Asus STRIKER II EXTREME

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 21%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (65th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 35 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 61.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics30.4% 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 Drive39.4% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
MotherboardAsus STRIKER II EXTREME  (all builds)
Memory4.9 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20081007
Uptime0.5 Days
Run DateSep 24 '19 at 02:36
Run Duration192 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing above expectations (65th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550-$161
Socket 775, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.35 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
61.7% Good
Memory 91.5
1-Core 48.1
2-Core 97
52% 78.9 Pts
4-Core 190
8-Core 181
25% 185 Pts
64-Core 186
12% 186 Pts
Poor: 37%
This bench: 61.7%
Great: 57%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R9 270X-$199
CLim: 1070 MHz, MLim: 1400 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 19.5.2
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
30.4% Below average
Lighting 38.1
Reflection 34.2
Parallax 46.1
31% 39.5 fps
MRender 30.6
Gravity 33.4
Splatting 40
29% 34.7 fps
Poor: 25%
This bench: 30.4%
Great: 29%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial_ CT750MX300SS 750GB
464GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M0C
SusWrite @10s intervals: 97 103 104 106 106 106 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
39.4% Below average
Read 123
Write 106
Mixed 110
SusWrite 104
25% 111 MB/s
4K Read 20
4K Write 38.2
4K Mixed 25.8
84% 28 MB/s
DQ Read 23.9
DQ Write 61.2
DQ Mixed 33.5
28% 39.5 MB/s
Poor: 45%
This bench: 39.4%
Great: 67%
Seagate ST3500641AS 500GB-$65
124GB free
Firmware: 3.AA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 55 55 54 54 54 55 MB/s
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
31.5% Below average
Read 55
Write 57
Mixed 37.8
SusWrite 54.5
38% 51.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.8
132% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 31.5%
Great: 33%
Toshiba HDWQ140 4TB
2.5TB free
Firmware: FJ1M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 166 180 176 180 182 181 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
77.1% Very good
Read 91
Write 107
Mixed 61.5
SusWrite 177
80% 109 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 0.9
194% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 64%
This bench: 77.1%
Great: 112%
Toshiba HDWQ140 4TB
2.5TB free
Firmware: FJ1M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 166 179 179 181 182 181 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Read 184
Write 182
Mixed 86
SusWrite 178
115% 157 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 3.2
4K Mixed 0.9
222% 1.87 MB/s
Poor: 64%
This bench: 104%
Great: 112%
WD WD1600JB-00GVC0 160GB
115GB free
Firmware: 20.00K20
SusWrite @10s intervals: 54 56 55 56 56 57 MB/s
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
25.6% Poor
Read 33.3
Write 32.3
Mixed 25.3
SusWrite 55.6
27% 36.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 1
170% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 25.6%
Great: 32%
Generic- SD/MMC 2GB
2GB free, PID 0119
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.6 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
2.82% Terrible
Read 8.3
Write 2.7
Mixed 2.8
SusWrite 3.5
5% 4.32 MB/s
4K Read 3.6
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
13% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 2.82%
Great: 8%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x2GB
4 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
25.5% Poor
MC Read 8.3
MC Write 7.9
MC Mixed 6.5
22% 7.57 GB/s
SC Read 8.9
SC Write 7.9
SC Mixed 7.6
23% 8.13 GB/s
Latency 64.9
62% 64.9 ns
Poor: 14%
This bench: 25.5%
Great: 45%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical STRIKER II EXTREME Builds (Compare 31 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asus STRIKER II EXTREME

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 24% - Poor Total price: $687
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 $280Crucial 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) $39Corsair 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