Default HX90

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 29%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 100%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 29%
Raft
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (55th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 45 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 96.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics19.8% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive174% 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.
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
MotherboardDefault HX90  (all builds)
Memory20.3 GB free of 32 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210805
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateJan 16 '22 at 23:56
Run Duration220 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU3%

 PC Performing as expected (55th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
FP6, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 4.45 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
96.2% Outstanding
Memory 77.6
1-Core 168
2-Core 332
102% 193 Pts
4-Core 614
8-Core 1,075
102% 845 Pts
64-Core 1,494
92% 1,494 Pts
Poor: 58%
This bench: 96.2%
Great: 98%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX Vega 8 5000 (iGPU)
AMD(1002 0123) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 21.30.23.01
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
19.8% Very poor
Lighting 25.5
Reflection 21.9
Parallax 34.3
21% 27.2 fps
MRender 15.2
Gravity 27.3
Splatting 22.7
18% 21.7 fps
Poor: 11%
This bench: 19.8%
Great: 21%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston OM8PDP3512B-A01 512GB
78GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EDFK0S03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 699 287 281 293 261 253 MB/s
Performing below expectations (37th percentile)
174% Outstanding
Read 1,086
Write 1,094
Mixed 1,078
SusWrite 346
202% 901 MB/s
4K Read 44
4K Write 146
4K Mixed 66.2
229% 85.4 MB/s
DQ Read 856
DQ Write 898
DQ Mixed 804
625% 853 MB/s
Poor: 120%
This bench: 174%
Great: 222%
Seagate Expansion 2TB
658GB free
Firmware: 0502
SusWrite @10s intervals: 13 13 13 13 13 13 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
14.8% Very poor
Read 38.2
Write 29.3
Mixed 29.3
SusWrite 12.9
20% 27.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.7
132% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 14.8%
Great: 67%
Mass Storage Device 32GB
1GB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 19.7
Write 15.7
Mixed 15.4
21% 16.9 MB/s
4K Read 5.7
4K Write 2.6
4K Mixed 3.7
235% 4 MB/s
Poor: 6% Great: 17%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 1TB
242GB free, PID a200
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 12 12 12 12 12 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
13.1% Very poor
Read 36
Write 32
Mixed 21.8
SusWrite 11.9
32% 25.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.5
76% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 13.1%
Great: 44%
Mass Storage Device 1TB
977GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.5 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
21.6% Poor
Read 3.7
Write 1.7
Mixed 5
SusWrite 4.4
5% 3.7 MB/s
4K Read 1.8
4K Write 6.4
4K Mixed 2.9
323% 3.7 MB/s
Poor: 5%
This bench: 21.6%
Great: 22%
Mass Storage Device 256GB
12GB free, PID 1212
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 19 18 19 19 19 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
18.8% Very poor
Read 19.7
Write 18.4
Mixed 18.2
SusWrite 19.1
26% 18.9 MB/s
4K Read 3.1
4K Write 3.6
4K Mixed 4.2
277% 3.63 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 18.8%
Great: 19%
iXpand Flash Drive 256GB
103GB free, PID cffa
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 10 10 9.7 11 9.9 MB/s
Performing below expectations (24th percentile)
17% Very poor
Read 37.2
Write 22.4
Mixed 19
SusWrite 10.3
27% 22.2 MB/s
4K Read 4.6
4K Write 2.7
4K Mixed 3.5
228% 3.6 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 17%
Great: 31%
SMI USB DISK 64GB
38GB free, PID 2000
Operating at USB 3.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 16 0.1 23 0.2 0.1 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
31% Below average
Read 131
Write 64.6
Mixed 71.8
SusWrite 6.8
79% 68.5 MB/s
4K Read 9.7
4K Write 2.7
4K Mixed 4.3
274% 5.57 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 31%
Great: 41%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905744-077.A00G 2x16GB
2 of 2 slots used
32GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
99.4% Outstanding
MC Read 38.3
MC Write 34.7
MC Mixed 33.5
101% 35.5 GB/s
SC Read 26.9
SC Write 42.9
SC Mixed 30.4
96% 33.4 GB/s
Latency 85
47% 85 ns
Poor: 77%
This bench: 99.4%
Great: 108%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical HX90 Builds (Compare 181 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 22%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 84%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 21%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Default HX90

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 $280Crucial 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