Casper NIRVANA DESKTOP

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 22%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 17%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 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 64.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics30.4% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
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 (26%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemCasper NIRVANA DESKTOP  (all builds)
MotherboardCASPER CASPER NIRVANA DESKTOP
Memory11.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20141117
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateNov 29 '23 at 14:57
Run Duration129 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU 26%

 PC Performing as expected (49th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-4590-$188
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
64.5% Good
Memory 83.4
1-Core 82.6
2-Core 162
65% 109 Pts
4-Core 265
8-Core 265
36% 265 Pts
64-Core 265
16% 265 Pts
Poor: 45%
This bench: 64.5%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 960-$198
CLim: 1493 MHz, MLim: 1800 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 546.17
Performing below potential (16th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
30.4% Below average
Lighting 37.5
Reflection 47.8
Parallax 31.2
31% 38.8 fps
MRender 36.8
Gravity 39.9
Splatting 34.4
30% 37 fps
Poor: 30%
This bench: 30.4%
Great: 36%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk PLUS 240GB
154GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 00RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 10 12 12 9.5 7.8 7.3 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 33% Great: 56%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
926GB free
Firmware: 1A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 155 174 175 158 149 143 MB/s
Performing above expectations (85th percentile)
101% Outstanding
Read 193
Write 158
Mixed 129
SusWrite 159
118% 160 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.7
4K Mixed 1.1
218% 1.63 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 101%
Great: 109%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KVR16N11/8 Samsung M378B1G73QH0-CK0 16GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
56.2% Above average
MC Read 20.7
MC Write 22.5
MC Mixed 17.8
58% 20.3 GB/s
SC Read 8.2
SC Write 18.2
SC Mixed 17.8
42% 14.7 GB/s
Latency 87.8
46% 87.8 ns
Poor: 56%
This bench: 56.2%
Great: 56%

 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 52 37 60 23.5" 1280 720 PHLC084 Philips 247EL
Typical NIRVANA DESKTOP Builds (Compare 655 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 61%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

System: Casper NIRVANA DESKTOP

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 71% - Very good Total price: $188
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