Asrock X99 Professional

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 114%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 95%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 103%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith 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 86.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics127% 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 Drive290% 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 @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180605
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 10 '21 at 18:09
Run Duration191 Seconds
Run User SVN-User
Background CPU3%

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd 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 4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
86.7% Excellent
Memory 93.4
1-Core 118
2-Core 232
84% 148 Pts
4-Core 431
8-Core 734
71% 582 Pts
64-Core 923
57% 923 Pts
Poor: 68%
This bench: 86.7%
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 (72nd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
127% Outstanding
Lighting 173
Reflection 282
Parallax 180
141% 212 fps
MRender 137
Gravity 181
Splatting 124
119% 147 fps
Poor: 109%
This bench: 127%
Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$69
254GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2300 782 781 787 784 786 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
290% Outstanding
Read 2,348
Write 2,105
Mixed 1,679
SusWrite 1,037
401% 1,792 MB/s
4K Read 66.3
4K Write 168
4K Mixed 88
302% 107 MB/s
DQ Read 987
DQ Write 774
DQ Mixed 871
654% 878 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 290%
Great: 355%
WD Green 1TB (2011)-$109
322GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 101 101 101 102 102 103 MB/s
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
52% Above average
Read 79.4
Write 81.5
Mixed 89
SusWrite 102
65% 87.9 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.7
138% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 52%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 2.5" 1TB (2004)-$46
33GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 106 104 108 110 109 108 MB/s
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
50.9% Above average
Read 69.5
Write 67.7
Mixed 40
SusWrite 108
52% 71.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.6
128% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 50.9%
Great: 62%
Toshiba MK5055GSX 500GB-$33
20GB free
Firmware: FG001M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 39 37 39 39 39 39 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
22.7% Poor
Read 40.1
Write 37.6
Mixed 22.2
SusWrite 38.9
26% 34.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.5
89% 0.6 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 22.7%
Great: 42%
Hitachi HTS545050B9A300 500GB-$71
42GB free
Firmware: PB4OCA1G
SusWrite @10s intervals: 50 50 51 51 51 52 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
27% Poor
Read 42.9
Write 43.1
Mixed 24.2
SusWrite 50.9
30% 40.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
121% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 27%
Great: 45%
Maxtor STM3250820AS 250GB
120GB free
Firmware: 3.AAE
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 65 66 67 67 67 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
38.1% Below average
Read 66
Write 29.6
Mixed 40.7
SusWrite 66.4
37% 50.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
144% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 38.1%
Great: 44%
WD Black 640GB (2008)-$25
430GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 98 98 99 99 97 97 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
58.7% Above average
Read 106
Write 98.5
Mixed 71.3
SusWrite 97.9
69% 93.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.8
165% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 58.7%
Great: 65%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX DDR4 3000 C15 4x4GB
4 of 8 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2666 MHz
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
109% Outstanding
MC Read 42.4
MC Write 43.7
MC Mixed 39.4
120% 41.8 GB/s
SC Read 17.4
SC Write 22.1
SC Mixed 22.9
59% 20.8 GB/s
Latency 61.3
65% 61.3 ns
Poor: 68%
This bench: 109%
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 promote inferior products, which UserBenchmark reveals.
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