ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus GL702VMK

Performance Results


Gaming 40% Jet ski	Desktop 79% Battleship	Workstation 33% Sail boat


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (78th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 22 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 74.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	51% 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 Drive	93.1% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory	16GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Run History

6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago.

System	Asus GL702VMK (all builds)
Motherboard	ASUSTeK GL702VMK
Memory	7.1 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20170106
Uptime	0.2 Days
Run Date	Aug 02 '17 at 12:36
Run Duration	489 Seconds
Run User	SWE-User
Background CPU	5%

PC Performing above expectations (78^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-7700HQ 473,208 User benchmarks, average bench 62% U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (98^th percentile)	74.1% Very good	Memory 84.1 1-Core 101 2-Core 202 74% 129 Pts	4-Core 347 8-Core 503 53% 425 Pts	64-Core 497 31% 497 Pts
Poor: 38% ↑ This bench: 74.1% Great: 73%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060 (Mobile) 177,775 User benchmarks, average bench 47% Asus(1043 1760) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 382.53 Performing way above expectations (92^nd percentile)	51% Above average	Lighting 61.5 Reflection 69.4 Parallax 57.8 50% 62.9 fps	MRender 67.2 Gravity 58.3 Splatting 67 53% 64.2 fps
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 51% Great: 52%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Micron_1100_MTFDDAV512TBN 512GB 14,424 User benchmarks, average bench 79% 334GB free (System drive) Firmware: M0MA020 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (91^st percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 37 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 159 (AB) Unknown 100 100 0 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 100 100 4 (AE) Unknown 100 100 5 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (C2) HDA temperature 45 30 300648759351 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 0 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 100 100 0 (CE) Flying height 100 100 0 (F6) Unknown 100 100 1872533141 (F7) Unknown 100 100 58846531 (F8) Unknown 100 100 17897582 (B4) Unknown 0 0 2464 (D2) Unknown 100 100 0	93.1% Outstanding	Read 480 Write 470 Mixed 475 106% 475 MB/s	4K Read 22.7 4K Write 74.8 4K Mixed 27.4 109% 41.6 MB/s	DQ Read 277 DQ Write 260 DQ Mixed 38.9 92% 192 MB/s
Poor: 59% ↑ This bench: 93.1% Great: 97%
HGST Travelstar 7K1000 2.5" 1TB 546,982 User benchmarks, average bench 59% 928GB free Firmware: JB0OA3V0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (86^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 100 100 0 (03) Spinup time 132 132 94489280514 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 299 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 152 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 157 (BF) G-sense error rate 100 100 0 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 2 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 100 100 1041 (C2) HDA temperature 193 193 171799609375 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (DF) Load/unload retry count 100 100 0	70.9% Very good	Read 134 Write 113 Mixed 117 91% 121 MB/s	4K Read 0.76 4K Write 1.8 4K Mixed 0.21 88% 0.92 MB/s
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 70.9% Great: 75%
Kingston HyperX Savage USB 3.1 256GB-$126 448 User benchmarks, average bench 61% 221GB free, PID 16b3 Operating at USB 3.1 Speed Performing as expected (49^th percentile)	71.3% Very good	Read 247 Write 148 Mixed 112 193% 169 MB/s	4K Read 2.5 4K Write 0.85 4K Mixed 0.72 63% 1.36 MB/s
Poor: 13% ↑ This bench: 71.3% Great: 99%
Kingston DataTraveler 100 G3 USB 3.0 16GB-$7 60,636 User benchmarks, average bench 13% 15GB free, PID 1666 Operating at USB 3.0 Speed Performing as expected (59^th percentile)	14.2% Very poor	Read 50.3 Write 16.9 Mixed 22.7 32% 30 MB/s	4K Read 13 4K Write 0.03 4K Mixed 0.18 56% 4.42 MB/s
Poor: 5% ↑ This bench: 14.2% Great: 23%
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 8GB 30,139 User benchmarks, average bench 10% 6GB free, PID 5567 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing above expectations (71^st percentile)	11.4% Very poor	Read 21.9 Write 2.7 Mixed 4.67 9% 9.74 MB/s	4K Read 5.84 4K Write 2.04 4K Mixed 1.55 144% 3.14 MB/s
Poor: 6% ↑ This bench: 11.4% Great: 13%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Samsung M471A2K43BB1-CRC 1x16GB 18,452 User benchmarks, average bench 41% 1 of 4 slots used 16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz Performing above expectations (74^th percentile)	43.4% Average	MC Read 15.4 MC Write 15.8 MC Mixed 12.7 42% 14.6 GB/s	SC Read 11.4 SC Write 14.7 SC Mixed 13.7 38% 13.3 GB/s	Latency 73.3 54% 73.3 ns
Poor: 33% ↑ This bench: 43.4% Great: 45%

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 GL702VMK Builds (Compare 420 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 31%

Sail boat

Desktop

Desktop 69%

Battle cruiser

Workstation

Workstation 26%

Raft

System: Asus GL702VMK

CPU
Core i7-7700HQIntelBench 62%, 473,208 samples	394x
Core i5-7300HQIntelBench 57%, 170,871 samples	26x

GPU
GTX 1060 (Mobile)NvidiaBench 47%, 177,775 samples	417x
RTX 2070Nvidia $200Bench 104%, 478,117 samples	1x
RTX 2060Nvidia $273Bench 90%, 645,160 samples	1x

SSD
Micron_1100_MTFDDAV256TBN 256GBBench 72%, 50,765 samples	134x
HFS128G39TND-N210A 128GBBench 61%, 41,519 samples	91x
Micron_1100_MTFDDAV512TBN 512GBBench 79%, 14,424 samples	9x

RAM
M471A2K43BB1-CRC 1x16GBSamsungBench 41%, 18,452 samples	204x
M471A1K43BB1-CRC 1x8GBSamsungBench 37%, 42,779 samples	39x
16ATF2G64HZ-2G3B1 1x16GBMicronBench 40%, 5,133 samples	15x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. UserBenchmark exposes their spiel so they attack our reputation.

Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?

Brands make lots 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+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't care about big brands.

Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?

Instead of pursuing sponsorship with billion-dollar brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data.

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 $48	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