Monster TULPAR T5 V1

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (41st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 59 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 48.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.93% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (22%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemMonster TULPAR T5 V1  (all builds)
MotherboardMONSTER TULPAR T5 V1
Memory28.4 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140811
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 11 '18 at 17:18
Run Duration120 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU 22%

 PC Performing as expected (41st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4710MQ-$46
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 1.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
48.7% Average
Memory 75.5
1-Core 66
2-Core 95.6
51% 79 Pts
4-Core 121
8-Core 174
18% 148 Pts
64-Core 179
11% 179 Pts
Poor: 29%
This bench: 48.7%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 870M
MSI(1462 1106) 3GB
Driver: nvd3dumx.dll Ver. 21.21.13.7654
Relative performance (0th percentile)
2.93% Terrible
Lighting 3.27
Reflection 3.04
Parallax 4.16
3% 3.49 fps
MRender 4
Gravity 3.9
Splatting 4.57
3% 4.16 fps
Poor: 17%
This bench: 2.93%
Great: 24%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Black 2.5" 750GB (2013)-$60
630GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
65.7% Good
Read 120
Write 109
Mixed 100
82% 110 MB/s
4K Read 0.58
4K Write 2.21
4K Mixed 0.23
90% 1.01 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 65.7%
Great: 71%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 1TB
637GB free, PID a202
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
37.6% Below average
Read 96.3
Write 90.1
Mixed 85.9
116% 90.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.24
4K Write 1.28
4K Mixed 0.17
50% 0.56 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 37.6%
Great: 49%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
GKH800SO51208-1600 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB SODIMM DDR3 1600 MHz clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
42.7% Average
MC Read 16
MC Write 17.4
MC Mixed 14.2
45% 15.9 GB/s
SC Read 7.3
SC Write 6.1
SC Mixed 9.2
22% 7.53 GB/s
Latency 89.4
45% 89.4 ns
Poor: 43%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical TULPAR T5 V1 Builds (Compare 7 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Monster TULPAR T5 V1

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 98% - Outstanding Total price: $46
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