Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 74%
Battleship
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 60%
Gunboat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (21st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 79 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 68%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics108% 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 Drive38.1% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
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 (14%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3  (all builds)
Memory12 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors, 2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120629
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 13 '23 at 19:26
Run Duration195 Seconds
Run User FIN-User
Background CPU 14%

 PC Performing below expectations (21st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2600K-$319
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
68% Good
Memory 84.7
1-Core 90
2-Core 161
67% 112 Pts
4-Core 278
8-Core 426
44% 352 Pts
64-Core 433
27% 433 Pts
Poor: 56%
This bench: 68%
Great: 83%
Graphics Cards Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 3000 (Desktop V2 1.35 GHz)-$15
ASRock(1849 0122) 2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
1.98% Terrible
Lighting 2.2
Reflection 2.8
Parallax 1.7
2% 2.23 fps
MRender 3.1
Gravity 2.7
Splatting 2.8
2% 2.87 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 1.98%
Great: 2%
Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti-$485
CLim: 2050 MHz, MLim: 2852 MHz, Ram: 11GB, Driver: 528.02
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
108% Outstanding
Lighting 136
Reflection 141
Parallax 142
111% 140 fps
MRender 129
Gravity 141
Splatting 123
106% 131 fps
Poor: 109%
This bench: 108%
Great: 133%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX100 256GB-$116
190GB free (System drive)
Firmware: MU03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 68 68 65 68 69 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
38.1% Below average
Read 265
Write 300
Mixed 219
SusWrite 67.5
48% 213 MB/s
4K Read 18.7
4K Write 26.6
4K Mixed 19.9
68% 21.7 MB/s
DQ Read 28.5
DQ Write 70.8
DQ Mixed 39.8
33% 46.4 MB/s
Poor: 65%
This bench: 38.1%
Great: 97%
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
140GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 278 305 306 295 302 303 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
56.7% Above average
Read 336
Write 312
Mixed 209
SusWrite 298
65% 289 MB/s
4K Read 22.1
4K Write 24.8
4K Mixed 21.6
74% 22.8 MB/s
DQ Read 32.6
DQ Write 59.8
DQ Mixed 41
33% 44.5 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 56.7%
Great: 124%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB-$80
288GB free
Firmware: 3.AAJ
SusWrite @10s intervals: 65 67 69 65 67 68 MB/s
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
39.6% Below average
Read 71
Write 61.8
Mixed 42.5
SusWrite 66.8
44% 60.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 39.6%
Great: 43%
Sabrent Disk Device 4TB
14GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.6 2 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
9.05% Terrible
Read 56.3
Write 20
Mixed 21.5
SusWrite 1.7
27% 24.9 MB/s
4K Read 2.2
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.7
32% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 9.05%
Great: 85%
Sabrent Disk Device 2TB
683GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 22 24 24 23 24 24 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
14.8% Very poor
Read 57.4
Write 21.6
Mixed 23.9
SusWrite 23.3
37% 31.5 MB/s
4K Read 2.2
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.9
49% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 14.8%
Great: 123%
Sabrent Disk Device 4TB
24GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
7.95% Terrible
Read 49.8
Write 23.9
Mixed 24.4
SusWrite 1.6
28% 24.9 MB/s
4K Read 1.6
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.7
30% 0.77 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 7.95%
Great: 85%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL RipjawsX DDR3 2133 C9 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (17th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
53.6% Above average
MC Read 19
MC Write 19.4
MC Mixed 16.9
53% 18.4 GB/s
SC Read 16.2
SC Write 16.9
SC Mixed 17
48% 16.7 GB/s
Latency 72.2
55% 72.2 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 53.6%
Great: 82%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 Builds (Compare 398 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 59% - Above average Total price: $522
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia 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 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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