QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (37th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 63 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 a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 62.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
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 (20%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemQEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory12.8 GB free of 16 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1024 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140401
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 08 '21 at 01:42
Run Duration124 Seconds
Run User GRC-User
Background CPU 20%

 PC Performing below expectations (37th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
1st CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1270 v6
CPU 0, 2 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 3.8 GHz, turbo 3.8 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
62.3% Good
Memory 80.4
1-Core 128
2-Core 259
85% 156 Pts
4-Core 257
8-Core 258
34% 258 Pts
64-Core 259
16% 259 Pts
Poor: 27%
This bench: 62.3%
Great: 88%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Red Hat VirtIO 181GB
140GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 247 103 87 86 94 108 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 1x16GB
1 of 1 slots used
16GB DIMM RAM
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
65.5% Good
MC Read 18.4
MC Write 26.9
MC Mixed 20.7
63% 22 GB/s
SC Read 17.7
SC Write 34.2
SC Mixed 24.5
73% 25.5 GB/s
Latency 79.8
50% 79.8 ns
Poor: 38%
This bench: 65.5%
Great: 161%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 34 9 7 64 0" 1024 768
Typical Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996) Builds (Compare 96 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 124%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 103%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 127%
UFO

System: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $485
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $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) $39Corsair 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