Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 18%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (50th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 50 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 69.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics19.5% 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
5 months ago, 5 months ago.
MotherboardAsrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3  (all builds)
Memory9.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display2560 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120629
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 02 '24 at 10:04
Run Duration163 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 26%

 PC Performing as expected (50th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2600-$139
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (74th percentile)
69.7% Good
Memory 83.6
1-Core 92.6
2-Core 181
69% 119 Pts
4-Core 302
8-Core 444
46% 373 Pts
64-Core 444
28% 444 Pts
Poor: 54%
This bench: 69.7%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 660-$170
MSI(1462 2871) 2GB
CLim: 1254 MHz, MLim: 1502 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 456.71
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
19.5% Very poor
Lighting 21.9
Reflection 35.1
Parallax 30.8
18% 29.3 fps
MRender 31.4
Gravity 28.8
Splatting 24.9
23% 28.4 fps
Poor: 18%
This bench: 19.5%
Great: 21%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Evo 120GB-$85
13GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EXT0DB6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 456
Write 387
Mixed 300
85% 381 MB/s
4K Read 26.4
4K Write 49.5
4K Mixed 30.5
105% 35.5 MB/s
DQ Read 371
DQ Write 308
DQ Mixed 174
176% 284 MB/s
Poor: 63% Great: 108%
Crucial MTFDDAK512MAM-1K1 512GB
139GB free
Firmware: 070H
SusWrite @10s intervals: 141 183 115 129 152 158 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
36% Below average
Read 247
Write 230
Mixed 212
SusWrite 146
47% 209 MB/s
4K Read 16.2
4K Write 25.9
4K Mixed 4.4
44% 15.5 MB/s
DQ Read 112
DQ Write 106
DQ Mixed 51.9
55% 90.2 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 36%
Great: 76%
Toshiba X300 4TB-$132
581GB free
Firmware: FP2A
SusWrite @10s intervals: 130 152 150 153 153 149 MB/s
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
87.1% Excellent
Read 154
Write 162
Mixed 67.5
SusWrite 148
97% 133 MB/s
4K Read 4.9
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 1.1
369% 2.77 MB/s
Poor: 57%
This bench: 87.1%
Great: 104%
Seagate Expansion HDD 5TB
2.5TB free, PID 2037
Operating at USB 3.2 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 104 122 118 112 115 114 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
50.9% Above average
Read 86
Write 114
Mixed 73.5
SusWrite 114
136% 97 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 4.3
4K Mixed 0.6
172% 2.07 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 50.9%
Great: 56%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston HyperX DDR3 1866 C9 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing below potential (26th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
47.6% Average
MC Read 16.3
MC Write 17
MC Mixed 15.1
46% 16.1 GB/s
SC Read 14
SC Write 15.7
SC Mixed 15.3
43% 15 GB/s
Latency 73.3
55% 73.3 ns
Poor: 41%
This bench: 47.6%
Great: 87%

 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 23 3 60 28.8" 2560 1057 ACI2931 ASUS MX299
Typical Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 Builds (Compare 396 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

Motherboard: Asrock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 59% - Above average Total price: $522
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. Additionally, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia 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