Asus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 40%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 33%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 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 60.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics61.7% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Boot Drive128% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
Memory24GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 24GB 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 (26%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA  (all builds)
Memory20.6 GB free of 24 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20161107
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 04 '18 at 07:56
Run Duration361 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 26%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-8370-$175
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.1 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
60.8% Good
Memory 77.4
1-Core 74.4
2-Core 132
58% 94.8 Pts
4-Core 240
8-Core 407
39% 324 Pts
64-Core 424
26% 424 Pts
Poor: 53%
This bench: 60.8%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$117
EVGA(3842 6262) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 397.31
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
61.7% Good
Lighting 78.3
Reflection 74.8
Parallax 65.4
64% 72.8 fps
MRender 71.1
Gravity 69.8
Splatting 70.7
58% 70.5 fps
Poor: 51%
This bench: 61.7%
Great: 60%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
74GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
128% Outstanding
Read 1,130
Write 648
Mixed 779
188% 852 MB/s
4K Read 42.1
4K Write 66.8
4K Mixed 24.1
130% 44.3 MB/s
DQ Read 146
DQ Write 93.3
DQ Mixed 58.9
60% 99.5 MB/s
Poor: 142%
This bench: 128%
Great: 236%
Hitachi HUA722020ALA331 2TB
909GB free
Firmware: JKAOA3NH Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
53.9% Above average
Read 103
Write 85.3
Mixed 89
70% 92.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.25
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.4
73% 0.55 MB/s
Poor: 36%
This bench: 53.9%
Great: 68%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
874GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
111% Outstanding
Read 212
Write 174
Mixed 169
139% 185 MB/s
4K Read 0.96
4K Write 2.74
4K Mixed 0.18
111% 1.29 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 111%
Great: 109%
Hitachi HTS541616J9SA00 160GB-$82
134GB free
Firmware: SB4IC7VP Max speed: SATA 1.0 150 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
25.9% Poor
Read 46
Write 44.1
Mixed 44.6
34% 44.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.45
4K Write 1.15
4K Mixed 0.26
69% 0.62 MB/s
Poor: 5%
This bench: 25.9%
Great: 25%
WDC WD25 00BEVS-75UST0 250GB
211GB free, PID 1561
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
21.8% Poor
Read 42.6
Write 46.7
Mixed 47
60% 45.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.41
4K Write 1.72
4K Mixed 0.27
69% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 21.8%
Great: 22%
Seagate FreeAgentDesktop 320GB
60GB free, PID 3000
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 11% Great: 17%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1600C9D3/4GX KHX1600C10D3/8GX KHX1600C10D3/8GX 9905403-447.A00LF 24GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 8192, 8192, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
42.4% Average
MC Read 16.1
MC Write 14.5
MC Mixed 14.7
43% 15.1 GB/s
SC Read 9.3
SC Write 8.7
SC Mixed 12.5
29% 10.2 GB/s
Latency 85.5
47% 85.5 ns

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 970 PRO GAMING/AURA Builds (Compare 903 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 23%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Asus 970 PRO GAMING/AURA - $299

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 62% - Good Total price: $588
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