Asus P8P67 PRO

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 16%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 13%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (55th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 45 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 75.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics19.8% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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.
Very high background CPU (32%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
7 years ago, 7 years ago.
MotherboardAsus P8P67 PRO  (all builds)
Memory12.8 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20121101
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 16 '17 at 03:47
Run Duration275 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU 32%

 PC Performing as expected (55th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-2500K-$246
LGA1155, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
75.3% Very good
Memory 90.8
1-Core 90.9
2-Core 181
71% 121 Pts
4-Core 352
8-Core 321
46% 336 Pts
64-Core 358
22% 358 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 75.3%
Great: 79%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD HD 5870
Sapphire(174B E140) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1062.1004
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
19.8% Very poor
Lighting 27.3
Reflection 15.1
Parallax 25.7
22% 22.7 fps
MRender 13.2
Gravity 21.4
Splatting 19.4
15% 18 fps
Poor: 17%
This bench: 19.8%
Great: 20%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 2TB-$37
1.5TB free (System drive)
Firmware: CC25 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
68.7% Good
Read 161
Write 79.1
Mixed 109
87% 116 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.34
4K Mixed 0.18
52% 0.37 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 68.7%
Great: 114%
WD 5000BEV External 500GB
416GB free, PID 1010
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
13.4% Very poor
Read 31.6
Write 22.8
Mixed 25.3
33% 26.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.44
4K Write 1.21
4K Mixed 0.36
55% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 13.4%
Great: 20%
ST310005 28AS 1TB
259GB free, PID 6830
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
15.7% Very poor
Read 34.3
Write 31.2
Mixed 15.8
33% 27.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.21
4K Mixed 0.47
60% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 2%
This bench: 15.7%
Great: 18%
HDD 500GB
71GB free, PID 2551
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
15.6% Very poor
Read 32
Write 25.7
Mixed 9.12
26% 22.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.53
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.44
75% 0.89 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 15.6%
Great: 63%
HDD 500GB
68GB free, PID 2551
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
15.3% Very poor
Read 31.6
Write 26
Mixed 18
30% 25.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.52
4K Write 1.61
4K Mixed 0.48
73% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 15.3%
Great: 63%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CT51264BA1339J.M8F Kingston 99U5474-016.A00LF 859B CT51264BA1339J.M8F Kingston 99U5474-016.A00LF 16GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
50.4% Above average
MC Read 16.6
MC Write 18.6
MC Mixed 16.2
49% 17.1 GB/s
SC Read 13.6
SC Write 16.4
SC Mixed 15.9
44% 15.3 GB/s
Latency 66.2
60% 66.2 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 50.4%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical P8P67 PRO Builds (Compare 1,048 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 77%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 31%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asus P8P67 PRO - $230

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 56% - Above average Total price: $849
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 endorse 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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 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 $40SanDisk 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