Asrock Z68 Pro3-M

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 30%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith 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 74.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics45.9% 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 Drive67.3% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
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.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock Z68 Pro3-M  (all builds)
Memory13.1 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kolorów, 1920 x 1200 - 32 Bit kolorów
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180314
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 14 '21 at 19:04
Run Duration252 Seconds
Run User POL-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-2500K-$246
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
74.8% Very good
Memory 88.1
1-Core 90.6
2-Core 180
70% 120 Pts
4-Core 358
8-Core 351
48% 355 Pts
64-Core 352
22% 352 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 74.8%
Great: 79%
Graphics Cards Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 780-$329
PNY(196E 104B) 3GB
CLim: 1267 MHz, MLim: 1552 MHz, Ram: 3GB, Driver: 466.47
Performing below potential (76th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
45.9% Average
Lighting 53.2
Reflection 60
Parallax 70.6
43% 61.3 fps
MRender 71.8
Gravity 64
Splatting 53.9
51% 63.2 fps
Poor: 41%
This bench: 45.9%
Great: 49%
Intel HD 3000 (Desktop V1 1.1 GHz)
ASRock(1849 0112) 2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
1.65% Terrible
Lighting 1.9
Reflection 2.5
Parallax 1.4
2% 1.93 fps
MRender 2.7
Gravity 1.7
Splatting 2.4
2% 2.27 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 1.65%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 240GB-$28
53GB free (System drive)
Firmware: R0105A
SusWrite @10s intervals: 294 152 179 72 62 63 MB/s
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
67.3% Good
Read 481
Write 413
Mixed 412
SusWrite 137
81% 361 MB/s
4K Read 26.4
4K Write 75.6
4K Mixed 25.7
113% 42.6 MB/s
DQ Read 234
DQ Write 19.4
DQ Mixed 1.2
33% 84.7 MB/s
Poor: 33%
This bench: 67.3%
Great: 100%
Crucial MX500 500GB-$53
16GB free
Firmware: M3CR023
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 477
Write 436
Mixed 421
99% 445 MB/s
4K Read 28
4K Write 67.3
4K Mixed 37
126% 44.1 MB/s
DQ Read 390
DQ Write 354
DQ Mixed 297
243% 347 MB/s
Poor: 78% Great: 125%
WD Blue 250GB (2010)-$37
109GB free
Firmware: 17.01H17
SusWrite @10s intervals: 97 106 113 113 111 112 MB/s
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
60.5% Good
Read 102
Write 92
Mixed 64.3
SusWrite 109
68% 91.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.8
153% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 60.5%
Great: 70%
WD Blue 250GB (2010)-$37
88GB free
Firmware: 17.01H17
SusWrite @10s intervals: 86 93 97 97 97 97 MB/s
Performing above expectations (60th percentile)
54.5% Above average
Read 95.2
Write 96.7
Mixed 61.5
SusWrite 94.6
64% 87 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.8
154% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 54.5%
Great: 70%
WD Blue 2.5" 320GB (2009)-$71
81GB free
Firmware: 8101
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 30 30 30 30 29 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
17.9% Very poor
Read 33
Write 27
Mixed 25.5
SusWrite 28.9
21% 28.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
126% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 17.9%
Great: 41%
Compact Flash Card 16GB
5GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 28 29 29 29 29 MB/s
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
11.6% Very poor
Read 2.7
Write 28.8
Mixed 4.2
SusWrite 28.4
25% 16 MB/s
4K Read 5.5
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 2
129% 2.9 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 11.6%
Great: 30%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905403-442.A00LF 9905403-442.A00LF 9905403-432.A00LF 9905403-442.A00LF 16GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
59.7% Above average
MC Read 20.9
MC Write 22.4
MC Mixed 19.6
60% 21 GB/s
SC Read 17.1
SC Write 16.6
SC Mixed 17.8
49% 17.2 GB/s
Latency 69.5
58% 69.5 ns
Poor: 40%
This bench: 59.7%
Great: 60%

 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% 0 12 10 60 21.5" 1280 720 DELD026 DELL P2210H
Typical Z68 Pro3-M Builds (Compare 147 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 24%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asrock Z68 Pro3-M

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 78% - Very good Total price: $306
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 more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
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 and they return repeatedly.
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) $29Corsair 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