Tarox Basic PC System

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 60%
Destroyer
Desktop
Desktop 78%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 49%
Yacht
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 74.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics79.5% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive16.5% is an extremely low SSD score, this system will benefit from a faster SSD.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (21%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
7 months ago, 7 months ago.
SystemTarox Basic PC System  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK P8Q77-M
Memory7.4 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140806
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateNov 03 '23 at 00:33
Run Duration169 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 21%

 PC Performing as expected (42nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-3770-$297
LGA1155, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
74.3% Very good
Memory 91.6
1-Core 80.9
2-Core 181
69% 118 Pts
4-Core 309
8-Core 469
48% 389 Pts
64-Core 476
30% 476 Pts
Poor: 57%
This bench: 74.3%
Great: 76%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 980-Ti-$560
EVGA(3842 4998) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1582 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 537.34
Performing below potential (58th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
79.5% Very good
Lighting 97.7
Reflection 169
Parallax 105
80% 124 fps
MRender 100
Gravity 101
Splatting 90.9
79% 97.5 fps
Poor: 70%
This bench: 79.5%
Great: 87%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 830 128GB-$109
6GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CXM03B1Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 63 49 50 48 30 22 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
16.5% Very poor
Read 4
Write 93.9
Mixed 26.2
SusWrite 43.5
10% 41.9 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 15.1
4K Mixed 8.2
20% 8.2 MB/s
DQ Read 286
DQ Write 29.3
DQ Mixed 30.2
54% 115 MB/s
Poor: 48%
This bench: 16.5%
Great: 76%
Samsung 840 250GB-$251
151GB free
Firmware: DXT06B0Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 159 145 182 143 142 106 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
47.8% Average
Read 223
Write 152
Mixed 133
SusWrite 146
37% 164 MB/s
4K Read 19.5
4K Write 42.4
4K Mixed 18.1
75% 26.7 MB/s
DQ Read 201
DQ Write 122
DQ Mixed 51
68% 125 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 47.8%
Great: 85%
Samsung 870 EVO 2TB-$190
1.5TB free
Firmware: SVT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 204 179 222 227 243 244 MB/s
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
67% Good
Read 223
Write 216
Mixed 222
SusWrite 220
50% 220 MB/s
4K Read 29.1
4K Write 48.6
4K Mixed 35.1
115% 37.6 MB/s
DQ Read 203
DQ Write 191
DQ Mixed 196
147% 197 MB/s
Poor: 81%
This bench: 67%
Great: 136%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
324GB free
Firmware: KC45
SusWrite @10s intervals: 117 114 118 119 117 118 MB/s
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
65.4% Good
Read 111
Write 108
Mixed 55.9
SusWrite 117
72% 98.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.8
132% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 65.4%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL Sniper DDR3 1866 C9 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
52.7% Above average
MC Read 19.5
MC Write 18.8
MC Mixed 16.5
52% 18.3 GB/s
SC Read 15.9
SC Write 16.2
SC Mixed 13.9
44% 15.3 GB/s
Latency 70.2
57% 70.2 ns
Poor: 43%
This bench: 52.7%
Great: 72%

 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 56 30 144 27" 1280 720 GSM5B7F 27GL850
Typical Basic PC System Builds (Compare 70 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 22%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 18%
Surfboard

System: Tarox Basic PC System

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 62% - Good Total price: $347
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $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 deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback