Asus WS X299 SAGE

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (48th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 52 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle intensive workstation, and even full-fledged server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 87.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics190% is a record breaking 3D score, it's almost off the scale. This GPU can handle all 3D games at very high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Memory128GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 128GB 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.
Very high background CPU (88%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus WS X299 SAGE  (all builds)
Memory116.9 GB free of 128 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display3440 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20210924
Uptime0.7 Days
Run DateMay 05 '24 at 22:39
Run Duration160 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 88%

 PC Performing as expected (48th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i9-9940X-$790
LGA 2066 R4, 1 CPU, 14 cores, 28 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.35 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
87.4% Excellent
Memory 79.1
1-Core 128
2-Core 256
84% 154 Pts
4-Core 512
8-Core 1,020
90% 766 Pts
64-Core 2,348
145% 2,348 Pts
Poor: 78%
This bench: 87.4%
Great: 95%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 6900-XT-$1,000
Sapphire(1DA2 E438) ≥ 4GB
Ram: 16GB, Driver: 24.4.1
Performing below potential (23rd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
190% Outstanding
Lighting 235
Reflection 244
Parallax 503
191% 327 fps
MRender 390
Gravity 208
Splatting 328
253% 309 fps
Poor: 177%
This bench: 190%
Great: 209%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Pro 512GB-$129
239GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXM05B0Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 375
Write 364
Mixed 258
74% 332 MB/s
4K Read 25.6
4K Write 82.4
4K Mixed 34.9
127% 47.6 MB/s
DQ Read 384
DQ Write 321
DQ Mixed 166
175% 290 MB/s
Poor: 66% Great: 118%
SanDisk Cruzer 16GB
5GB free, PID 5530
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 23.7
Write 4.7
Mixed 10
13% 12.8 MB/s
4K Read 3.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 2.6
149% 2.53 MB/s
Poor: 5% Great: 17%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 8x16GB
8 of 8 slots used
128GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
126% Outstanding
MC Read 44.2
MC Write 65.1
MC Mixed 45.2
147% 51.5 GB/s
SC Read 8.5
SC Write 22.6
SC Mixed 10.9
40% 14 GB/s
Latency 82
49% 82 ns
Poor: 75%
This bench: 126%
Great: 183%

 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 69 57 240 44.8" 1280 720 GSM9E8C LG ULTRAGEAR+
Typical WS X299 SAGE Builds (Compare 266 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 132%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 91%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 166%
UFO

Motherboard: Asus WS X299 SAGE

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 65% - Good Total price: $1,625
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, UserBenchmark's data exposes the youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $176Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
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