Asus P5QD TURBO

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 38%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 34.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics2.81% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive42.1% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
High background CPU (26%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
MotherboardAsus P5QD TURBO  (all builds)
Memory4.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1600 x 1024 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20090707
Uptime1 Days
Run DateJan 19 '20 at 10:55
Run Duration221 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU 26%

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Quad Q8400-$100
LGA 775, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.65 GHz, turbo 2.5 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
34.3% Below average
Memory 61.4
1-Core 37.9
2-Core 73.8
37% 57.7 Pts
4-Core 41.6
8-Core 128
9% 84.6 Pts
64-Core 134
8% 134 Pts
Poor: 31%
This bench: 34.3%
Great: 52%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 220
Asus(1043 8311) 1GB
Ram: 1GB, Driver: 342.1
Performing way above expectations (86th percentile)
2.81% Terrible
Lighting 3.1
Reflection 5
Parallax 1.53
2% 3.21 fps
MRender 6.29
Gravity 2.5
Splatting 3.78
3% 4.19 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.81%
Great: 3%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX500 500GB-$53
134GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M3CR010
SusWrite @10s intervals: 51 44 54 65 67 66 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
42.1% Average
Read 199
Write 186
Mixed 196
SusWrite 57.8
36% 160 MB/s
4K Read 23.3
4K Write 39
4K Mixed 27.4
91% 29.9 MB/s
DQ Read 29.4
DQ Write 68.7
DQ Mixed 35.1
31% 44.4 MB/s
Poor: 78%
This bench: 42.1%
Great: 125%
Hitachi HDT721010SLA360 1TB-$30
99GB free
Firmware: ST6OA31B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 64 65 61 62 64 66 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
37.6% Below average
Read 67
Write 51.2
Mixed 40.6
SusWrite 63.9
41% 55.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.7
111% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 37.6%
Great: 61%
WD Green 1TB (2009)-$72
175GB free
Firmware: 01.00A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 52 45 56 65 67 67 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
32.7% Below average
Read 55
Write 69
Mixed 42
SusWrite 58.7
41% 56.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.4
84% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 32.7%
Great: 57%
WD 5000AAK External 500GB
414GB free, PID 1003
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 23 23 25 26 26 26 MB/s
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
16.4% Very poor
Read 32
Write 27.2
Mixed 26
SusWrite 25
37% 27.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.9
101% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 16.4%
Great: 20%
Maxtor 3200 400GB
153GB free, PID 3200
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.9 1 1 1 1 0.9 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
1.6% Terrible
Read 0.7
Write 0.7
Mixed 0.7
SusWrite 0.9
1% 0.75 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.3
25% 0.33 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 1.6%
Great: 16%
TrekStor DSpocket light30 500GB
103GB free, PID 0059
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 21 21 22 22 22 22 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
11.3% Very poor
Read 32
Write 20.2
Mixed 20.5
SusWrite 21.5
30% 23.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.6
4K Mixed 0.5
39% 0.53 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 11.3%
Great: 42%
Generic USB CF Reader 1GB
0GB free, PID 0330
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
2.34% Terrible
Read 7
Write 2.2
Mixed 3
SusWrite 2.6
4% 3.7 MB/s
4K Read 3.2
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
12% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.34%
Great: 7%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x2GB
4 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR2
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
18.7% Very poor
MC Read 6.1
MC Write 6.2
MC Mixed 5.9
17% 6.07 GB/s
SC Read 5
SC Write 5.9
SC Mixed 5.6
16% 5.5 GB/s
Latency 123
32% 123 ns
Poor: 14%
This bench: 18.7%
Great: 45%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical P5QD TURBO Builds (Compare 88 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asus P5QD TURBO

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 51% - Above average Total price: $188
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $369
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback