Monster TULPAR T5

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 70%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (72nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 28 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 light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 76.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics3.6% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive108% 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.
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
SystemMonster TULPAR T5  (all builds)
MotherboardMonster TULPAR T5
Memory28.6 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20141201
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 21 '20 at 13:17
Run Duration126 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4910MQ-$110
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 3.9 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
76.8% Very good
Memory 80.2
1-Core 93.3
2-Core 243
75% 139 Pts
4-Core 396
8-Core 590
61% 493 Pts
64-Core 591
37% 591 Pts
Poor: 41%
This bench: 76.8%
Great: 78%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4600 (Mobile 1.15 GHz)
MSI(1462 0000) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.5166
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
3.6% Terrible
Lighting 4
Reflection 2.7
Parallax 7.1
3% 4.6 fps
MRender 8.5
Gravity 2.6
Splatting 4.9
4% 5.33 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.6%
Great: 3%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 EVO mSATA 250GB
184GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT41B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 406 316 315 302 305 312 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
108% Outstanding
Read 493
Write 458
Mixed 387
SusWrite 326
93% 416 MB/s
4K Read 42.9
4K Write 102
4K Mixed 56.3
191% 67 MB/s
DQ Read 186
DQ Write 190
DQ Mixed 294
192% 223 MB/s
Poor: 66%
This bench: 108%
Great: 118%
Toshiba MQ01ABD075 750GB-$40
627GB free
Firmware: AX001F
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 67 66 67 67 68 MB/s
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
40.1% Average
Read 72.7
Write 65.8
Mixed 29
SusWrite 67.1
43% 58.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.6
107% 0.77 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 40.1%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B1G73DB0-YK0 Micron OEM MONSTER M471B1G73BH0-YK0 Kingston 9905428-435.A00LF 32GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
56.3% Above average
MC Read 21.4
MC Write 20.4
MC Mixed 15.9
55% 19.2 GB/s
SC Read 15.5
SC Write 22.6
SC Mixed 20
55% 19.4 GB/s
Latency 80.2
50% 80.2 ns
Poor: 56%
This bench: 56.3%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TULPAR T5 Builds (Compare 28 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Monster TULPAR T5

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 99% - Outstanding Total price: $44
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. 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 exposes the youtubers that are paid to promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia 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 $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