Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X512FL_A512FL

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 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 58.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.49% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive159% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
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 (19%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemAsus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X512FL_A512FL  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK X512FL
Memory2.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210125
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 02 '23 at 06:00
Run Duration112 Seconds
Run User MYS-User
Background CPU 19%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-8265U
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 1.8 GHz, turbo 3.3 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
58.8% Above average
Memory 58.7
1-Core 88.8
2-Core 177
60% 108 Pts
4-Core 317
8-Core 472
49% 394 Pts
64-Core 468
29% 468 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 58.8%
Great: 71%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel UHD Graphics 620
Asus(1043 1FBE) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 27.20.100.8681
Performing as expected (40th percentile)
4.49% Terrible
Lighting 5.4
Reflection 13.4
Parallax 5
4% 7.93 fps
MRender 6
Gravity 5.1
Splatting 5.9
5% 5.67 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.49%
Great: 6%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intel 660p NVMe PCIe M.2 512GB-$60
430GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 004C Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 777 741 725 68 176 134 MB/s
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
159% Outstanding
Read 1,318
Write 874
Mixed 752
SusWrite 437
188% 845 MB/s
4K Read 45.3
4K Write 114
4K Mixed 54.3
199% 71.3 MB/s
DQ Read 318
DQ Write 530
DQ Mixed 333
278% 394 MB/s
Poor: 94%
This bench: 159%
Great: 209%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A5244CB0-CRC 04EF TEAMGROUP-SD4-2666 8GB
2400, 2667 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
54.6% Above average
MC Read 22.9
MC Write 21
MC Mixed 16.3
57% 20.1 GB/s
SC Read 10.9
SC Write 17.4
SC Mixed 16.2
42% 14.8 GB/s
Latency 132
30% 132 ns
Poor: 40%
This bench: 54.6%
Great: 67%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 51 24 60 15.5" 1280 720 NCP0046
Typical VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X512FL_A512FL Builds (Compare 36 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

System: Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X512FL_A512FL

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 51% - Above average Total price: $60
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
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+ 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 $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 $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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