TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus CG8565

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 44%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 35%
Jet ski
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 72.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics57.2% 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 Drive94.3% 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (22%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemAsus CG8565  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK CG8565
Memory1.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit cores, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20121029
Uptime4.9 Days
Run DateApr 01 '23 at 19:36
Run Duration156 Seconds
Run User PRT-User
Background CPU 22%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2600K-$319
LGA1155, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.75 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
72.8% Very good
Memory 93.8
1-Core 83.3
2-Core 167
69% 115 Pts
4-Core 282
8-Core 403
43% 342 Pts
64-Core 370
23% 370 Pts
Poor: 56% ↑
This bench: 72.8%
 Great: 83%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$117
Asus(1043 85AC)
CLim: 2025 MHz, MLim: 2052 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 528.24
Performing below potential (73rd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
57.2% Above average
Lighting 70.9
Reflection 73.5
Parallax 68.1
58% 70.8 fps
MRender 66.2
Gravity 72.5
Splatting 67
56% 68.6 fps
Poor: 51% ↑
This bench: 57.2%
 Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX500 1TB-$88
117GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M3CR032
SusWrite @10s intervals: 349 375 415 417 348 365 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
94.3% Outstanding
Read 442
Write 427
Mixed 372
SusWrite 378
91% 405 MB/s
4K Read 30.1
4K Write 59.4
4K Mixed 40.3
129% 43.3 MB/s
DQ Read 306
DQ Write 284
DQ Mixed 260
205% 283 MB/s
Poor: 75% ↑
This bench: 94.3%
 Great: 125%
Samsung 850 Pro 256GB-$129
228GB free
Firmware: EXM01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 217 229 235 233 199 209 MB/s
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
66.6% Good
Read 213
Write 212
Mixed 215
SusWrite 220
49% 215 MB/s
4K Read 28.5
4K Write 55.5
4K Mixed 33.4
115% 39.1 MB/s
DQ Read 203
DQ Write 195
DQ Mixed 198
149% 199 MB/s
Poor: 71% ↑
This bench: 66.6%
 Great: 124%
WD Green 2TB (2011)-$55
927GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 93 94 92 91 91 93 MB/s
Performing as expected (47th percentile)
50.7% Above average
Read 83.9
Write 95.6
Mixed 73.8
SusWrite 92.4
64% 86.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
138% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 31% ↑
This bench: 50.7%
 Great: 67%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown SLA302G08-MGJHB 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR3 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
51.8% Above average
MC Read 18.4
MC Write 17.5
MC Mixed 16.9
50% 17.6 GB/s
SC Read 14.6
SC Write 15.5
SC Mixed 15.3
43% 15.1 GB/s
Latency 60.3
66% 60.3 ns
Poor: 35% ↑
This bench: 51.8%
 Great: 63%
Take a copy of your results

 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 CG8565 Builds (Compare 47 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 43%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 78%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 35%
Jet ski

System: Asus CG8565

CPU
Core i7-2600KIntel  $319Bench 71%, 147,533 samples34x
Core i5-3570KIntel  $50Bench 68%, 185,516 samples3x
Core i7-3770KIntel  $175Bench 72%, 165,979 samples3x
GPU
GTX 1060-6GBNvidia  $117Bench 56%, 1,368,019 samples9x
HD 4000 (Desktop 1.15 GHz)Intel  $15Bench 3%, 52,547 samples4x
GTX 1070Nvidia  $278Bench 80%, 1,459,281 samples4x
SSD
850 Evo 500GBSamsung  $94Bench 112%, 695,664 samples3x
840 Pro 256GBSamsung  $175Bench 95%, 73,119 samples3x
850 Evo 250GBSamsung  $100Bench 103%, 951,591 samples3x
RAM
SLA302G08-MGJHB 2x4GBUnknownBench 55%, 53 samples6x
SLA302G08-MGJHB 4x4GBUnknownBench 55%, 61 samples5x
Fury DDR3 1600 C10 2x8GBHyperXBench 54%, 77,652 samples2x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $530
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit 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 the youtubers that are paid to promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly 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 PC brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively 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
Amazon Ebay
deals
Build Test EFps
Can You Run It?
►
YouTube
*NEW*
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback