QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 34%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (6th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 94 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 an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 23.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics15.7% 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 Drive50.1% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Very high background CPU (61%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemQEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory13.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 0 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150206
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 21 '22 at 20:31
Run Duration158 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 61%

 PC Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon W-10855M
CPU 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 2.8 GHz (avg)
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
23.1% Poor
Memory 32.5
1-Core 20.5
2-Core 38
20% 30.3 Pts
4-Core 75.4
8-Core 102
11% 88.9 Pts
64-Core 108
7% 108 Pts
Poor: 17%
This bench: 23.1%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia Quadro RTX 5000 with Max-Q Design
Legend(17AA 22B8) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 16GB, Driver: 512.15
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
15.7% Very poor
Lighting 14.7
Reflection 16.3
Parallax 18.9
12% 16.6 fps
MRender 41.8
Gravity 19.6
Splatting 24.7
23% 28.7 fps
Poor: 75%
This bench: 15.7%
Great: 102%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Red Hat VirtIO 419GB
319GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 187 192 219 210 225 217 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
50.1% Above average
Read 585
Write 405
Mixed 479
SusWrite 208
94% 419 MB/s
4K Read 10.7
4K Write 8.1
4K Mixed 7.8
30% 8.87 MB/s
DQ Read 118
DQ Write 96.2
DQ Mixed 51.8
54% 88.6 MB/s
Poor: 48%
This bench: 50.1%
Great: 72%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 1x16GB
1 of 1 slots used
16GB DIMM RAM
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
39.4% Below average
MC Read 14.1
MC Write 14.4
MC Mixed 18.4
45% 15.6 GB/s
SC Read 4.8
SC Write 7.7
SC Mixed 6.4
18% 6.3 GB/s
Latency 240
17% 240 ns
Poor: 38%
This bench: 39.4%
Great: 161%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) Builds (Compare 611 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 83%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 74%
Battleship

System: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $485
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