ADD TO PC
BUILD

Gigabyte GA-MKHM17P-00

Performance Results


Gaming 28% Raft	Desktop 83% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 25% Raft


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (70th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 30 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 71.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	26.6% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	256% 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.
Memory	32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS Version	Although 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, 2 years ago, 2 years ago.

System	GIGABYTE GB-BNi7HG4-950
Motherboard	Gigabyte GA-MKHM17P-00 (all builds)
Memory	25.5 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display	1804 x 1014 - 32 Bit färger
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20160524
Uptime	0.1 Days
Run Date	May 30 '21 at 08:17
Run Duration	144 Seconds
Run User	SWE-User
Background CPU	4%

PC Performing above expectations (70^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-6700HQ 320,434 User benchmarks, average bench 59% U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.15 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	71.6% Very good	Memory 81.7 1-Core 101 2-Core 188 71% 123 Pts	4-Core 332 8-Core 538 53% 435 Pts	64-Core 536 33% 536 Pts
Poor: 34% ↑ This bench: 71.6% Great: 69%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GTX 950 59 User benchmarks, average bench 26% Gigabyte(1458 D003) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1152 MHz, MLim: 1252 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 456.71 Performing below potential (66^th percentile) - GPU OC Guide	26.6% Poor	Lighting 33.7 Reflection 38.6 Parallax 34.5 28% 35.6 fps	MRender 26.6 Gravity 34.3 Splatting 29.9 25% 30.3 fps
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 26.6% Great: 28%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$150 38,097 User benchmarks, average bench 241% 200GB free (System drive) Firmware: 3B7Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s SusWrite @10s intervals: 1291 1209 1205 1204 1197 1190 MB/s Performing above expectations (61^st percentile)	256% Outstanding	Read 1659 Write 1,364 Mixed 639 SusWrite 1,216 273% 1,219 MB/s	4K Read 51.3 4K Write 151 4K Mixed 63.2 239% 88.5 MB/s	DQ Read 1,028 DQ Write 866 DQ Mixed 871 673% 922 MB/s
Poor: 157% ↑ This bench: 256% Great: 302%
Samsung 850 Pro 1TB-$175 25,365 User benchmarks, average bench 105% 593GB free Firmware: EXM04B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 419 437 444 453 452 448 MB/s Performing above expectations (66^th percentile)	111% Outstanding	Read 476 Write 424 Mixed 367 SusWrite 442 96% 427 MB/s	4K Read 33.2 4K Write 94.2 4K Mixed 46.3 160% 57.9 MB/s	DQ Read 362 DQ Write 311 DQ Mixed 330 249% 334 MB/s
Poor: 77% ↑ This bench: 111% Great: 124%
ST375084 0AS 750GB 2 User benchmarks, average bench 16% 488GB free, PID 2329 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 40 40 40 41 41 41 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	17% Very poor	Read 32 Write 21 Mixed 29.7 SusWrite 40.4 42% 30.8 MB/s	4K Read 0.6 4K Write 1.1 4K Mixed 0.5 57% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 16% ↑ This bench: 17% Great: 17%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Corsair Vengeance SODIM DDR4 3000 C16 2x16GB 649 User benchmarks, average bench 87% 2 of 4 slots used 32GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz Performing as expected (56^th percentile)	87.8% Excellent	MC Read 31.7 MC Write 35.1 MC Mixed 28.7 91% 31.8 GB/s	SC Read 17.1 SC Write 34.6 SC Mixed 25.2 73% 25.6 GB/s	Latency 77.5 52% 77.5 ns
Poor: 70% ↑ This bench: 87.8% Great: 103%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical GA-MKHM17P-00 Builds (Compare 11 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 25%

Surfboard

Desktop

Desktop 73%

Battleship

Workstation

Workstation 22%

Surfboard

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-MKHM17P-00

CPU
Core i7-6700HQIntelBench 59%, 320,434 samples	11x

GPU
GeForce GTX 950NvidiaBench 26%, 59 samples	11x

SSD
SKC2500M8500G 500GBKingstonBench 260%, 4,181 samples	7x
850 Pro 1TBSamsung $175Bench 105%, 25,365 samples	2x
960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 1TBSamsung $150Bench 241%, 38,097 samples	1x

RAM
Vengeance SODIM DDR4 3000 C16 2x16GBCorsairBench 87%, 649 samples	10x
CT16G4SFD8213.C16FAD 2x16GBCrucialBench 73%, 680 samples	1x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.

Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?

Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.

Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?

We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.

Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?

The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.

Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?

Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.

The Best.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $549	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback