EVGA Classified SR-2

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 74%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 84%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 72%
Battleship
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (48th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 52 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 typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 84.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics88.5% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at 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
MotherboardEVGA Classified SR-2  (all builds)
Memory24.9 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130424
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateApr 23 '20 at 16:55
Run Duration232 Seconds
Run User ESP-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing as expected (48th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
1st CPU: Intel Xeon X5680
CPU 1, 2 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 3.95 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
84.2% Excellent
Memory 94.6
1-Core 101
2-Core 193
76% 130 Pts
4-Core 398
8-Core 620
63% 509 Pts
64-Core 1,437
89% 1,437 Pts
Poor: 61%
This bench: 84.2%
Great: 78%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX Vega-64-$400
CLim: 1630 MHz, MLim: 945 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 20.4.1
Performing below potential (76th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
88.5% Excellent
Lighting 107
Reflection 82.3
Parallax 168
88% 119 fps
MRender 83.5
Gravity 120
Splatting 122
90% 108 fps
Poor: 77%
This bench: 88.5%
Great: 94%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$76
88GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT0
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 3,201
Write 2,780
Mixed 2,891
660% 2,958 MB/s
4K Read 290
4K Write 221
4K Mixed 143
740% 218 MB/s
DQ Read 689
DQ Write 483
DQ Mixed 526
409% 566 MB/s
Poor: 74% Great: 129%
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$76
37GB free
Firmware: RVT0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 237 236 237 237 237 236 MB/s
Performing below potential (9th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
79.1% Very good
Read 262
Write 251
Mixed 248
SusWrite 236
56% 249 MB/s
4K Read 34.1
4K Write 69.6
4K Mixed 44
145% 49.2 MB/s
DQ Read 205
DQ Write 195
DQ Mixed 199
149% 199 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 79.1%
Great: 129%
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
54GB free
Firmware: 3B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,317
Write 1,130
Mixed 534
220% 994 MB/s
4K Read 33.4
4K Write 79.9
4K Mixed 41.7
146% 51.7 MB/s
DQ Read 678
DQ Write 574
DQ Mixed 554
435% 602 MB/s
Poor: 142% Great: 236%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$67
749GB free
Firmware: CC9F
SusWrite @10s intervals: 131 147 146 147 146 146 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
80.1% Excellent
Read 136
Write 100
Mixed 71.5
SusWrite 144
83% 113 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.8
143% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 56%
This bench: 80.1%
Great: 113%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 2TB-$37
83GB free
Firmware: SC48
SusWrite @10s intervals: 93 94 94 94 93 94 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
49.7% Average
Read 77.3
Write 83.2
Mixed 51.5
SusWrite 93.9
56% 76.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 7.8
4K Mixed 0.7
239% 2.97 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 49.7%
Great: 114%
500gb RAID 500GB
148GB free
Firmware: 1.0.
SusWrite @10s intervals: 68 70 70 70 69 70 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
49.8% Average
Read 103
Write 111
Mixed 49.3
SusWrite 69.6
61% 83.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.7
4K Mixed 1.2
217% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 49.8%
Great: 61%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
351GB free
Firmware: JC4B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 118 119 120 120 120 120 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
69.6% Good
Read 123
Write 123
Mixed 70.3
SusWrite 120
80% 109 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 1.1
190% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 69.6%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Hynix HMT41GV7BMR4A-H9 HMT31GR7BFR4A-H9 HMT31GR7BFR4A-H9 HMT31GR7BFR4A-H9 32GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
42% Average
MC Read 17.1
MC Write 14.3
MC Mixed 12.7
42% 14.7 GB/s
SC Read 10.8
SC Write 5.2
SC Mixed 7.7
23% 7.9 GB/s
Latency 58.1
69% 58.1 ns
Poor: 40%
This bench: 42%
Great: 48%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Classified SR-2 Builds (Compare 51 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 47%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 47%
Yacht

Motherboard: EVGA Classified SR-2

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 16% - Very poor Total price: $922
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 $550Samsung 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