Gigabyte GA-X299 DESIGNARE EX-CF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 140%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 95%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 186%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 93.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics148% is an outstanding 3D score, it's the bee's knees. This GPU can handle almost all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive237% 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.
Memory128GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 128GB 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.
Run History
SystemGigabyte X299 DESIGNARE EX
MotherboardGigabyte GA-X299 DESIGNARE EX-CF  (all builds)
Memory120.5 GB free of 128 GB @ 3 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191129
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 06 '19 at 01:07
Run Duration270 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU4%
Watch Gameplay: 2080-Ti + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i9-9980XE-$1,097
CPU0, 1 CPU, 18 cores, 36 threads
Base clock 3 GHz, turbo 3 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
93.7% Outstanding
Memory 82
1-Core 140
2-Core 238
86% 153 Pts
4-Core 563
8-Core 1,121
99% 842 Pts
64-Core 3,330
206% 3,330 Pts
Poor: 74%
This bench: 93.7%
Great: 93%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2080-Ti-$441
Nvidia(10DE 12A4) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2160 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 436.30
Performing below potential (24th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
148% Outstanding
Lighting 200
Reflection 224
Parallax 211
163% 212 fps
MRender 250
Gravity 201
Splatting 141
155% 197 fps
Poor: 128%
This bench: 148%
Great: 174%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 2TB-$220
1TB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2QEXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1210 1224 1150 1123 1160 1131 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
237% Outstanding
Read 1,852
Write 1,737
Mixed 1,211
SusWrite 1,166
334% 1,492 MB/s
4K Read 38.9
4K Write 145
4K Mixed 53.7
204% 79.2 MB/s
DQ Read 393
DQ Write 901
DQ Mixed 1,017
669% 770 MB/s
Poor: 195%
This bench: 237%
Great: 371%
Dual Drive Dock 2 2TB
530GB free
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 404 400 394 382 384 382 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
66.6% Good
Read 385
Write 373
Mixed 365
SusWrite 391
85% 378 MB/s
4K Read 21.1
4K Write 27
4K Mixed 22.8
76% 23.6 MB/s
DQ Read 43.7
DQ Write 129
DQ Mixed 17
33% 63.2 MB/s
Poor: 67%
This bench: 66.6%
Great: 71%
Intel 660p NVMe PCIe M.2 2TB-$192
333GB free
Firmware: 002C Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 183 182 183 182 182 182 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (0th percentile)
63.2% Good
Read 687
Write 186
Mixed 277
SusWrite 182
73% 333 MB/s
4K Read 44.5
4K Write 6.9
4K Mixed 11.7
86% 21 MB/s
Poor: 154%
This bench: 63.2%
Great: 282%
Dual Drive Dock 1 14TB
3TB free
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 251 258 253 251 252 251 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
WD WUH721414ALE6L4 14TB
5TB free
Firmware: LDGNW07G
SusWrite @10s intervals: 179 179 178 179 178 182 MB/s
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
116% Outstanding
Read 224
Write 231
Mixed 99.3
SusWrite 179
134% 183 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 3.4
4K Mixed 2.3
381% 2.4 MB/s
Poor: 71%
This bench: 116%
Great: 138%
WD Gold 12TB (2017)-$236
11TB free
Firmware: 01.01H01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 177 177 178 177 178 169 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 72% Great: 138%
WD Black 1.5TB (2010)
1.5TB free
Firmware: 05.01D05
SusWrite @10s intervals: 141 139 140 140 141 140 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
83.7% Excellent
Read 152
Write 140
Mixed 109
SusWrite 140
100% 135 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.8
178% 1.37 MB/s
Poor: 44%
This bench: 83.7%
Great: 85%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX 3000 C15 8x16GB
8 of 8 slots used
128GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3000 MHz
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
126% Outstanding
MC Read 44
MC Write 67.3
MC Mixed 43.5
147% 51.6 GB/s
SC Read 6.6
SC Write 22.4
SC Mixed 10.1
37% 13 GB/s
Latency 76.8
52% 76.8 ns
Poor: 72%
This bench: 126%
Great: 177%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-X299 DESIGNARE EX-CF Builds (Compare 277 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 105%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 91%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 133%
UFO

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-X299 DESIGNARE EX-CF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 59% - Above average Total price: $1,654
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. Additionally, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia 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