Gigabyte Z390 GAMING X

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (77th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 23 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an outstanding single core score, this CPU is the cat's whiskers: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 105%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is outstanding.
Graphics218% 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.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
High background CPU (30%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
15 days ago, 14 days ago.
SystemGigabyte Z390 GAMING X
MotherboardGigabyte Z390 GAMING X  (all builds)
Memory27.7 GB free of 32 GB @ 3 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20231221
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateMay 17 '24 at 03:38
Run Duration243 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 30%

 PC Performing above expectations (77th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-9700K-$264
U3E1, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.95 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
105% Outstanding
Memory 94.9
1-Core 152
2-Core 305
101% 184 Pts
4-Core 615
8-Core 1,144
105% 879 Pts
64-Core 1,125
70% 1,125 Pts
Poor: 82%
This bench: 105%
Great: 105%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 7900-GRE
Sapphire(1DA2 E475) ≥ 4GB
Ram: 16GB, Driver: 24.4.1
Performing below potential (62nd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
218% Outstanding
Lighting 291
Reflection 350
Parallax 611
237% 417 fps
MRender 322
Gravity 272
Splatting 368
267% 321 fps
Poor: 114%
This bench: 218%
Great: 228%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe PCIe M.2 1TB-$93
687GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B2Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 2,164
Write 2,269
Mixed 1,718
458% 2,050 MB/s
4K Read 58.7
4K Write 151
4K Mixed 80.3
272% 96.8 MB/s
DQ Read 1,689
DQ Write 1,270
DQ Mixed 1,424
1,080% 1,461 MB/s
Poor: 188% Great: 410%
Corsair Force NVMe PCIe M.2 960GB
118GB free
Firmware: ECFM22.6 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,543
Write 2,425
Mixed 1,329
397% 1,766 MB/s
4K Read 7.9
4K Write 160
4K Mixed 77.4
196% 81.9 MB/s
DQ Read 1,870
DQ Write 1,413
DQ Mixed 1,585
1,200% 1,622 MB/s
Poor: 150% Great: 298%
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
217GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 502
Write 478
Mixed 418
104% 466 MB/s
4K Read 42.7
4K Write 100
4K Mixed 57.4
191% 66.7 MB/s
DQ Read 378
DQ Write 340
DQ Mixed 354
267% 357 MB/s
Poor: 80% Great: 134%
Crucial MX500 2TB-$155
1.5TB free
Firmware: M3CR045
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 328
Write 394
Mixed 365
81% 363 MB/s
4K Read 40.9
4K Write 78.6
4K Mixed 56.6
176% 58.7 MB/s
DQ Read 379
DQ Write 342
DQ Mixed 155
172% 292 MB/s
Poor: 83% Great: 125%
WD My Book 25EE 4TB
2TB free, PID 25ee
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 97.6
Write 179
Mixed 109
176% 129 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 0.9
128% 1.43 MB/s
Poor: 18% Great: 100%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 029E CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 029E CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 029E CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 32GB
3000, 3000, 3000, 3000 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
94.4% Outstanding
MC Read 34.1
MC Write 37.9
MC Mixed 28.9
96% 33.6 GB/s
SC Read 18.9
SC Write 38.9
SC Mixed 26.7
80% 28.2 GB/s
Latency 57.8
69% 57.8 ns
Poor: 61%
This bench: 94.4%
Great: 102%

 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 56 31 240 27" 2048 1152 HPN3967 OMEN 27qs
Typical GA-Z390 GAMING X-CF Builds (Compare 12,009 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 114%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 100%
UFO
Workstation
Workstation 105%
UFO

Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 GAMING X - $225

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 113% - Outstanding Total price: $808
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