Biostar J3160NH

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 21%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (29th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 71 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
ProcessorWith an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 19.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Graphics1.52% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive46.7% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardBiostar J3160NH  (all builds)
Memory12.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kleuren
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180706
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 02 '21 at 19:49
Run Duration195 Seconds
Run User NLD-User
Background CPU 100%

 PC Performing below expectations (29th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Celeron J3160
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 1.9 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
19.1% Very poor
Memory 28.5
1-Core 21.5
2-Core 37.5
19% 29.2 Pts
4-Core 54.9
8-Core 69.3
8% 62.1 Pts
64-Core 70.9
4% 70.9 Pts
Poor: 14%
This bench: 19.1%
Great: 33%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD Graphics
Biostar(1565 1114) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.4531
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
1.52% Terrible
Lighting 1.7
Reflection 1.2
Parallax 2.6
1% 1.83 fps
MRender 2.3
Gravity 1.9
Splatting 2.3
2% 2.17 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.52%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 480GB-$38
238GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFKK1B3
SusWrite @10s intervals: 271 256 327 308 290 244 MB/s
Performing below potential (13th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
46.7% Average
Read 233
Write 148
Mixed 224
SusWrite 283
50% 222 MB/s
4K Read 13.5
4K Write 23.9
4K Mixed 11.4
48% 16.3 MB/s
DQ Read 145
DQ Write 113
DQ Mixed 128
96% 129 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 46.7%
Great: 102%
HyperX Fury 120GB-$160
96GB free
Firmware: 600ABBF0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 90 88 89 89 89 90 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
36.3% Below average
Read 249
Write 111
Mixed 138
SusWrite 89.2
32% 147 MB/s
4K Read 11.7
4K Write 27.2
4K Mixed 15.5
52% 18.1 MB/s
DQ Read 94
DQ Write 116
DQ Mixed 104
78% 104 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 36.3%
Great: 75%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown H641GU67F7066G 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 1067 MHz clocked @ 1066 MHz
Performing below potential (16th percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
18.9% Very poor
MC Read 6.8
MC Write 8.2
MC Mixed 6.6
21% 7.2 GB/s
SC Read 2.5
SC Write 4.3
SC Mixed 2.7
9% 3.17 GB/s
Latency 263
15% 263 ns
Poor: 19%
This bench: 18.9%
Great: 42%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical J3160NH Builds (Compare 2 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 27%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Biostar J3160NH

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 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