Biostar H310MHP

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing way below expectations (17th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 83 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.
Processor	With 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 64.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics	94.2% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
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.

Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

Run History

2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)

Motherboard	Biostar H310MHP (all builds)
Memory	10.4 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20190531
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Dec 29 '21 at 12:03
Run Duration	412 Seconds
Run User	TUR-User
Background CPU	100%

Watch Gameplay How to compare your gameplay

PC Performing way below expectations (17^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i5-9400F-$85 299,482 User benchmarks, average bench 85% U3E1, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 6 threads Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 3.9 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (2^nd percentile)	64.8% Good	Memory 82.9 1-Core 107 2-Core 187 73% 126 Pts	4-Core 253 8-Core 458 43% 356 Pts	64-Core 224 14% 224 Pts
Poor: 72% ↑ This bench: 64.8% Great: 91%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2060S (Super)-$510 319,148 User benchmarks, average bench 100% Nvidia(10DE 1F06) ≥ 4GB CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 471.11 Performing below potential (17^th percentile) - GPU OC Guide	94.2% Outstanding	Lighting 114 Reflection 107 Parallax 115 93% 112 fps	MRender 154 Gravity 107 Splatting 101 96% 121 fps
Poor: 90% ↑ This bench: 94.2% Great: 106%

Drives	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
CGM Virtual Disk 0001 107GB 22 User benchmarks, average bench 14% 62GB free (System drive) Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete	Read 6,609 Write 6,922 Mixed 6,709 1,510% 6,747 MB/s	4K Read 411 4K Write 338 4K Mixed 333 1,228% 361 MB/s	DQ Read 1,242 DQ Write 1,231 DQ Mixed 1,225 924% 1,233 MB/s
Poor: 9% Great: 21%
CGM Virtual Disk 35606 12TB 3TB free SusWrite @10s intervals: 80 27 44 33 46 56 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples

CGM Virtual Disk 40726 12TB 2 User benchmarks, average bench 15% 1.5TB free SusWrite @10s intervals: 45 34 43 44 41 32 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Poor: 13% Great: 16%
CGM Virtual Disk 41238 1TB 2 User benchmarks, average bench 11% 651GB free SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 21 18 21 19 18 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Poor: 9% Great: 12%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown BL8G32C16U4R.M8FE1 2x8GB 2,481 User benchmarks, average bench 89% 2 of 4 slots used 16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz Performing below expectations (33^rd percentile)	81.7% Excellent	MC Read 32.6 MC Write 34.6 MC Mixed 23.6 86% 30.3 GB/s	SC Read 13.7 SC Write 25.6 SC Mixed 20.7 57% 20 GB/s	Latency 75.3 53% 75.3 ns
Poor: 66% ↑ This bench: 81.7% Great: 114%

Take a copy of your results

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

MBD

Typical H310MHP Builds (Compare 1,026 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming 40%

Speed boat

Desktop 87%

Aircraft carrier

Workstation 33%

Sail boat

Motherboard: Biostar H310MHP

CPU
Core i3-9100FIntel $120Bench 80%, 34,310 samples	360x
Core i5-9400FIntel $85Bench 85%, 299,482 samples	287x
Core i5-9400Intel $161Bench 86%, 22,187 samples	45x

GPU
GTX 1650Nvidia $155Bench 43%, 259,091 samples	134x
GTX 1050-TiNvidia $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples	94x
RX 570AMD $130Bench 45%, 473,685 samples	55x

SSD
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	67x
A400 120GBKingston $28Bench 61%, 166,392 samples	36x
A400 480GBKingston $38Bench 74%, 237,487 samples	31x

RAM
HyperX DDR4 2666 C16 2x4GBKingstonBench 82%, 4,742 samples	23x
BL8G32C16U4R.M8FE1 1x8GBUnknownBench 49%, 189 samples	16x
TEAMGROUP-UD4-2666 1x8GBUnknownBench 43%, 5,242 samples	16x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 75% - Very good

Total price: $303

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $124	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $549	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	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