QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 43%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics26.1% 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)
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.
Very high background CPU (96%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemQEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory5.3 GB free of 8 GB @ 0 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit Farben, 1024 x 768 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150206
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 16 '22 at 15:50
Run Duration315 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 96%

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-6300U
CPU 0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 2.5 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (76th percentile)
43% Average
Memory 66.8
1-Core 44.4
2-Core 107
44% 72.6 Pts
4-Core 105
8-Core 183
18% 144 Pts
64-Core 187
12% 187 Pts
Poor: 14%
This bench: 43%
Great: 52%
Graphics Cards Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R9 270X-$199
MSI(1462 3030) 2GB
CLim: 1080 MHz, MLim: 1400 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 21.5.1
Performing below potential (45th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
26.1% Poor
Lighting 33
Reflection 38.3
Parallax 46.3
27% 39.2 fps
MRender 31.6
Gravity 34
Splatting 26.4
25% 30.7 fps
Poor: 25%
This bench: 26.1%
Great: 29%
Intel HD 520 (Mobile Skylake)
Legend(17AA 2247) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 30.0.101.1660
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
5.69% Terrible
Lighting 6.9
Reflection 4.9
Parallax 6.4
6% 6.07 fps
MRender 5.3
Gravity 5.6
Splatting 9.4
6% 6.77 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5.69%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Red Hat VirtIO 43GB
11GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0001
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,105
Write 1040
Mixed 1,051
803% 1,065 MB/s
4K Read 21.6
4K Write 20.7
4K Mixed 23.1
3,850% 21.8 MB/s
DQ Read 122
DQ Write 90.7
DQ Mixed 91.4
883% 101 MB/s
Poor: 17% Great: 89%
Red Hat VirtIO 21GB
7GB free
Firmware: 0001
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,082
Write 1,030
Mixed 970
772% 1,027 MB/s
4K Read 21.6
4K Write 22.9
4K Mixed 25.3
4,135% 23.3 MB/s
DQ Read 107
DQ Write 103
DQ Mixed 101
938% 104 MB/s
Poor: 6% Great: 67%
Red Hat VirtIO 54GB
21GB free
Firmware: 0001
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,523
Write 1,120
Mixed 1,149
948% 1,264 MB/s
4K Read 25.9
4K Write 24.1
4K Mixed 23.5
4,137% 24.5 MB/s
DQ Read 105
DQ Write 92.4
DQ Mixed 97.7
899% 98.4 MB/s
Poor: 14% Great: 106%
Red Hat VirtIO 54GB
39GB free
Firmware: 0001
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1221
Write 1,140
Mixed 1,252
910% 1,205 MB/s
4K Read 26.4
4K Write 21.7
4K Mixed 24.6
4,235% 24.2 MB/s
DQ Read 100
DQ Write 95.1
DQ Mixed 101
918% 98.9 MB/s
Poor: 14% Great: 106%
Red Hat VirtIO 54GB
50GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 367 395 393 414 450 406 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 14% Great: 106%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 1x8GB
1 of 1 slots used
8GB DIMM RAM
Performing below potential (33rd percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
59.3% Above average
MC Read 22.1
MC Write 25.5
MC Mixed 20.1
64% 22.6 GB/s
SC Read 8
SC Write 16
SC Mixed 12.4
35% 12.1 GB/s
Latency 109
37% 109 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 59.3%
Great: 145%

 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?
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 $549Samsung 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