ADD TO PC
BUILD

Mousecomputer IStDXi-M1B4

Performance Results


Gaming 54% Yacht	Desktop 85% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 50% Yacht


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (65th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 35 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With 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 moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 82.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics	59.5% 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 Drive	101% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Run History

3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago.

System	Mousecomputer IStDXi-M1B4 (all builds)
Motherboard	MouseComputer B450M-A
Memory	4.2 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display	1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20200423
Uptime	0.1 Days
Run Date	Oct 16 '20 at 03:58
Run Duration	228 Seconds
Run User	JPN-User
Background CPU	3%

Watch Gameplay: 1650S + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

PC Performing above expectations (65^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD Ryzen 5 2600-$150 179,588 User benchmarks, average bench 73% AM4, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.75 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (98^th percentile)	82.9% Excellent	Memory 78.9 1-Core 120 2-Core 236 80% 145 Pts	4-Core 468 8-Core 768 76% 618 Pts	64-Core 947 59% 947 Pts
Poor: 67% ↑ This bench: 82.9% Great: 81%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super)-$300 180,577 User benchmarks, average bench 59% Zotac(19DA 1583) CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3000 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 456.38 Performing below potential (78^th percentile) - GPU OC Guide	59.5% Above average	Lighting 77.7 Reflection 72.2 Parallax 70.1 63% 73.3 fps	MRender 68.4 Gravity 71.6 Splatting 54.8 52% 64.9 fps
Poor: 53% ↑ This bench: 59.5% Great: 62%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Plextor PX-256M8VC 256GB 959 User benchmarks, average bench 91% 162GB free (System drive) Firmware: 1.01 SusWrite @10s intervals: 265 199 266 275 276 276 MB/s Performing above expectations (68^th percentile)	101% Outstanding	Read 506 Write 464 Mixed 430 SusWrite 260 93% 415 MB/s	4K Read 36.7 4K Write 72.9 4K Mixed 47.3 155% 52.3 MB/s	DQ Read 381 DQ Write 353 DQ Mixed 128 161% 287 MB/s
Poor: 59% ↑ This bench: 101% Great: 115%
USB DISK 4GB 85 User benchmarks, average bench 4% 2GB free, PID 6387 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 MB/s Performing way below expectations (1^st percentile)	0.37% Terrible	Read 0.8 Write 0.7 Mixed 0.8 SusWrite 0.5 1% 0.7 MB/s	4K Read 0.6 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 2% 0.2 MB/s
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 0.37% Great: 5%
USB DISK 2.0 4GB 1,030 User benchmarks, average bench 5% 2GB free, PID 3600 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.5 MB/s Performing above expectations (82^nd percentile)	6.33% Terrible	Read 20 Write 7 Mixed 5.2 SusWrite 7.4 11% 9.9 MB/s	4K Read 7.7 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 29% 2.57 MB/s
Poor: 3% ↑ This bench: 6.33% Great: 7%
BUFFALO External HDD 1TB 329 User benchmarks, average bench 16% 818GB free, PID 01ba Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete		Read 38 Mixed 29 36% 33.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.8 4K Write 1.2 4K Mixed 0.8 71% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 10% Great: 20%
Imation USB Device 4GB 3 User benchmarks, average bench 4% 1GB free, PID 068c Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	1.01% Terrible	Read 0.7 Write 0.8 Mixed 0.5 SusWrite 0.5 1% 0.62 MB/s	4K Read 0.8 4K Write 0.2 4K Mixed 0.1 13% 0.37 MB/s
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 1.01% Great: 6%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Kingston CBD26D4U9S1ME-4 2x4GB 2 of 4 slots used 8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2666 MHz Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	75.9% Very good	MC Read 33 MC Write 25.2 MC Mixed 22.9 77% 27 GB/s	SC Read 18.7 SC Write 29.9 SC Mixed 23.2 68% 23.9 GB/s	Latency 82.7 48% 82.7 ns

Take a copy of your results

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

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.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback