Supermicro X9DAi

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 81%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 82%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 90%
Aircraft carrier
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 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. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 74.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics103% 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.
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.
Run History
SystemSupermicro X9DAi  (all builds)
MotherboardSupermicro X9DAi
Memory25.8 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.9 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180712
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 12 '20 at 15:25
Run Duration227 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU0%
Watch Gameplay: 1080 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
1st CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2690 0
CPU 1, 2 CPU, 16 cores, 32 threads
Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 2.95 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
74.9% Very good
Memory 84.7
1-Core 98.5
2-Core 186
72% 123 Pts
4-Core 351
8-Core 657
60% 504 Pts
64-Core 1,779
110% 1,779 Pts
Poor: 58%
This bench: 74.9%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-$195
CLim: 1987 MHz, MLim: 2502 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 432.0
Performing below potential (56th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
103% Outstanding
Lighting 131
Reflection 144
Parallax 132
107% 135 fps
MRender 112
Gravity 136
Splatting 107
96% 119 fps
Poor: 93%
This bench: 103%
Great: 110%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 250GB-$52
106GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 4B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 3,142
Write 2,620
Mixed 2,804
636% 2,856 MB/s
4K Read 114
4K Write 87.7
4K Mixed 80.9
323% 94.3 MB/s
DQ Read 85.3
DQ Write 356
DQ Mixed 372
241% 271 MB/s
Poor: 75% Great: 128%
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
83GB free
Firmware: 3B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1213 397 288 288 288 289 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
147% Outstanding
Read 1554
Write 1,385
Mixed 598
SusWrite 460
222% 999 MB/s
4K Read 26.5
4K Write 82.5
4K Mixed 35.7
130% 48.2 MB/s
DQ Read 425
DQ Write 350
DQ Mixed 224
212% 333 MB/s
Poor: 142%
This bench: 147%
Great: 236%
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
233GB free
Firmware: 2B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 216 238 238 238 238 238 MB/s
Performing below potential (3rd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
63.2% Good
Read 239
Write 230
Mixed 226
SusWrite 234
52% 232 MB/s
4K Read 26.4
4K Write 42
4K Mixed 31.1
102% 33.2 MB/s
DQ Read 144
DQ Write 190
DQ Mixed 168
127% 167 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 63.2%
Great: 124%
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
203GB free
Firmware: 2B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 375 294 294 294 294 294 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
93.4% Outstanding
Read 418
Write 409
Mixed 369
SusWrite 308
85% 376 MB/s
4K Read 28.6
4K Write 78.2
4K Mixed 40.3
136% 49 MB/s
DQ Read 356
DQ Write 338
DQ Mixed 179
180% 291 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 93.4%
Great: 124%
WD Green 2TB (2012)-$50
723GB free
Firmware: 0A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 105 116 115 114 115 116 MB/s
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
60.7% Good
Read 97.8
Write 79.4
Mixed 91.3
SusWrite 114
71% 95.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.9
174% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 60.7%
Great: 84%
Samsung HD103SI 1TB-$89
266GB free
Firmware: 1118
SusWrite @10s intervals: 73 78 78 78 78 78 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
42.4% Average
Read 70.4
Write 70.7
Mixed 40.5
SusWrite 77.1
47% 64.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
148% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 42.4%
Great: 59%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Elpida EBJ40EG8BFWB- EBJ40EG8BFWB- EBJ40EG8BFWB- EBJ40EG8BFWB- EBJ40EG8BFWB- Micron 9JSF51272AZ-1 EBJ40EG8BFWB- Micron 9JSF51272AZ-1 32GB
1866, 1866, 1866, 1866, 1866, 1866, 1866, 1866 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
91.5% Outstanding
MC Read 48.1
MC Write 34.5
MC Mixed 27.9
105% 36.8 GB/s
SC Read 13.8
SC Write 6.1
SC Mixed 7.8
26% 9.23 GB/s
Latency 72.3
55% 72.3 ns
Poor: 79%
This bench: 91.5%
Great: 101%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X9DAi Builds (Compare 89 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 74%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 83%
Aircraft carrier

System: Supermicro X9DAi

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 103% - Outstanding Total price: $247
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 youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
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 keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair 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