ECS A55F-M3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 36%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (48th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 52 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 37.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics1.75% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive15.5% 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 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (20%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardECS A55F-M3  (all builds)
Memory1.5 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20111227
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateDec 29 '17 at 09:52
Run Duration138 Seconds
Run User IDN-User
Background CPU 20%

 PC Performing as expected (48th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A4-3300 APU-$90
P0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
37.5% Below average
Memory 64.4
1-Core 36.4
2-Core 39.1
34% 46.6 Pts
4-Core 64.7
8-Core 66.9
9% 65.8 Pts
64-Core 75.1
5% 75.1 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 37.5%
Great: 49%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 6410D
Elitegroup(1019 7BB5) 512MB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 14.501.1003.0
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
1.75% Terrible
Lighting 1.87
Reflection 2.62
Parallax 1.56
2% 2.01 fps
MRender 3.19
Gravity 1.2
Splatting 3.43
2% 2.61 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.75%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Virtual Disk 43GB
21GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
15.5% Very poor
Read 86
Write 79.5
Mixed 79.5
18% 81.7 MB/s
4K Read 7.86
4K Write 8.73
4K Mixed 4.84
23% 7.15 MB/s
DQ Read 8.85
DQ Write 9.25
DQ Mixed 4.8
5% 7.64 MB/s
Virtual Disk 268GB
88GB free
Firmware: 0
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
43.7% Average
Read 77.3
Write 72.6
Mixed 79
58% 76.3 MB/s
4K Read 1.12
4K Write 7.68
4K Mixed 0.48
242% 3.09 MB/s
Poor: 42%
This bench: 43.7%
Great: 44%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown T2G88U1-P9H 2x2GB
2 of 2 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR3 1600 MHz clocked @ 800 MHz
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
30.1% Below average
MC Read 11.4
MC Write 10.2
MC Mixed 10.9
31% 10.8 GB/s
SC Read 6.7
SC Write 5.5
SC Mixed 7.3
19% 6.5 GB/s
Latency 115
35% 115 ns
Poor: 31%
This bench: 30.1%
Great: 55%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical A55F-M3 Builds (Compare 25 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 39%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: ECS A55F-M3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 52% - Above average Total price: $74
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 $163Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $160
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 $383
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