ECS P67H2-A

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (22nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 78 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
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 71.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics3.2% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive74.7% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
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.
Very high background CPU (43%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
6 months ago, 6 months ago.
MotherboardECS P67H2-A  (all builds)
Memory5.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1024 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20121026
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateDec 02 '23 at 15:09
Run Duration172 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 43%

 PC Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-3770K-$175
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.7 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
71.1% Very good
Memory 88.1
1-Core 94.7
2-Core 189
72% 124 Pts
4-Core 302
8-Core 378
44% 340 Pts
64-Core 453
28% 453 Pts
Poor: 59%
This bench: 71.1%
Great: 83%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 710
Zotac(19DA 5360) 1GB
CLim: 954 MHz, MLim: 400 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 474.64
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
3.2% Terrible
Lighting 3.8
Reflection 5.6
Parallax 4.1
3% 4.5 fps
MRender 3.3
Gravity 3.9
Splatting 4.9
3% 4.03 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.2%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung PM871b 2.5 7mm 256GB
123GB free (System drive)
Firmware: MVT02D0Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 305 162 155 151 146 132 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
74.7% Very good
Read 433
Write 449
Mixed 279
SusWrite 175
75% 334 MB/s
4K Read 19.9
4K Write 41.3
4K Mixed 33.9
96% 31.7 MB/s
DQ Read 386
DQ Write 343
DQ Mixed 365
274% 365 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 74.7%
Great: 114%
Crucial MX500 1TB-$88
506GB free
Firmware: M3CR033
SusWrite @10s intervals: 235 238 225 221 236 237 MB/s
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
74.3% Very good
Read 253
Write 238
Mixed 233
SusWrite 232
54% 239 MB/s
4K Read 29.1
4K Write 64.4
4K Mixed 40.7
130% 44.7 MB/s
DQ Read 207
DQ Write 201
DQ Mixed 185
144% 198 MB/s
Poor: 75%
This bench: 74.3%
Great: 125%
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB-$110
123GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 237 238 227 222 235 237 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
77.6% Very good
Read 252
Write 242
Mixed 223
SusWrite 233
54% 237 MB/s
4K Read 33.5
4K Write 64.9
4K Mixed 44.3
142% 47.6 MB/s
DQ Read 203
DQ Write 191
DQ Mixed 197
148% 197 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 77.6%
Great: 133%
Seagate ST9250412AS 250GB
175GB free
Firmware: 0002SDMA
SusWrite @10s intervals: 73 73 71 71 73 74 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
48.6% Average
Read 96.4
Write 82.1
Mixed 46.9
SusWrite 72.8
55% 74.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 29%
This bench: 48.6%
Great: 42%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
HyperX Fury DDR3 1866 C10 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (32nd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
56.3% Above average
MC Read 20.5
MC Write 19.9
MC Mixed 18.3
56% 19.6 GB/s
SC Read 15.5
SC Write 16.9
SC Mixed 16.2
46% 16.2 GB/s
Latency 67.2
60% 67.2 ns
Poor: 36%
This bench: 56.3%
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 26 12 70 32" 1280 720 HWP3338 HP Pavilion32
Typical P67H2-A Builds (Compare 5 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 50%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 77%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 40%
Speed boat

Motherboard: ECS P67H2-A

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 73% - Very good Total price: $519
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable 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 praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products 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. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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