Asrock X570M Pro4

Performance Results


Gaming 29% Raft	Desktop 81% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 27% Raft


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing as expected (44th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 56 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 77%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	29.6% 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)
Memory	16GB 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 Version	Windows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.

Run History

2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 23 months ago, 20 months ago, 20 months ago, 20 months ago, 20 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)

Motherboard	Asrock X570M Pro4 (all builds)
Memory	10.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display	1680 x 1050 - 32 Bit kleuren
OS	Windows 11
BIOS Date	20200825
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Oct 08 '21 at 10:53
Run Duration	356 Seconds
Run User	NLD-User
Background CPU	3%

Watch Gameplay: 1050-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

PC Performing as expected (44^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD Ryzen 5 2600-$125 179,588 User benchmarks, average bench 73% AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.6 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (86^th percentile)	77% Very good	Memory 73.9 1-Core 115 2-Core 224 76% 138 Pts	4-Core 431 8-Core 640 67% 535 Pts	64-Core 888 55% 888 Pts
Poor: 67% ↑ This bench: 77% Great: 81%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1050-Ti-$59 946,701 User benchmarks, average bench 29% Asus(1043 862A) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 471.11 Performing below potential (76^th percentile) - GPU OC Guide	29.6% Poor	Lighting 37.4 Reflection 39.6 Parallax 41.2 30% 39.4 fps	MRender 38.4 Gravity 38.8 Splatting 27.6 28% 34.9 fps
Poor: 27% ↑ This bench: 29.6% Great: 33%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$109 695,664 User benchmarks, average bench 112% 267GB free (System drive) Firmware: EMT02B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 464 509 480 280 268 MB/s Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 80% Great: 134%
Samsung 830 128GB-$109 37,250 User benchmarks, average bench 63% 57GB free Firmware: CXM03B1Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 302 301 301 300 301 301 MB/s Performing above expectations (81^st percentile)	70.1% Very good	Read 464 Write 252 Mixed 263 SusWrite 301 71% 320 MB/s	4K Read 21.3 4K Write 52.5 4K Mixed 22.4 89% 32.1 MB/s	DQ Read 194 DQ Write 80.2 DQ Mixed 120 93% 131 MB/s
Poor: 48% ↑ This bench: 70.1% Great: 76%
Toshiba MD04ACA400 4TB-$140 10,635 User benchmarks, average bench 82% 2TB free Firmware: FP2A SusWrite @10s intervals: 74 80 91 78 76 74 MB/s Performing way below expectations (3^rd percentile)	52% Above average	Read 102 Write 51.5 Mixed 49.7 SusWrite 78.7 52% 70.4 MB/s	4K Read 1.4 4K Write 2 4K Mixed 1.1 218% 1.5 MB/s
Poor: 55% ↑ This bench: 52% Great: 104%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$63 235,501 User benchmarks, average bench 88% 487GB free Firmware: CC27 SusWrite @10s intervals: 66 76 81 70 66 57 MB/s Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete		Write 14.2 Mixed 8 SusWrite 69.3 22% 30.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.2 4K Write 0.2 4K Mixed 0.4 56% 0.27 MB/s
Poor: 56% Great: 113%
Toshiba MD04ACA400 4TB-$140 10,635 User benchmarks, average bench 82% 232GB free Firmware: FP2A SusWrite @10s intervals: 137 135 136 135 134 135 MB/s Performing as expected (55^th percentile)	84.3% Excellent	Read 157 Write 156 Mixed 66.7 SusWrite 135 94% 129 MB/s	4K Read 5.3 4K Write 2.1 4K Mixed 1.2 393% 2.87 MB/s
Poor: 55% ↑ This bench: 84.3% Great: 104%
Seagate Barracuda 6TB (2017)-$123 14,331 User benchmarks, average bench 66% 1.5TB free Firmware: 0001 SusWrite @10s intervals: 110 126 123 123 127 123 MB/s Performing way below expectations (14^th percentile)	50.9% Above average	Read 54.3 Write 63.4 Mixed 52.1 SusWrite 122 54% 72.9 MB/s	4K Read 1.1 4K Write 4.7 4K Mixed 0.5 188% 2.1 MB/s
Poor: 40% ↑ This bench: 50.9% Great: 87%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 2TB-$50 815,515 User benchmarks, average bench 88% 200GB free Firmware: CC98 SusWrite @10s intervals: 85 93 93 93 94 93 MB/s Performing way below expectations (8^th percentile)	57.3% Above average	Read 108 Write 74.6 Mixed 61.9 SusWrite 91.7 62% 84.1 MB/s	4K Read 0.9 4K Write 0.9 4K Mixed 0.6 121% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 51% ↑ This bench: 57.3% Great: 114%
WD Green 2TB (2012)-$49 170,877 User benchmarks, average bench 64% 627GB free Firmware: 80.00A80 SusWrite @10s intervals: 101 100 101 101 100 100 MB/s Performing below expectations (37^th percentile)	58.3% Above average	Read 102 Write 90.3 Mixed 62.3 SusWrite 100 65% 88.9 MB/s	4K Read 1 4K Write 1.7 4K Mixed 0.9 173% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 40% ↑ This bench: 58.3% Great: 84%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C16 2x8GB 87,241 User benchmarks, average bench 82% 2 of 4 slots used 16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz Performing below potential (38^th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP	77.3% Very good	MC Read 29.6 MC Write 28.2 MC Mixed 26.3 80% 28 GB/s	SC Read 20.4 SC Write 26.7 SC Mixed 21.4 65% 22.8 GB/s	Latency 92.6 43% 92.6 ns
Poor: 59% ↑ This bench: 77.3% Great: 102%

Take a copy of your results

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

SkillBench Score 0: 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	8	6	60	25.5"	1280 720	MED3611 MD 20094

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

MBD

Typical X570M Pro4 Builds (Compare 901 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming 102%

UFO

Desktop 94%

Nuclear submarine

Workstation 103%

UFO

Motherboard: Asrock X570M Pro4

CPU
Ryzen 7 3700XAMD $205Bench 86%, 635,419 samples	155x
Ryzen 7 5800XAMD $201Bench 98%, 128,080 samples	117x
Ryzen 9 3900XAMD $395Bench 88%, 197,342 samples	111x

GPU
RTX 2070S (Super)Nvidia $210Bench 115%, 663,603 samples	54x
RTX 3080Nvidia $910Bench 187%, 424,051 samples	50x
RX 5700-XTAMD $250Bench 98%, 254,908 samples	49x

SSD
980 Pro NVMe PCIe M.2 1TBSamsung $98Bench 394%, 276,089 samples	42x
970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 1TBSamsung $76Bench 310%, 455,997 samples	41x
970 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 1TBSamsung $158Bench 297%, 331,647 samples	30x

RAM
Vengeance RGB PRO DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GBCorsair $63Bench 85%, 346,786 samples	30x
Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GBCorsair $40Bench 85%, 653,654 samples	29x
Ripjaws V DDR4 3200 C16 2x16GBG.SKILLBench 89%, 92,468 samples	27x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 118% - Outstanding

Total price: $576

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184	Nvidia RTX 4070 $409	Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16