Asrock X99 Professional

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 109%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 98%
Nuclear submarine
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 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 79.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
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 Drive268% 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (16%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
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 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180605
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateMar 12 '21 at 20:26
Run Duration193 Seconds
Run User SVN-User
Background CPU 16%

 PC Performing as expected (49th 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 above expectations (71st percentile)
79.2% Very good
Memory 96
1-Core 98.7
2-Core 174
74% 123 Pts
4-Core 337
8-Core 616
57% 476 Pts
64-Core 795
49% 795 Pts
Poor: 68%
This bench: 79.2%
Great: 88%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti-$485
CLim: 1999 MHz, MLim: 2752 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 461.40
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
133% Outstanding
Lighting 184
Reflection 195
Parallax 190
150% 190 fps
MRender 138
Gravity 188
Splatting 128
122% 151 fps
Poor: 109%
This bench: 133%
Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$69
234GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1938 958 773 777 784 780 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
268% Outstanding
Read 2,235
Write 1,949
Mixed 1,622
SusWrite 1,002
381% 1,702 MB/s
4K Read 58.8
4K Write 146
4K Mixed 84.4
275% 96.6 MB/s
DQ Read 805
DQ Write 628
DQ Mixed 694
525% 709 MB/s
Poor: 178%
This bench: 268%
Great: 355%
WD Green 1TB (2011)-$109
71GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 64 67 67 65 67 67 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
39.4% Below average
Read 71.1
Write 64.9
Mixed 61.7
SusWrite 66.1
49% 65.9 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.6
131% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 39.4%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 2.5" 1TB (2004)-$46
222GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 85 87 85 84 87 88 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
41.9% Average
Read 59.8
Write 59.7
Mixed 40.1
SusWrite 85.9
45% 61.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.7
138% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 41.9%
Great: 62%
Toshiba MK5055GSX 500GB-$33
13GB free
Firmware: FG001M
SusWrite @10s intervals: 35 36 37 36 37 37 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
20% Poor
Read 33.1
Write 38.3
Mixed 23.6
SusWrite 36.4
24% 32.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.5
93% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 20%
Great: 42%
Hitachi HTS545050B9A300 500GB-$71
402GB free
Firmware: PB4OCA1G
SusWrite @10s intervals: 46 49 49 48 49 50 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
27.4% Poor
Read 46.8
Write 42
Mixed 23.4
SusWrite 48.5
29% 40.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
121% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 27.4%
Great: 45%
Maxtor STM3250820AS 250GB
11GB free
Firmware: 3.AAE
SusWrite @10s intervals: 41 43 43 43 43 43 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
24.6% Poor
Read 42.9
Write 15.7
Mixed 29.2
SusWrite 42.6
24% 32.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.8
142% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 24.6%
Great: 44%
WD Black 640GB (2008)-$25
422GB free
Firmware: 01.03B01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 88 99 99 98 98 99 MB/s
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
56.3% Above average
Read 99.1
Write 93.9
Mixed 72.8
SusWrite 96.8
67% 90.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.9
164% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 56.3%
Great: 65%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX DDR4 3000 C15 4x4GB
4 of 8 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
109% Outstanding
MC Read 43.1
MC Write 41.5
MC Mixed 41.2
120% 41.9 GB/s
SC Read 15.8
SC Write 18.5
SC Mixed 20.4
52% 18.2 GB/s
Latency 53.9
74% 53.9 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 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