Asrock 990FX Killer

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 49%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 74%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 39%
Jet ski
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (66th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 34 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 68.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics69.5% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive104% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (13%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardAsrock 990FX Killer  (all builds)
Memory11.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20141014
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 27 '24 at 22:15
Run Duration187 Seconds
Run User ESP-User
Background CPU 13%
Watch Gameplay: 1660 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (66th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8350-$130
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
68.3% Good
Memory 92.6
1-Core 68.7
2-Core 128
61% 96.5 Pts
4-Core 239
8-Core 397
39% 318 Pts
64-Core 398
25% 398 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 68.3%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1660-$200
CLim: 2145 MHz, MLim: 2000 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 552.22
Performing below potential (63rd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
69.5% Good
Lighting 91.9
Reflection 87.6
Parallax 76.4
75% 85.3 fps
MRender 65.5
Gravity 79
Splatting 71.4
59% 72 fps
Poor: 62%
This bench: 69.5%
Great: 73%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
419GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 264 387 413 418 419 420 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
104% Outstanding
Read 483
Write 446
Mixed 390
SusWrite 387
96% 426 MB/s
4K Read 38
4K Write 72.2
4K Mixed 48.3
158% 52.8 MB/s
DQ Read 276
DQ Write 240
DQ Mixed 258
193% 258 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 104%
Great: 134%
WD Black 1TB (2013)-$39
930GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 157 161 161 162 162 162 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
95.5% Outstanding
Read 172
Write 161
Mixed 103
SusWrite 161
110% 149 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 2.6
4K Mixed 1.2
232% 1.67 MB/s
Poor: 50%
This bench: 95.5%
Great: 108%
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016)-$62
2TB free
Firmware: CC26
SusWrite @10s intervals: 171 189 189 189 190 191 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
108% Outstanding
Read 189
Write 133
Mixed 82.2
SusWrite 186
108% 148 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.8
153% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 63%
This bench: 108%
Great: 114%
WD Blue 2.5" 500GB (2009)-$50
466GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 61 73 74 75 75 74 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
42.3% Average
Read 75.2
Write 74.3
Mixed 46
SusWrite 72.1
49% 66.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
134% 1 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 42.3%
Great: 43%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500GB-$80
466GB free
Firmware: SD1A
SusWrite @10s intervals: 72 88 79 79 82 75 MB/s
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
51.9% Above average
Read 101
Write 96.9
Mixed 54.7
SusWrite 79.2
61% 83.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.9
160% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 51.9%
Great: 59%
Seagate M3 Portable 1TB
331GB free, PID 61b6
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 104 127 126 127 126 127 MB/s
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
40% Below average
Read 60.8
Write 88.3
Mixed 82.2
SusWrite 123
128% 88.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.1
53% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 40%
Great: 51%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL TridentX DDR3 2400 C10 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 2400 MHz clocked @ 1200 MHz
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
39.9% Below average
MC Read 14.1
MC Write 13.4
MC Mixed 12.2
38% 13.2 GB/s
SC Read 12
SC Write 9
SC Mixed 12.4
32% 11.1 GB/s
Latency 63.2
63% 63.2 ns
Poor: 40%
This bench: 39.9%
Great: 88%

 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 70 58 60 7.2" 1280 720 SAM07C5 SAMSUNG
Typical 990FX Killer Builds (Compare 259 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 36%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 29%
Raft

Motherboard: Asrock 990FX Killer - $154

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $490
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 $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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