Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X712FAC_F712FA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 57.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.03% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive86.3% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Sub-optimal background CPU (18%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
18 months ago, 15 months ago.
SystemAsus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X712FAC_F712FA  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK X712FAC
Memory2 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20191018
Uptime7.1 Days
Run DateFeb 26 '23 at 20:11
Run Duration115 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 18%

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-10210U
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.1 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
57.6% Above average
Memory 64.5
1-Core 98.3
2-Core 181
64% 115 Pts
4-Core 281
8-Core 356
41% 319 Pts
64-Core 317
20% 317 Pts
Poor: 26%
This bench: 57.6%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel UHD Graphics
Asus(1043 1D11) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 30.0.100.9864
Performing below expectations (37th percentile)
4.03% Terrible
Lighting 5.5
Reflection 2.9
Parallax 4.6
4% 4.33 fps
MRender 7.3
Gravity 5.8
Splatting 0.1
3% 4.4 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.03%
Great: 6%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intel 660p NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB-$58
79GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 004C Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 261 168 15 8.3 57 13 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
86.3% Excellent
Read 854
Write 778
Mixed 674
SusWrite 87
134% 598 MB/s
4K Read 16.6
4K Write 93.6
4K Mixed 24.3
106% 44.8 MB/s
DQ Read 328
DQ Write 341
DQ Mixed 334
251% 334 MB/s
Poor: 94%
This bench: 86.3%
Great: 209%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A5244CB0-CTD 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz
Performing below potential (10th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
43.6% Average
MC Read 17.9
MC Write 15.1
MC Mixed 12.3
43% 15.1 GB/s
SC Read 11.3
SC Write 18.4
SC Mixed 14.3
42% 14.7 GB/s
Latency 115
35% 115 ns
Poor: 27%
This bench: 43.6%
Great: 74%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X712FAC_F712FA Builds (Compare 14 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk

System: Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X712FAC_F712FA

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 52% - Above average Total price: $58
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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 obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or 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 $169Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $369
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback