Asus TUF B360M-E GAMING

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 42%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 34%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (56th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 44 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 light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 87.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics41.8% 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 Drive39.8% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory8GB 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
MotherboardAsus TUF B360M-E GAMING  (all builds)
Memory4.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190527
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateFeb 18 '21 at 14:22
Run Duration175 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU7%
Watch Gameplay: 1650 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (56th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-9100F-$115
LGA1151, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
87.1% Excellent
Memory 88.7
1-Core 120
2-Core 248
85% 152 Pts
4-Core 493
8-Core 495
66% 494 Pts
64-Core 494
31% 494 Pts
Poor: 72%
This bench: 87.1%
Great: 86%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1650-$155
CLim: 2175 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 461.40
Performing below potential (48th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
41.8% Average
Lighting 63
Reflection 59.9
Parallax 52
51% 58.3 fps
MRender 42.2
Gravity 54.6
Splatting 0.2
23% 32.3 fps
Poor: 39%
This bench: 41.8%
Great: 46%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WDC WDS240G2G0B-00EPW0 240GB
89GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UJ510000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 203 23 4.6 4.4 9.5 5.1 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
39.8% Below average
Read 364
Write 226
Mixed 219
SusWrite 41.6
47% 213 MB/s
4K Read 18.1
4K Write 27.8
4K Mixed 14.5
61% 20.1 MB/s
DQ Read 112
DQ Write 84.5
DQ Mixed 43.4
47% 80.1 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 39.8%
Great: 55%
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$37
525GB free
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 170 181 185 184 181 174 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
107% Outstanding
Read 193
Write 180
Mixed 81.5
SusWrite 179
116% 158 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.8
162% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 107%
Great: 113%
ST350083 0AS 500GB
465GB free, PID 0277
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 37 41 42 42 42 39 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
19.1% Very poor
Read 40.1
Write 21.5
Mixed 32.5
SusWrite 40.6
45% 33.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
77% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 19.1%
Great: 19%
SAMSUNG HD204UI 2TB
1.5TB free, PID 2773
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.7 5.2 4.8 5 4.9 5.8 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
14.5% Very poor
Read 37.6
Write 40.9
Mixed 35.8
SusWrite 5.5
39% 30 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1
121% 1.37 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 14.5%
Great: 51%
WDC WD50 00AACS-00G8B0 500GB
266GB free, PID 2773
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 33 38 37 38 38 36 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
20.3% Poor
Read 37.1
Write 39.9
Mixed 28.1
SusWrite 36.6
48% 35.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.7
101% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 20.3%
Great: 26%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair CM4X4GF2666C16K4 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
80.3% Excellent
MC Read 29.3
MC Write 32.6
MC Mixed 23.8
82% 28.6 GB/s
SC Read 18.2
SC Write 32.7
SC Mixed 22.2
70% 24.4 GB/s
Latency 68.8
58% 68.8 ns
Poor: 64%
This bench: 80.3%
Great: 97%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical TUF B360M-E GAMING Builds (Compare 1,121 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 53%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 45%
Speed boat

Motherboard: Asus TUF B360M-E GAMING

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 115% - Outstanding Total price: $202
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.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair 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