Gigabyte GA-H110M-H-CF

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 13%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (58th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 42 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 66.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics14.9% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB 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.
Very high background CPU (62%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemGigabyte H110M-H
MotherboardGigabyte GA-H110M-H-CF  (all builds)
Memory6.3 GB free of 12 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20171214
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateDec 02 '23 at 12:35
Run Duration130 Seconds
Run User PHL-User
Background CPU 62%

 PC Performing as expected (58th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-7400-$70
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3 GHz, turbo 3.3 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
66.1% Good
Memory 77.8
1-Core 103
2-Core 202
72% 128 Pts
4-Core 309
8-Core 348
43% 328 Pts
64-Core 352
22% 352 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 66.1%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-$120
Zotac(19DA 288B) 1GB
CLim: 1306 MHz, MLim: 1252 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 536.23
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
14.9% Very poor
Lighting 18.2
Reflection 17
Parallax 16.8
15% 17.3 fps
MRender 23
Gravity 18.8
Splatting 15.2
15% 19 fps
Poor: 13%
This bench: 14.9%
Great: 16%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
ST1000DM003-1CH162 128GB
2GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0807
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 445
Write 54.8
Mixed 238
53% 246 MB/s
4K Read 31.8
4K Write 61.5
4K Mixed 12.6
97% 35.3 MB/s
DQ Read 181
DQ Write 251
DQ Mixed 17.8
69% 150 MB/s
Poor: 43% Great: 79%
Seagate ST1000LM048-2E7172 1TB
103GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 69 72 70 69 65 MB/s
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
47% Average
Read 94.8
Write 94.5
Mixed 91.3
SusWrite 68.7
65% 87.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.3
106% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 47%
Great: 71%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown MSD48G26Q3 ShuoLe4G2666 12GB
2400, 2400 MHz
8192, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
69.3% Good
MC Read 25.7
MC Write 30.3
MC Mixed 21.4
74% 25.8 GB/s
SC Read 9.7
SC Write 24.7
SC Mixed 13.6
46% 16 GB/s
Latency 84.6
47% 84.6 ns
Poor: 69%
This bench: 69.3%
Great: 69%

 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 71 59 60 15.5" 1280 720 ACR0015 Acer X163W
Typical GA-H110M-H-CF Builds (Compare 3,483 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H110M-H-CF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $98
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