Asus MAXIMUS VI EXTREME

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 85%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 88%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 71%
Battleship
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (64th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 36 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 82.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics99.2% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive123% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (14%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsus MAXIMUS VI EXTREME  (all builds)
Memory27.3 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140815
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 03 '19 at 16:31
Run Duration340 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 14%
Watch Gameplay: 1080 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (64th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4770K-$120
SOCKET 1150, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 4.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (92nd percentile)
82.2% Excellent
Memory 96.9
1-Core 115
2-Core 200
81% 137 Pts
4-Core 365
8-Core 571
58% 468 Pts
64-Core 629
39% 629 Pts
Poor: 60%
This bench: 82.2%
Great: 84%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-$195
CLim: 1987 MHz, MLim: 2502 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 441.8
Performing below potential (34th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
99.2% Outstanding
Lighting 122
Reflection 130
Parallax 108
99% 120 fps
MRender 117
Gravity 138
Splatting 112
100% 123 fps
Poor: 93%
This bench: 99.2%
Great: 110%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB-$110
152GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 317 391 336 403 383 324 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
123% Outstanding
Read 487
Write 444
Mixed 406
SusWrite 359
95% 424 MB/s
4K Read 44.1
4K Write 117
4K Mixed 62.9
209% 74.7 MB/s
DQ Read 379
DQ Write 349
DQ Mixed 362
272% 363 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 123%
Great: 133%
Seagate NAS HDD 4TB-$145
281GB free
Firmware: SC46
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 116
Write 120
Mixed 71
76% 102 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.6
117% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 45% Great: 100%
Seagate ST32000542AS 2TB-$100
50GB free
Firmware: CC32
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 94.3
Write 93.5
Mixed 54.3
60% 80.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 1
174% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 31% Great: 61%
WD Green 2TB (2011)-$55
29GB free
Firmware: 50.0AB50
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 103
Write 99.2
Mixed 63.8
66% 88.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.8
169% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 31% Great: 67%
WD Green 2TB (2009)-$113
4GB free
Firmware: 04.05G04
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 88.3
Write 86.7
Mixed 66
60% 80.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.4
4K Mixed 0.8
158% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 30% Great: 60%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$67
1TB free
Firmware: CC26
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 106
Write 66.3
Mixed 68.5
60% 80.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.6
112% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 56% Great: 113%
Seagate ST32000542AS 2TB-$100
446GB free
Firmware: CC32
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 102
Write 96
Mixed 55.8
63% 84.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 1
176% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 31% Great: 61%
Samsung Spinpoint F4 2TB-$119
0GB free
Firmware: 1AQ10001
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 112
Write 127
Mixed 64
75% 101 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 0.5
124% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 32% Great: 72%
ST320005 42AS 2TB
2TB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 94
Write 87.8
Mixed 61
100% 80.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 1.1
101% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 18% Great: 45%
WDC WD20 EADS-00R6B0 2TB
1TB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Read 12.2
Write 0.5
Mixed 0.3
3% 4.33 MB/s
4K Read 0
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0
10% 0.1 MB/s
Poor: 13% Great: 38%
WDC WD20 EARS-00MVWB0 2TB
144GB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 132
Write 94.8
Mixed 83.5
125% 104 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.7
102% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 7% Great: 40%
WDC WD20 EARS-00MVWB0 2TB
417GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: MB/s
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
18.1% Very poor
Read 82.8
Write 77.5
Mixed 70.8
SusWrite 0.3
73% 57.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.6
88% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 18.1%
Great: 40%
ST320005 42AS 2TB
2TB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.9 3 1.1 1.3 0.9 0.7 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
23.3% Poor
Read 117
Write 104
Mixed 66.7
SusWrite 1.6
88% 72.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 1.1
105% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 23.3%
Great: 45%
WDC WD20 EADS-00R6B0 2TB
2TB free, PID 0539
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 87 85 84 86 86 84 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
34.7% Below average
Read 65.5
Write 65.3
Mixed 51
SusWrite 85.1
92% 66.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.7
98% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 34.7%
Great: 35%
ST3000DM 001-9YN166 3TB
0GB free, PID 0539
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 90.2
Write 78.3
Mixed 74
102% 80.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.6
50% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 13% Great: 63%
Hitachi HDS5C3020ALA632 2TB
540GB free, PID 0539
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 86 85 84 86 86 84 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (89th percentile)
43.3% Average
Read 136
Write 133
Mixed 59.5
SusWrite 85
134% 103 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
84% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 43.3%
Great: 44%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL TridentX DDR3 2400 C10 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
83.4% Excellent
MC Read 30.7
MC Write 32.3
MC Mixed 26.1
85% 29.7 GB/s
SC Read 20
SC Write 21.1
SC Mixed 25.2
63% 22.1 GB/s
Latency 50.6
79% 50.6 ns
Poor: 45%
This bench: 83.4%
Great: 119%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical MAXIMUS VI EXTREME Builds (Compare 426 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 77%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 80%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 63%
Destroyer

Motherboard: Asus MAXIMUS VI EXTREME - $580

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 96% - Outstanding Total price: $971
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. 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 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they return repeatedly.
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