Asus TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING (WI-FI)

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 55%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 99%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 55%
Yacht
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (56th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 44 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 typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 96.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is excellent.
Graphics49.5% 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)
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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
MotherboardAsus TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING (WI-FI)  (all builds)
Memory26.2 GB free of 32 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20211012
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateAug 21 '23 at 09:12
Run Duration241 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU8%

 PC Performing as expected (56th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i9-9900K-$399
LGA1151, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.65 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
96.3% Outstanding
Memory 93.3
1-Core 146
2-Core 292
97% 177 Pts
4-Core 533
8-Core 996
91% 765 Pts
64-Core 1,410
87% 1,410 Pts
Poor: 89%
This bench: 96.3%
Great: 104%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R9 390X
Sapphire(174B E324) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1040 MHz, MLim: 1500 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 22.10.1
Performing below potential (55th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
49.5% Average
Lighting 63.5
Reflection 73.6
Parallax 85.9
52% 74.3 fps
MRender 64.2
Gravity 59.5
Splatting 45.7
45% 56.5 fps
Poor: 41%
This bench: 49.5%
Great: 54%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 990 2TB
592GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 1B2Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1984 1991 2003 1984 1952 1949 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Sandisk S3 1T02 1TB
211GB free
Firmware: 40101000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 476 473 476 475 354 344 MB/s
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
111% Outstanding
Read 497
Write 470
Mixed 387
SusWrite 433
100% 447 MB/s
4K Read 35.6
4K Write 82.4
4K Mixed 46
156% 54.7 MB/s
DQ Read 379
DQ Write 320
DQ Mixed 251
215% 317 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 111%
Great: 122%
WDC WDBA3V5000AN 500GB
55GB free
Firmware: 2112
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Read 1,570
Write 1,723
Mixed 1,438
353% 1,577 MB/s
4K Read 22.6
4K Write 89.7
4K Mixed 50.8
147% 54.4 MB/s
DQ Read 347
DQ Write 779
DQ Mixed 433
367% 520 MB/s
Poor: 39% Great: 61%
WD Black 1TB (2010)-$39
167GB free
Firmware: 05.01D05
SusWrite @10s intervals: 106 109 110 107 109 108 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
65.9% Good
Read 121
Write 111
Mixed 106
SusWrite 108
83% 112 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.9
193% 1.43 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 65.9%
Great: 76%
WD My Book 25EE 4TB
807GB free, PID 25ee
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 161 160 162 159 160 162 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
67.7% Good
Read 171
Write 176
Mixed 127
SusWrite 161
215% 159 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 1
123% 1.5 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 67.7%
Great: 100%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3600 C16 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
101% Outstanding
MC Read 38.2
MC Write 39.8
MC Mixed 29.2
102% 35.7 GB/s
SC Read 20.4
SC Write 45.5
SC Mixed 30.5
92% 32.1 GB/s
Latency 61.5
65% 61.5 ns
Poor: 68%
This bench: 101%
Great: 134%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 31: 0P 4R 3G 2B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
31% 53% 17 555 458 60 72.3" 1920 1080 GSM0001 LG TV
History: Score 46: 0P 5R 7G 0B | Score 31: 0P 4R 3G 2B
Typical TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING (WI-FI) Builds (Compare 1,114 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 104%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 100%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 96%
Nuclear submarine

Motherboard: Asus TUF Z390M-PRO GAMING (WI-FI)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 104% - Outstanding Total price: $607
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