Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X515JF_A516JF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 64%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (62nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 38 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. 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 58.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.44% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive173% 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.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
SystemAsus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X515JF_A516JF  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK X515JF
Memory3.8 GB free of 8 GB @ 3.2 GHz
DisplayЦвета: 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210603
Uptime1.4 Days
Run DateDec 16 '21 at 16:29
Run Duration144 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU4%

 PC Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Pentium 6805
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.1 GHz, turbo 3 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
58.8% Above average
Memory 72.9
1-Core 102
2-Core 182
68% 119 Pts
4-Core 261
8-Core 253
35% 257 Pts
64-Core 261
16% 261 Pts
Poor: 35%
This bench: 58.8%
Great: 64%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel UHD G1
Asus(1043 1EFF) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 30.0.100.9805
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
3.44% Terrible
Lighting 6.4
Reflection 12.2
Parallax 6.7
5% 8.43 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.44%
Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WDC PC SN530 SDBPNPZ-256G-1002 256GB
96GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 21106000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 449 218 217 220 222 221 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
173% Outstanding
Read 1456
Write 906
Mixed 931
SusWrite 258
197% 888 MB/s
4K Read 50.6
4K Write 146
4K Mixed 66.6
239% 87.6 MB/s
DQ Read 672
DQ Write 444
DQ Mixed 542
409% 553 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 173%
Great: 189%
Apacer A S350 128GB
59GB free, PID 2329
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 31 34 37 37 37 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
54.7% Above average
Read 34.5
Write 33.9
Mixed 28.2
SusWrite 35.7
45% 33.1 MB/s
4K Read 8.2
4K Write 13
4K Mixed 5.6
663% 8.93 MB/s
DQ Read 5.8
DQ Write 11.3
DQ Mixed 7.6
664% 8.23 MB/s
Poor: 47%
This bench: 54.7%
Great: 55%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A5244CB0-CWE Hynix HMA851S6DJR6N-XN 8GB
3200, 3200 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
85.3% Excellent
MC Read 28.9
MC Write 36.8
MC Mixed 27
88% 30.9 GB/s
SC Read 18.2
SC Write 35.1
SC Mixed 25.6
75% 26.3 GB/s
Latency 94.9
42% 94.9 ns
Poor: 35%
This bench: 85.3%
Great: 70%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X515JF_A516JF Builds (Compare 2 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 60%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk

System: Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X515JF_A516JF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 $170Nvidia 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 $40SanDisk 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