Gigabyte GA-EP45T-USB3P

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 47%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (31st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 69 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 below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 47.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics8.35% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive29% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB 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 (39%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardGigabyte GA-EP45T-USB3P  (all builds)
Memory4.1 GB free of 12 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20091230
Uptime1.2 Days
Run DateSep 17 '21 at 17:56
Run Duration213 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 39%

 PC Performing below expectations (31st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550-$161
Socket 775, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.15 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (41st percentile)
47.7% Average
Memory 67.5
1-Core 40.8
2-Core 85.7
42% 64.7 Pts
4-Core 165
8-Core 158
22% 161 Pts
64-Core 160
10% 160 Pts
Poor: 37%
This bench: 47.7%
Great: 57%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 740
EVGA(3842 3747) 2GB
CLim: 1084 MHz, MLim: 1250 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 456.71
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
8.35% Terrible
Lighting 9.3
Reflection 11.8
Parallax 12.9
8% 11.3 fps
MRender 13.6
Gravity 12.3
Splatting 10.8
10% 12.2 fps
Poor: 6%
This bench: 8.35%
Great: 8%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 830 256GB-$261
27GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CXM03B1Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 107 69 113 110 134 124 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
29% Poor
Read 188
Write 20.7
Mixed 63
SusWrite 110
21% 95.4 MB/s
4K Read 15.9
4K Write 9.1
4K Mixed 12.3
45% 12.4 MB/s
DQ Read 20.5
DQ Write 24.4
DQ Mixed 17.4
14% 20.8 MB/s
Poor: 53%
This bench: 29%
Great: 86%
WD Red 10TB (2017)-$419
7TB free
Firmware: 83.H0A83
SusWrite @10s intervals: 158 171 171 164 165 154 MB/s
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
98.4% Outstanding
Read 178
Write 155
Mixed 63.7
SusWrite 164
102% 140 MB/s
4K Read 2.5
4K Write 4.5
4K Mixed 0.9
288% 2.63 MB/s
Poor: 59%
This bench: 98.4%
Great: 114%
WD Red 8TB (2016)-$201
813GB free
Firmware: 83.H0A83
SusWrite @10s intervals: 90 95 94 91 92 90 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
58.4% Above average
Read 111
Write 106
Mixed 59.3
SusWrite 92
68% 92.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 1.3
229% 1.5 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 58.4%
Great: 97%
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB (2013)-$49
3.5TB free
Firmware: CC52
SusWrite @10s intervals: 89 95 94 91 92 90 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
69.6% Good
Read 151
Write 125
Mixed 63.7
SusWrite 91.7
79% 108 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.7
127% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 69.6%
Great: 96%
USB DISK 3.0 32GB
25GB free, PID 6400
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.2 9.6 9.6 10 11 10 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
7.52% Terrible
Read 33.2
Write 12
Mixed 23
SusWrite 9.6
23% 19.4 MB/s
4K Read 2.6
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
10% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 7.52%
Great: 58%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 12GB
null MHz
4096, 4096, 2048, 2048 MB
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
15.7% Very poor
MC Read 4.5
MC Write 5.4
MC Mixed 4.7
14% 4.87 GB/s
SC Read 3.7
SC Write 4.3
SC Mixed 4.1
12% 4.03 GB/s
Latency 107
37% 107 ns
Poor: 20%
This bench: 15.7%
Great: 50%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 1: 0R 0G 1B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
1% 2% 40 6 3 60 24" 1920 1017 SAM058B SyncMaster
Typical GA-EP45T-USB3P Builds (Compare 12 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45T-USB3P

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 27% - Poor Total price: $555
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 and 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 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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