QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 15%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 41%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (14th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 86 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 an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 29.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics42.7% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive50.5% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (19%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemQEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory12 GB free of 16 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150206
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateApr 05 '20 at 19:05
Run Duration112 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU 19%

 PC Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon E7- 4850
CPU 0, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 2 GHz, turbo 2 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
29.8% Poor
Memory 28.6
1-Core 40.6
2-Core 88.7
29% 52.6 Pts
4-Core 166
8-Core 325
29% 245 Pts
64-Core 480
30% 480 Pts
Poor: 30%
This bench: 29.8%
Great: 53%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 970-$200
CLim: 1455 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 445.75
Performing below potential (7th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
42.7% Average
Lighting 53.1
Reflection 54.8
Parallax 50.1
43% 52.7 fps
MRender 57.5
Gravity 51
Splatting 46
42% 51.5 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 54%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Red Hat VirtIO 483GB
415GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 404 414 428 434 403 385 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
50.5% Above average
Read 495
Write 486
Mixed 492
SusWrite 411
106% 471 MB/s
4K Read 4.9
4K Write 5.5
4K Mixed 5.7
18% 5.37 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 50.5%
Great: 76%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 1x16GB
1 of 1 slots used
16GB DIMM RAM
Relative performance (0th percentile)
13.7% Very poor
MC Read 5.5
MC Write 4.9
MC Mixed 4.7
14% 5.03 GB/s
SC Read 3
SC Write 2.4
SC Mixed 2.5
8% 2.63 GB/s
Latency 263
15% 263 ns
Poor: 38%
This bench: 13.7%
Great: 161%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) Builds (Compare 611 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 83%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 74%
Battleship

System: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $485
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/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 $174Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback