TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 45%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 38%
Jet ski
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 72.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics57.1% 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 Drive91.4% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait 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
5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago, 5 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
MotherboardAsus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA  (all builds)
Memory14.1 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.9 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit barev
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20170607
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJun 06 '19 at 16:25
Run Duration183 Seconds
Run User CZE-User
Background CPU10%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8300-$168
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4.7 GHz, turbo 4.65 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
72.7% Very good
Memory 94.1
1-Core 68.8
2-Core 139
63% 101 Pts
4-Core 278
8-Core 507
47% 392 Pts
64-Core 502
31% 502 Pts
Poor: 48% ↑
This bench: 72.7%
 Great: 64%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$117
Asus(1043 862C) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1974 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 430.86
Performing below potential (73rd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
57.1% Above average
Lighting 70.4
Reflection 73.6
Parallax 61.2
57% 68.4 fps
MRender 68.9
Gravity 67.2
Splatting 70.1
56% 68.7 fps
Poor: 51% ↑
This bench: 57.1%
 Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Evo 500GB-$150
405GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EXT0BB6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 223 229 249 239 233 246 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
91.4% Outstanding
Read 445
Write 409
Mixed 372
SusWrite 237
82% 366 MB/s
4K Read 37.2
4K Write 73.1
4K Mixed 47.4
156% 52.6 MB/s
DQ Read 251
DQ Write 217
DQ Mixed 185
152% 218 MB/s
Poor: 72% ↑
This bench: 91.4%
 Great: 126%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
23GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 143 144 144 172 179 150 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
87.8% Excellent
Read 150
Write 134
Mixed 69.5
SusWrite 155
93% 127 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1.1
210% 1.53 MB/s
Poor: 52% ↑
This bench: 87.8%
 Great: 109%
Samsung Spinpoint T166 500GB-$40
56GB free
Firmware: CR100-13
SusWrite @10s intervals: 72 70 70 71 71 72 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
42.4% Average
Read 76.3
Write 84
Mixed 50.8
SusWrite 71.1
52% 70.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.9
162% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑
This bench: 42.4%
 Great: 44%
WL3000GSA6454G 3TB
16GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 68 68 68 68 69 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
49.8% Average
Read 105
Write 96.5
Mixed 69.7
SusWrite 68.1
63% 84.8 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 1
194% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 49% ↑
This bench: 49.8%
 Great: 95%
Hitachi Deskstar P7K500 250GB-$44
21GB free
Firmware: GM2OA5CA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 72 72 71 72 73 73 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
44.1% Average
Read 81.5
Write 86.5
Mixed 49
SusWrite 72
53% 72.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.9
160% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 19% ↑
This bench: 44.1%
 Great: 50%
Seagate Expansion 2TB
1TB free
Firmware: 0502
SusWrite @10s intervals: 73 76 77 77 77 77 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
52.4% Above average
Read 106
Write 88.3
Mixed 62.3
SusWrite 76.1
61% 83.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1
171% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 16% ↑
This bench: 52.4%
 Great: 67%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
HyperX Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 1866 MHz clocked @ 933 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
55.2% Above average
MC Read 22.5
MC Write 17.3
MC Mixed 19.1
56% 19.6 GB/s
SC Read 12
SC Write 11
SC Mixed 14.4
36% 12.5 GB/s
Latency 59.6
67% 59.6 ns
Poor: 36% ↑
This bench: 55.2%
 Great: 72%
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

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 970 PRO GAMING/AURA Builds (Compare 903 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA - $299

CPU
FX-8350AMD  $130Bench 61%, 313,196 samples431x
FX-6300AMD  $90Bench 55%, 261,607 samples112x
FX-8370AMD  $175Bench 62%, 34,720 samples85x
GPU
GTX 1050-TiNvidia  $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples86x
GTX 1060-6GBNvidia  $117Bench 56%, 1,368,019 samples66x
RX 580AMD  $130Bench 52%, 360,351 samples51x
SSD
850 Evo 250GBSamsung  $100Bench 103%, 951,591 samples22x
A400 240GBKingston  $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples18x
860 Evo 500GBSamsung  $76Bench 105%, 762,998 samples18x
RAM
Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x8GBHyperXBench 59%, 122,541 samples51x
HyperX DDR3 1866 C10 4x8GBKingstonBench 63%, 12,722 samples13x
Fury DDR3 1600 C10 2x8GBHyperXBench 54%, 77,652 samples13x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 62% - Good Total price: $588
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on 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 pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, UserBenchmark's data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
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) $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
Amazon Ebay
deals
Build Test EFps
Can You Run It?
►
YouTube
*NEW*
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback