Gigabyte GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS Ultra

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 173%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 101%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 148%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 92.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics188% is a record breaking 3D score, it's almost off the scale. This GPU can handle all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Memory32GB 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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Run History
16 months ago, 15 months ago.
SystemGigabyte Z390 AORUS ULTRA
MotherboardGigabyte GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS Ultra  (all builds)
Memory25.1 GB free of 32 GB @ 3.6 GHz
Display3440 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20191015
Uptime7 Days
Run DateJan 19 '23 at 05:52
Run Duration321 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU2%
Watch Gameplay: 3080 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i9-9900KF-$272
U3E1, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.8 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
92.9% Outstanding
Memory 94.7
1-Core 144
2-Core 286
97% 175 Pts
4-Core 506
8-Core 628
73% 567 Pts
64-Core 873
54% 873 Pts
Poor: 90%
This bench: 92.9%
Great: 104%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 3080-$700
Nvidia(10DE 1467) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 4750 MHz, Ram: 10GB, Driver: 528.02
Performing below potential (47th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
188% Outstanding
Lighting 271
Reflection 249
Parallax 311
221% 277 fps
MRender 316
Gravity 230
Splatting 169
187% 238 fps
Poor: 163%
This bench: 188%
Great: 202%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$46
126GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2QEXM7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 2,410
Write 2,179
Mixed 1,506
451% 2,032 MB/s
4K Read 54
4K Write 117
4K Mixed 72.9
237% 81.3 MB/s
DQ Read 1,003
DQ Write 675
DQ Mixed 852
632% 843 MB/s
Poor: 152% Great: 302%
WD Blue SN570 NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB
253GB free
Firmware: 234100WD Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1386 322 395 344 262 314 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
222% Outstanding
Read 2,048
Write 2,038
Mixed 1,718
SusWrite 504
353% 1,577 MB/s
4K Read 47.1
4K Write 114
4K Mixed 65.4
215% 75.4 MB/s
DQ Read 1,110
DQ Write 811
DQ Mixed 928
702% 949 MB/s
Poor: 159%
This bench: 222%
Great: 300%
WD Blue SN570 NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB
899GB free
Firmware: 234100WD Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1452 572 561 572 561 571 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
228% Outstanding
Read 1,892
Write 2,221
Mixed 1,889
SusWrite 715
378% 1,679 MB/s
4K Read 47.4
4K Write 117
4K Mixed 65.8
218% 76.7 MB/s
DQ Read 1,096
DQ Write 750
DQ Mixed 842
650% 896 MB/s
Poor: 159%
This bench: 228%
Great: 300%
H/W DISK 1 1TB
859GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 115 117 117 115 118 118 MB/s
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
44.2% Average
Read 100
Write 117
Mixed 63.9
SusWrite 117
136% 99.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.9
78% 1 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 44.2%
Great: 59%
H/W DISK 2 500GB
419GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 116 118 117 115 118 118 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
48.8% Average
Read 117
Write 126
Mixed 57.6
SusWrite 117
140% 104 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 1
105% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 26%
This bench: 48.8%
Great: 49%
H/W DISK 3 2TB
1.5TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 81 83 83 82 82 82 MB/s
Performing above expectations (80th percentile)
41.8% Average
Read 119
Write 118
Mixed 71.7
SusWrite 82.1
129% 97.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.5
91% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 41.8%
Great: 44%
H/W DISK 4 4TB
1.5TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 79 82 82 82 82 82 MB/s
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
48.3% Average
Read 131
Write 135
Mixed 67.9
SusWrite 81.8
136% 104 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 3.6
4K Mixed 1.1
165% 2.07 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 48.3%
Great: 69%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair CMH32GX4M2D3600C18 2x16GB
2 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3600 MHz
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
99.9% Outstanding
MC Read 36.5
MC Write 42.2
MC Mixed 30.5
104% 36.4 GB/s
SC Read 14.9
SC Write 36.1
SC Mixed 28.8
76% 26.6 GB/s
Latency 57.8
69% 57.8 ns
Poor: 61%
This bench: 99.9%
Great: 124%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-Z390 AORUS ULTRA-CF Builds (Compare 7,797 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 152%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 102%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 150%
UFO

Motherboard: Gigabyte GIGABYTE Z390 AORUS Ultra - $172

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 93% - Outstanding Total price: $1,232
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate a lot of reddit accounts. UserBenchmark exposes their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
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+ reviews on trustpilot are written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which saves our users millions.
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 $44
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 deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback