Asrock Z77 Extreme4

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 74%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 88%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 62%
Destroyer
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 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 83.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics86.9% 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 Drive61.8% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system 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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock Z77 Extreme4  (all builds)
Memory13.5 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.9 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20180312
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 06 '20 at 10:36
Run Duration178 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU2%
Watch Gameplay: 1070 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (49th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-3770K-$175
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
83.8% Excellent
Memory 93.3
1-Core 123
2-Core 243
86% 153 Pts
4-Core 401
8-Core 618
63% 509 Pts
64-Core 618
38% 618 Pts
Poor: 59%
This bench: 83.8%
Great: 83%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1070-$278
PNY(196E 11A0) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1923 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 441.66
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
86.9% Excellent
Lighting 109
Reflection 118
Parallax 102
89% 110 fps
MRender 99.7
Gravity 101
Splatting 102
82% 101 fps
Poor: 71%
This bench: 86.9%
Great: 88%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WDC WDBNCE5000PNC-WR 500GB
146GB free (System drive)
Firmware: X411
SusWrite @10s intervals: 175 179 153 248 190 97 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
61.8% Good
Read 307
Write 284
Mixed 200
SusWrite 174
54% 241 MB/s
4K Read 27.1
4K Write 48.2
4K Mixed 23.6
97% 33 MB/s
DQ Read 254
DQ Write 177
DQ Mixed 152
131% 194 MB/s
Poor: 57%
This bench: 61.8%
Great: 104%
Hitachi HDT721010SLA360 1TB-$69
873GB free
Firmware: ST6OA31B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 71 71 69 69 72 70 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
40.1% Average
Read 69.2
Write 70.6
Mixed 40.3
SusWrite 70.3
46% 62.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.9
158% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 40.1%
Great: 61%
WD Blue 1TB (2010)-$70
74GB free
Firmware: 15.01H15
SusWrite @10s intervals: 60 60 61 61 61 61 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
34.8% Below average
Read 60.2
Write 60.7
Mixed 51.9
SusWrite 60.5
43% 58.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
155% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 34.8%
Great: 74%
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2017)-$79
1TB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 126 118 116 117 120 129 MB/s
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
62.7% Good
Read 97.7
Write 102
Mixed 67.6
SusWrite 121
71% 97 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 0.5
4K Mixed 0
59% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 62.7%
Great: 90%
WD Blue 4TB (2015)-$85
1.5TB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 96 99 99 100 100 101 MB/s
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
75.5% Very good
Read 164
Write 166
Mixed 106
SusWrite 99.2
99% 134 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.9
188% 1.47 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 75.5%
Great: 101%
Generic- USB3.0 CRW-SD/MS 32GB
30GB free, PID 0301
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.9 7 6.9 6.8 7 7.1 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
9.5% Terrible
Read 41
Write 18.2
Mixed 20.5
SusWrite 7.1
25% 21.7 MB/s
4K Read 3.3
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 2
94% 1.9 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 9.5%
Great: 38%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial BLS8G3D1609DS1S00. 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1867 MHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
64.8% Good
MC Read 24.7
MC Write 22.2
MC Mixed 19.7
63% 22.2 GB/s
SC Read 19.4
SC Write 21
SC Mixed 22.1
60% 20.8 GB/s
Latency 61.5
65% 61.5 ns
Poor: 31%
This bench: 64.8%
Great: 63%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Z77 Extreme4 Builds (Compare 4,039 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 37%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 77%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 29%
Raft

Motherboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme4 - $159

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 57% - Above average Total price: $465
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 large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps 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. In addition, 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