Asrock X79 Extreme4-M

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 15%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 63%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 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 53%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics30.5% 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)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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
MotherboardAsrock X79 Extreme4-M  (all builds)
Memory14 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1600 x 1200 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120319
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 14 '19 at 05:35
Run Duration108 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU7%
Watch Gameplay: 1050-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-3820
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 1.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
53% Above average
Memory 90.9
1-Core 56.6
2-Core 121
57% 89.5 Pts
4-Core 96.1
8-Core 74.3
12% 85.2 Pts
64-Core 50.7
3% 50.7 Pts
Poor: 56%
This bench: 53%
Great: 80%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1050-Ti-$59
Asus(1043 8613) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 431.60
Performing way above expectations (85th percentile)
30.5% Below average
Lighting 37.8
Reflection 30
Parallax 40.4
31% 36.1 fps
MRender 37.4
Gravity 37.6
Splatting 35
30% 36.7 fps
Poor: 27%
This bench: 30.5%
Great: 33%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Momentus 2.5" 500GB-$49
213GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0002SDM1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 50 58 63 61 63 64 MB/s
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
43.5% Average
Read 91.8
Write 85.4
Mixed 43.7
SusWrite 59.8
51% 70.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.8
129% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 43.5%
Great: 58%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown BLS4G3D1609DS BLS4G3D1609DS F3-12800CL9-4 F3-12800CL9-4 16GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
22.4% Poor
MC Read 7.8
MC Write 6.7
MC Mixed 5.4
19% 6.63 GB/s
SC Read 6.2
SC Write 3.3
SC Mixed 9
18% 6.17 GB/s
Latency 66
61% 66 ns
Poor: 46%
This bench: 22.4%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X79 Extreme4-M Builds (Compare 84 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 31%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asrock X79 Extreme4-M

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 81% - Excellent Total price: $158
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
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 $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