Asrock X99 Professional

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 124%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 97%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 113%
UFO
PC StatusOverall 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.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 90.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics133% 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 Drive292% 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)
Memory13.1 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180605
Uptime0.5 Days
Run DateJan 12 '21 at 17:17
Run Duration192 Seconds
Run User SVN-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing above expectations (65th 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 4.2 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
90.8% Outstanding
Memory 95.9
1-Core 123
2-Core 238
87% 152 Pts
4-Core 462
8-Core 780
75% 621 Pts
64-Core 986
61% 986 Pts
Poor: 68%
This bench: 90.8%
Great: 88%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti-$485
CLim: 2037 MHz, MLim: 2902 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 442.74
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
133% Outstanding
Lighting 184
Reflection 296
Parallax 190
150% 223 fps
MRender 142
Gravity 190
Splatting 132
125% 155 fps
Poor: 109%
This bench: 133%
Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$69
249GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2307 780 782 786 788 785 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
292% Outstanding
Read 2,326
Write 2,101
Mixed 1,684
SusWrite 1038
400% 1,787 MB/s
4K Read 66.5
4K Write 170
4K Mixed 89.6
306% 109 MB/s
DQ Read 1,011
DQ Write 802
DQ Mixed 902
676% 905 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 292%
Great: 355%
WD Green 1TB (2011)-$109
322GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 102 100 102 103 102 103 MB/s
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
53.3% Above average
Read 83.6
Write 81.2
Mixed 63.4
SusWrite 102
61% 82.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.6
122% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 53.3%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 2.5" 1TB (2004)-$46
33GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 107 106 110 76 93 109 MB/s
Performing as expected (60th percentile)
47.6% Average
Read 65.2
Write 70.8
Mixed 42.2
SusWrite 100
51% 69.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.7
138% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 47.6%
Great: 62%
Toshiba MK5055GSX 500GB-$33
20GB free
Firmware: FG001M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 38 40 40 40 40 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
22% Poor
Read 37.2
Write 32.6
Mixed 23
SusWrite 39.3
24% 33 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.5
91% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 22%
Great: 42%
Hitachi HTS545050B9A300 500GB-$71
42GB free
Firmware: PB4OCA1G
SusWrite @10s intervals: 50 50 52 50 52 52 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
27.5% Poor
Read 44.6
Write 39
Mixed 23.4
SusWrite 50.8
29% 39.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.7
123% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 27.5%
Great: 45%
Maxtor STM3250820AS 250GB
120GB free
Firmware: 3.AAE
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 66 67 68 68 67 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
38.5% Below average
Read 67
Write 29.9
Mixed 39.2
SusWrite 66.9
38% 50.8 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: 99 99 99 101 101 100 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
59.1% Above average
Read 106
Write 102
Mixed 79.8
SusWrite 99.7
72% 96.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.9
172% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 59.1%
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 (92nd percentile)
111% Outstanding
MC Read 43.2
MC Write 43.8
MC Mixed 39.5
120% 42.2 GB/s
SC Read 17.1
SC Write 23
SC Mixed 23.6
61% 21.2 GB/s
Latency 54.3
74% 54.3 ns
Poor: 68%
This bench: 111%
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 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, UserBenchmark's data exposes the youtubers that 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 dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
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