TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Supermicro X9SAE

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 80%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 59%
Gunboat
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 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 64%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics125% is an outstanding 3D score, it's the bee's knees. This GPU can handle almost all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive58.9% 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 far more than any current game requires. 16GB 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.
Very high background CPU (43%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemSupermicro X9SAE  (all builds)
MotherboardSupermicro X9SAE
Memory9 GB free of 16.0156 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130710
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 08 '22 at 13:29
Run Duration142 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 43%

 PC Performing below expectations (30th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon E3-1225 V2-$200
CPU, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.2 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
64% Good
Memory 84
1-Core 83.5
2-Core 159
65% 109 Pts
4-Core 251
8-Core 284
35% 268 Pts
64-Core 210
13% 210 Pts
Poor: 59% ↑
This bench: 64%
 Great: 77%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti-$485
MSI(1462 3602)
CLim: 1974 MHz, MLim: 2752 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 517.48
Performing below potential (59th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
125% Outstanding
Lighting 170
Reflection 181
Parallax 176
139% 176 fps
MRender 131
Gravity 182
Splatting 124
118% 146 fps
Poor: 109% ↑
This bench: 125%
 Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
PNY 120GB SATA SSD 120GB
47GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V0218A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 224 253 317 249 89 76 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
58.9% Above average
Read 366
Write 322
Mixed 304
SusWrite 201
67% 298 MB/s
4K Read 20.8
4K Write 48.2
4K Mixed 15.8
77% 28.3 MB/s
DQ Read 106
DQ Write 303
DQ Mixed 34.2
75% 148 MB/s
Poor: 42% ↑
This bench: 58.9%
 Great: 91%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
383GB free
Firmware: KC48
SusWrite @10s intervals: 28 24 27 34 24 29 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
35.7% Below average
Read 97
Write 82.9
Mixed 50.9
SusWrite 27.4
48% 64.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.4
86% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 27% ↑
This bench: 35.7%
 Great: 88%
Seagate Barracuda 500GB (2016)-$24
224GB free
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 128 134 158 147 152 159 MB/s
Performing as expected (41st percentile)
75.8% Very good
Read 118
Write 36.4
Mixed 55.5
SusWrite 146
65% 89.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.7
125% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 35% ↑
This bench: 75.8%
 Great: 114%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1600C9D3/4GX KHX1600C9D3/4GX KHX1600C9D3/4GX KHX1600C9D3/4GX Micron/Numonyx 25Q Series 16GB
1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 0 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 16 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
52.2% Above average
MC Read 18.8
MC Write 19.9
MC Mixed 16.1
52% 18.3 GB/s
SC Read 14.1
SC Write 14.7
SC Mixed 15
42% 14.6 GB/s
Latency 73.5
54% 73.5 ns
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 X9SAE Builds (Compare 24 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 65%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

System: Supermicro X9SAE

CPU
Xeon E3-1225 V2Intel  $200Bench 70%, 2,869 samples9x
Core i7-3770Intel  $297Bench 69%, 278,207 samples8x
Xeon E3-1240IntelBench 70%, 2,292 samples2x
GPU
HD P4000 (Server 1.25 GHz)IntelBench 4%, 800 samples3x
GTX 1050-TiNvidia  $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples3x
Quadro 600NvidiaBench 3%, 15,964 samples3x
SSD
840 120GBSamsung  $109Bench 61%, 51,792 samples3x
MX500 1TBCrucial  $88Bench 106%, 202,785 samples2x
M4 128GBCrucial  $116Bench 60%, 34,516 samples1x
RAM
KHX1600C10D3/4G KHX1600C10D3/8G KHX1600C10D3/4G KHX1600C10D3/8G 16GBKingstonBench 57%, 2,175 samples2x
9965525-023.A00LF 2x4GBKingstonBench 52%, 50 samples2x
9965525-055.A00LF 9965525-055.A00LF Winbond 25X/Q Series 16GBKingstonBench 54%, 18 samples2x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 51% - Above average Total price: $309
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 more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
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 return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial 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) $29Corsair 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