Asus SABERTOOTH X58

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 27%
Raft
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (45th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 55 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 60.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics54.1% 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 Drive38.7% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB 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 (11%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsus SABERTOOTH X58  (all builds)
Memory9 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1360 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120809
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 20 '16 at 22:13
Run Duration164 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 11%

 PC Performing as expected (45th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-950-$100
LGA1366, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 1.95 GHz, turbo 1.9 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
60.9% Good
Memory 94.3
1-Core 47.6
2-Core 96.2
53% 79.4 Pts
4-Core 152
8-Core 237
24% 194 Pts
64-Core 199
12% 199 Pts
Poor: 54%
This bench: 60.9%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 970-$200
Driver: nvd3dumx.dll Ver. 10.18.13.6881
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
54.1% Above average
Lighting 68.7
Reflection 67.8
Parallax 66.5
56% 67.7 fps
MRender 73
Gravity 63
Splatting 52.6
50% 62.8 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 54.1%
Great: 54%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
OCZ Trion 100 960GB-$310
529GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SAFM Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
38.7% Below average
Read 354
Write 93.2
Mixed 97.5
39% 182 MB/s
4K Read 17.9
4K Write 21.8
4K Mixed 5.43
46% 15 MB/s
DQ Read 191
DQ Write 76.3
DQ Mixed 0.54
36% 89.4 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 38.7%
Great: 89%
OCZ VERTEX3 90GB
10GB free
Firmware: 2.22 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
38.2% Below average
Read 192
Write 119
Mixed 145
34% 152 MB/s
4K Read 18.8
4K Write 48.8
4K Mixed 12.7
71% 26.8 MB/s
DQ Read 30.6
DQ Write 82.7
DQ Mixed 11.8
22% 41.7 MB/s
Poor: 50%
This bench: 38.2%
Great: 77%
WD Black 1TB (2010)-$60
168GB free
Firmware: 05.00K05 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
47.6% Average
Read 80.1
Write 85.5
Mixed 32.6
48% 66.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.47
4K Write 2.17
4K Mixed 0.32
95% 0.99 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 47.6%
Great: 76%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 3x4GB
3 of 6 slots used
12GB DIMM
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
50% Average
MC Read 18.5
MC Write 16.6
MC Mixed 18.1
51% 17.7 GB/s
SC Read 9.5
SC Write 10.2
SC Mixed 11.6
30% 10.4 GB/s
Latency 59
68% 59 ns
Poor: 25%
This bench: 50%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical SABERTOOTH X58 Builds (Compare 1,675 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 35%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: Asus SABERTOOTH X58

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Above average Total price: $376
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing charade so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit a lot from flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they've no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products, which UserBenchmark reveals.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. The 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data which saves our users millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176Nvidia 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) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk 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