7.6% Terrible
Read 30
Write 26.5
Mixed 22.3
SusWrite 7
27% 21.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 0.5
4K Mixed 0.6
40% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 7.6%
Great: 22%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 C9 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 1600 MHz clocked @ 800 MHz
Performing below potential (34th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
48.6% Average
MC Read 19.4
MC Write 15.1
MC Mixed 17.4
49% 17.3 GB/s
SC Read 10
SC Write 9.3
SC Mixed 13.4
31% 10.9 GB/s
Latency 67
60% 67 ns
Poor: 39%
This bench: 48.6%
Great: 64%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical M5A99X EVO R2.0 Builds (Compare 769 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 31%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 - $300

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 70% - Very good Total price: $643
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 $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $285WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $146
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $375WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i5-13600K $250Nvidia RTX 4070 $519Crucial 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