Asus P7H55-M

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 21%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 16%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (69th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 31 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. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 54.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics59.5% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive40.4% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory5GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 5GB 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.
Run History
3 years ago, 3 years ago.
MotherboardAsus P7H55-M  (all builds)
Memory2.8 GB free of 5 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20100818
Uptime0.6 Days
Run DateAug 16 '20 at 00:48
Run Duration223 Seconds
Run User MYS-User
Background CPU8%

 PC Performing above expectations (69th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3 540-$60
LGA1156, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.7 GHz, turbo 3.65 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
54.6% Above average
Memory 78.5
1-Core 89.4
2-Core 178
67% 115 Pts
4-Core 179
8-Core 183
24% 181 Pts
64-Core 229
14% 229 Pts
Poor: 33%
This bench: 54.6%
Great: 52%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 580-2048SP
XFX(1682 E580) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1286 MHz, MLim: 1750 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 20.3.1
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
59.5% Above average
Lighting 74.1
Reflection 76.3
Parallax 92.3
60% 80.9 fps
MRender 78.2
Gravity 72.6
Splatting 64.4
58% 71.7 fps
Poor: 33%
This bench: 59.5%
Great: 47%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Transcend TS32GHSD370 32GB
3GB free (System drive)
Firmware: N1114A
SusWrite @10s intervals: 43 29 25 24 23 22 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
40.4% Average
Read 257
Write 46
Mixed 79
SusWrite 27.8
22% 102 MB/s
4K Read 26.2
4K Write 21.9
4K Mixed 26.4
85% 24.8 MB/s
DQ Read 33.5
DQ Write 46
DQ Mixed 17.3
19% 32.3 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 40.4%
Great: 40%
Transcend TS128GSSD420 128GB
4GB free
Firmware: N0815B
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 289
Write 183
Mixed 198
49% 223 MB/s
4K Read 26
4K Write 60.6
4K Mixed 32.6
113% 39.7 MB/s
DQ Read 33.2
DQ Write 106
DQ Mixed 43.8
41% 61.1 MB/s
Poor: 53% Great: 79%
Storejet Transcend 250GB
7GB free
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 25 26 25 25 25 25 MB/s
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
17.8% Very poor
Read 37
Write 33.2
Mixed 21.2
SusWrite 24.9
21% 29.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.4
77% 0.47 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 17.8%
Great: 40%
WD Green 500GB (2009)-$23
442GB free
Firmware: 01.00A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 18 12 10 8.1 17 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
13.8% Very poor
Read 36.7
Write 1
Mixed 1.2
SusWrite 11.3
9% 12.6 MB/s
4K Read 0
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0
6% 0.1 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 13.8%
Great: 54%
USB FLASH DRIVE 8GB
7GB free, PID b113
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.1 3.1 4.8 3.6 6 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
5% Terrible
Read 20.7
Write 1
Mixed 7
SusWrite 4.1
8% 8.2 MB/s
4K Read 4.7
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
17% 1.57 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5%
Great: 9%
USB FLASH DRIVE 8GB
6GB free, PID b113
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.5 3.6 3.6 4.6 2.8 4.7 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
4.89% Terrible
Read 20.5
Write 2.2
Mixed 8.5
SusWrite 3.8
9% 8.75 MB/s
4K Read 4.6
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
17% 1.53 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.89%
Great: 9%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 5GB
1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
2048, 2048, 1024 MB
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
32% Below average
MC Read 10.8
MC Write 9.9
MC Mixed 11.8
31% 10.8 GB/s
SC Read 8.2
SC Write 7.9
SC Mixed 9.1
24% 8.4 GB/s
Latency 83.3
48% 83.3 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 32%
Great: 34%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical P7H55-M Builds (Compare 448 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 21%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 16%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus P7H55-M

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 85% - Excellent Total price: $187
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 more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
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 return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial 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) $29Corsair 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