TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Gigabyte GA-P55WV7

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 20%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 17%
Surfboard
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (35th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 65 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 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 62%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics22% 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 Drive177% 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.
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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (17%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardGigabyte GA-P55WV7  (all builds)
Memory7.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180226
Uptime0.8 Days
Run DateJun 08 '22 at 13:13
Run Duration207 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 17%

 PC Performing below expectations (35th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 2.75 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
62% Good
Memory 69.9
1-Core 94.9
2-Core 171
64% 112 Pts
4-Core 292
8-Core 483
47% 388 Pts
64-Core 30.3
2% 30.3 Pts
Poor: 38% ↑
This bench: 62%
 Great: 73%
Graphics Cards Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060 (Mobile)
Gigabyte(1458 D555) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 512.96
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
22% Poor
Lighting 29
Reflection 26.9
Parallax 33.5
24% 29.8 fps
MRender 8.2
Gravity 38
Splatting 22.4
19% 22.9 fps
Poor: 35% ↑
This bench: 22%
 Great: 52%
Intel HD Graphics 630
Gigabyte(1458 D555) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 30.0.101.1994
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
5.65% Terrible
Lighting 6
Reflection 5.9
Parallax 7
5% 6.3 fps
MRender 9.1
Gravity 6.2
Splatting 10.2
7% 8.5 fps
Poor: 3% ↑
This bench: 5.65%
 Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk Ultra 3D NVMe 1TB
286GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 211070WD Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 378 385 551 278 326 429 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
177% Outstanding
Read 1,510
Write 1,398
Mixed 1,255
SusWrite 391
255% 1,139 MB/s
4K Read 37.4
4K Write 103
4K Mixed 62.7
191% 67.6 MB/s
DQ Read 881
DQ Write 551
DQ Mixed 701
527% 711 MB/s
Poor: 161% ↑
This bench: 177%
 Great: 280%
SanDisk Ultra 3D 500GB-$70
108GB free
Firmware: X61110RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 163 173 215 151 167 221 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
88.7% Excellent
Read 450
Write 433
Mixed 241
SusWrite 182
73% 327 MB/s
4K Read 26.3
4K Write 74.6
4K Mixed 46.5
139% 49.1 MB/s
DQ Read 373
DQ Write 322
DQ Mixed 246
212% 314 MB/s
Poor: 70% ↑
This bench: 88.7%
 Great: 119%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial CT8G4SFS824A.M8FB 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing below potential (18th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
61.9% Good
MC Read 25.4
MC Write 24.5
MC Mixed 20.2
67% 23.4 GB/s
SC Read 9.6
SC Write 16.3
SC Mixed 13.7
38% 13.2 GB/s
Latency 102
39% 102 ns
Poor: 55% ↑
This bench: 61.9%
 Great: 79%
Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

 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 GA-P55WV7 Builds (Compare 24 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 33%
Sail boat
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 27%
Raft

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-P55WV7

CPU
Core i7-7700HQIntelBench 62%, 473,208 samples24x
GPU
GTX 1060 (Mobile)NvidiaBench 47%, 177,775 samples14x
HD Graphics 630IntelBench 5%, 310,249 samples10x
SSD
Ultra 3D NVMe 1TBSandiskBench 232%, 13,576 samples7x
MTS800 M.2 256GBTranscend  $141Bench 79%, 1,971 samples5x
850 Evo 250GBSamsung  $100Bench 103%, 951,591 samples2x
RAM
CBD24D4S7D8MB-16 1x16GBKingstonBench 42%, 1,209 samples11x
CT8G4SFS824A.M8FB 2x8GBCrucialBench 71%, 297 samples6x
F4 DDR4 2133 C15 2x16GBG.SKILLBench 72%, 1,022 samples1x
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 $122Nvidia 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) $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
Amazon Ebay
deals
Build Test EFps
Can You Run It?
►
YouTube
*NEW*
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback