Asrock X99 Professional

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 101%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 86%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 91%
Nuclear submarine
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (59th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 41 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 76.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics126% is an outstanding 3D score, it's the bee's knees. This GPU can handle almost all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive291% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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 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, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago, 3 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
MotherboardAsrock X99 Professional  (all builds)
Memory13.5 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180605
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 09 '21 at 23:32
Run Duration296 Seconds
Run User SVN-User
Background CPU6%

 PC Performing as expected (59th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-5820K-$130
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
76.2% Very good
Memory 83.8
1-Core 98.5
2-Core 195
72% 126 Pts
4-Core 369
8-Core 625
60% 497 Pts
64-Core 788
49% 788 Pts
Poor: 68%
This bench: 76.2%
Great: 88%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti-$485
CLim: 1999 MHz, MLim: 2752 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 442.74
Performing below potential (68th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
126% Outstanding
Lighting 171
Reflection 284
Parallax 180
140% 212 fps
MRender 137
Gravity 183
Splatting 125
120% 148 fps
Poor: 109%
This bench: 126%
Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$69
253GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1806 1022 785 782 775 783 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
291% Outstanding
Read 2566
Write 2,351
Mixed 1,831
SusWrite 992
433% 1,935 MB/s
4K Read 66.8
4K Write 156
4K Mixed 91.9
302% 105 MB/s
DQ Read 835
DQ Write 662
DQ Mixed 744
558% 747 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 291%
Great: 355%
WD Green 1TB (2011)-$109
322GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 98 102 101 103 101 103 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
54.4% Above average
Read 88.4
Write 82.9
Mixed 67.8
SusWrite 101
63% 85.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.6
112% 0.77 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 54.4%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 2.5" 1TB (2004)-$46
33GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 102 108 106 96 108 109 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
49.6% Average
Read 67.5
Write 65.7
Mixed 38.7
SusWrite 105
51% 69.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.7
139% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 49.6%
Great: 62%
Toshiba MK5055GSX 500GB-$33
20GB free
Firmware: FG001M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 39 39 39 39 39 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
22.2% Poor
Read 38
Write 35.8
Mixed 23.4
SusWrite 39
25% 34.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.5
91% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 22.2%
Great: 42%
Hitachi HTS545050B9A300 500GB-$71
42GB free
Firmware: PB4OCA1G
SusWrite @10s intervals: 50 51 52 51 52 52 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
27% Poor
Read 42.4
Write 43.4
Mixed 23.5
SusWrite 51.3
29% 40.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.7
123% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 27%
Great: 45%
Maxtor STM3250820AS 250GB
120GB free
Firmware: 3.AAE
SusWrite @10s intervals: 66 67 67 67 67 67 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
38.5% Below average
Read 67
Write 28.8
Mixed 39.9
SusWrite 66.8
37% 50.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
144% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 38.5%
Great: 44%
WD Black 640GB (2008)-$25
430GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 97 100 98 98 96 100 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
58.1% Above average
Read 104
Write 97.4
Mixed 75.1
SusWrite 98.1
69% 93.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 1
191% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 58.1%
Great: 65%
SanDisk Extreme USB 3.0 32GB-$28
17GB free, PID 5580
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 183
Write 80.2
Mixed 76
124% 113 MB/s
4K Read 8.4
4K Write 10.6
4K Mixed 8.1
667% 9.03 MB/s
DQ Read 12.9
DQ Write 11.9
DQ Mixed 9.8
786% 11.5 MB/s
Poor: 25% Great: 93%
Ut165 USB2FlashStorage 2GB
2GB free, PID 0165
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 5.3 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.7 5.7 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
7.7% Terrible
Read 25.6
Write 3.2
Mixed 5.5
SusWrite 5.5
10% 9.95 MB/s
4K Read 11.8
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
44% 3.93 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 7.7%
Great: 8%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX DDR4 3000 C15 4x4GB
4 of 8 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing above expectations (60th percentile)
95% Outstanding
MC Read 36.7
MC Write 39
MC Mixed 34.2
105% 36.6 GB/s
SC Read 14.9
SC Write 18.6
SC Mixed 19.6
51% 17.7 GB/s
Latency 73.7
54% 73.7 ns
Poor: 68%
This bench: 95%
Great: 117%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X99 Professional Builds (Compare 34 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 52%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 82%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 46%
Yacht

Motherboard: Asrock X99 Professional

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 37% - Below average Total price: $829
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing charade so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit a lot from 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 sponsor youtubers, so they've no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to market inferior products. UserBenchmark's data challenges the marketing and exposes the youtubers' biases.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. The 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data which saves our users millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176Nvidia 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