Asus TUF Z270 MARK 2

Performance Results


Gaming 21% Surfboard	Desktop 82% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 18% Surfboard


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing as expected (50th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 50 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. 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 70.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	17.8% 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 Drive	113% 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, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago, 6 years ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)

Motherboard	Asus TUF Z270 MARK 2 (all builds)
Memory	27.2 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit cores
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20170723
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Nov 10 '17 at 14:27
Run Duration	133 Seconds
Run User	BRA-User
Background CPU	0%

PC Performing as expected (50^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-7700K-$230 712,312 User benchmarks, average bench 84% LGA1151, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 4.2 GHz, turbo 4.2 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (6^th percentile)	70.7% Very good	Memory 82.7 1-Core 124 2-Core 215 80% 141 Pts	4-Core 340 8-Core 340 46% 340 Pts	64-Core 340 21% 340 Pts
Poor: 71% ↑ This bench: 70.7% Great: 92%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-Ti-$92 309,423 User benchmarks, average bench 17% Asus(1043 84BE) 2GB CLim: 1293 MHz, MLim: 1350 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 388.0 Performing above expectations (85^th percentile)	17.8% Very poor	Lighting 22.2 Reflection 17.1 Parallax 20.3 18% 19.9 fps	MRender 25.1 Gravity 23 Splatting 16.8 17% 21.6 fps
Poor: 16% ↑ This bench: 17.8% Great: 19%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100 951,591 User benchmarks, average bench 103% 163GB free (System drive) Firmware: EMT02B6Q Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing above expectations (74^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 99 99 59 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 78 (B1) Unknown 99 99 3 (B3) Unknown 100 100 0 (B5) Unknown 100 100 0 (B6) Unknown 100 100 0 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 66 57 34 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 0 (EB) Unknown 99 99 22 (F1) Unknown 99 99 1693763333	113% Outstanding	Read 515 Write 396 Mixed 419 99% 443 MB/s	4K Read 45.3 4K Write 91.5 4K Mixed 48.1 179% 61.6 MB/s	DQ Read 332 DQ Write 250 DQ Mixed 117 135% 233 MB/s
Poor: 72% ↑ This bench: 113% Great: 124%
Samsung 840 Evo 120GB-$85 104,444 User benchmarks, average bench 91% 69GB free Firmware: EXT0DB6Q Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (33^rd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 99 99 4984 (0C) Power cycle count 98 98 1783 (B1) Unknown 69 69 374 (B3) Unknown 100 100 0 (B5) Unknown 100 100 0 (B6) Unknown 100 100 0 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 69 44 31 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 97 97 2196 (EB) Unknown 99 99 1310 (F1) Unknown 99 99 47097166850	89.8% Excellent	Read 504 Write 301 Mixed 346 85% 384 MB/s	4K Read 43.5 4K Write 71.8 4K Mixed 23.6 134% 46.3 MB/s	DQ Read 330 DQ Write 214 DQ Mixed 61.1 102% 202 MB/s
Poor: 63% ↑ This bench: 89.8% Great: 108%
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$39 1,120,098 User benchmarks, average bench 92% 298GB free Firmware: CC43 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (33^rd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 80 63 102027031 (03) Spinup time 97 97 0 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 79 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 66 60 4322948 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 62 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 79 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (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 69 62 521601055 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 100 100 79 (C2) HDA temperature 31 21 90194313247 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 17 1 102027031 (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 31907312042046 (F1) Unknown 100 253 5770815380 (F2) Unknown 100 253 3377795883	86.1% Excellent	Read 135 Write 165 Mixed 126 106% 142 MB/s	4K Read 0.43 4K Write 1.4 4K Mixed 0.22 69% 0.69 MB/s
Poor: 60% ↑ This bench: 86.1% Great: 113%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Kingston HyperX 2400 C15 4x8GB 9,100 User benchmarks, average bench 82% 4 of 4 slots used 32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz Performing above expectations (70^th percentile)	82.2% Excellent	MC Read 27.9 MC Write 32.6 MC Mixed 27.8 84% 29.4 GB/s	SC Read 19.2 SC Write 32.5 SC Mixed 23.3 72% 25 GB/s	Latency 75.6 53% 75.6 ns
Poor: 67% ↑ This bench: 82.2% Great: 107%

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 TUF Z270 MARK 2 Builds (Compare 1,910 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming 71%

Battleship

Desktop 90%

Aircraft carrier

Workstation 61%

Destroyer

Motherboard: Asus TUF Z270 MARK 2 - $129

CPU
Core i7-7700KIntel $230Bench 84%, 712,312 samples	919x
Core i5-7600KIntel $190Bench 76%, 195,006 samples	323x
Core i7-7700Intel $167Bench 76%, 256,717 samples	184x

GPU
GTX 1070Nvidia $132Bench 80%, 1,459,281 samples	268x
GTX 1060-6GBNvidia $117Bench 56%, 1,368,019 samples	219x
GTX 1080Nvidia $195Bench 102%, 1,082,454 samples	202x

SSD
850 Evo 500GBSamsung $94Bench 112%, 695,664 samples	56x
860 Evo 1TBSamsung $139Bench 112%, 602,853 samples	51x
850 Evo 250GBSamsung $100Bench 103%, 951,591 samples	49x

RAM
Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GBCorsair $48Bench 82%, 606,405 samples	93x
Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GBCorsair $45Bench 85%, 653,654 samples	56x
DDR4 3000 2OZ 2x8GBAdataBench 87%, 25,457 samples	35x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 96% - Outstanding

Total price: $634

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163	Nvidia RTX 4070 $539	Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $31	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16