ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus GL702VM

Performance Results


Gaming 45% Yacht	Desktop 85% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 38% Jet ski


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (79th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 21 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 76.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	51.4% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	267% 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.
Memory	32GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Run History

6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago.

System	Asus GL702VM (all builds)
Motherboard	ASUSTeK GL702VM
Memory	28.8 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20170428
Uptime	3 Days
Run Date	Nov 10 '17 at 03:16
Run Duration	112 Seconds
Run User	USA-User
Background CPU	2%

PC Performing above expectations (79^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-6700HQ 320,434 User benchmarks, average bench 59% U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.15 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	76.3% Very good	Memory 83.6 1-Core 102 2-Core 196 73% 127 Pts	4-Core 372 8-Core 546 57% 459 Pts	64-Core 518 32% 518 Pts
Poor: 34% ↑ This bench: 76.3% Great: 69%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060 (Mobile) 177,775 User benchmarks, average bench 47% Asus(1043 1580) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 388.13 Performing way above expectations (94^th percentile)	51.4% Above average	Lighting 62.5 Reflection 71.2 Parallax 56.1 51% 63.3 fps	MRender 65.8 Gravity 58.4 Splatting 67 52% 63.7 fps
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 51.4% Great: 52%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Pro NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB-$139 63,520 User benchmarks, average bench 266% 249GB free (System drive) Firmware: 2B6QCXP7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s Performing as expected (47^th percentile)	267% Outstanding	Read 1,981 Write 1,755 Mixed 1,583 395% 1,773 MB/s	4K Read 45.9 4K Write 117 4K Mixed 58.9 207% 74 MB/s	DQ Read 403 DQ Write 339 DQ Mixed 183 188% 308 MB/s
Poor: 159% ↑ This bench: 267% Great: 353%
Seagate FireCuda 2.5" 2TB-$79 71,106 User benchmarks, average bench 46% 1TB free Firmware: SDM1 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (86^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 83 64 216685650 (03) Spinup time 99 99 0 (04) Start/Stop count 98 98 2544 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 71 60 4306693428 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 25348896981698 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 186 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BC) Unknown 100 100 0 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 75 55 437452825 (BF) G-sense error rate 100 100 1 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 14 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 99 99 3534 (C2) HDA temperature 25 45 25 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (F0) Head flying hours 100 253 -12013023525901 (F1) Unknown 100 253 4531171946 (F2) Unknown 100 253 2279277447 (FE) Unknown 100 100 0	59.6% Above average	Read 129 Write 78.9 Mixed 60.7 66% 89.4 MB/s	4K Read 0.76 4K Write 1.63 4K Mixed 0.22 86% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 23% ↑ This bench: 59.6% Great: 68%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Hynix HMA82GS6MFR8N-TF 1315 CT16G4SFD8213.C16FAD 32GB 6 User benchmarks, average bench 70% 2133, 2133 MHz 16384, 16384 MB Performing above expectations (67^th percentile)	71.5% Very good	MC Read 26.3 MC Write 27.4 MC Mixed 23 73% 25.6 GB/s	SC Read 15.1 SC Write 24.8 SC Mixed 22 59% 20.6 GB/s	Latency 74.1 54% 74.1 ns
Poor: 64% ↑ This bench: 71.5% Great: 72%

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

Typical GL702VM Builds (Compare 445 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 30%

Raft

Desktop

Desktop 66%

Battle cruiser

Workstation

Workstation 25%

Surfboard

System: Asus GL702VM

CPU
Core i7-6700HQIntelBench 59%, 320,434 samples	415x
Core i5-6300HQIntelBench 54%, 41,531 samples	30x

GPU
GTX 1060 (Mobile)NvidiaBench 47%, 177,775 samples	442x
RTX 2070S (Super)Nvidia $210Bench 115%, 663,603 samples	1x
RTX 3060Nvidia $266Bench 100%, 447,556 samples	1x

SSD
HFS256G39TND-N210A 256GBBench 70%, 39,780 samples	93x
MZNTY128HDHP-00000 128GBSamsungBench 80%, 2,542 samples	43x
HFS128G39TND-N210A 128GBBench 61%, 41,519 samples	18x

RAM
M471A2K43BB1-CPB 1x16GBSamsungBench 38%, 8,819 samples	146x
M471A1K43BB0-CPB 1x8GBSamsungBench 35%, 32,056 samples	32x
HMA82GS6MFR8N-TF 1x16GBHynixBench 38%, 4,427 samples	26x

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.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk 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

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback