QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
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 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 54.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Boot Drive54% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (11%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemQEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory4.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1280 x 800 - 32 Bit colors, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150206
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJun 14 '23 at 11:29
Run Duration114 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 11%

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon E3-1245 v3
CPU 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
54.8% Above average
Memory 64.2
1-Core 83.3
2-Core 167
59% 105 Pts
4-Core 260
8-Core 284
36% 272 Pts
64-Core 344
21% 344 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 54.8%
Great: 71%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Qemu HARDDISK 69GB
26GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2.5+
SusWrite @10s intervals: 318 334 309 248 241 250 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
54% Above average
Read 386
Write 411
Mixed 440
SusWrite 283
86% 380 MB/s
4K Read 14.5
4K Write 20.4
4K Mixed 18
56% 17.6 MB/s
DQ Read 85
DQ Write 81.2
DQ Mixed 83.9
63% 83.4 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 54%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 1x8GB
1 of 1 slots used
8GB DIMM RAM
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
53.4% Above average
MC Read 19.6
MC Write 21.8
MC Mixed 18.5
57% 20 GB/s
SC Read 10.8
SC Write 14.1
SC Mixed 12
35% 12.3 GB/s
Latency 116
34% 116 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 53.4%
Great: 145%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) Builds (Compare 611 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 83%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 74%
Battleship

System: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $485
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair 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