QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (26th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 74 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
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 59.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics43.5% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory46.8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 46.8GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 8.1 is a recent version of Windows, it's worth upgrading to Windows 10 which has had several improvements made to the user interface including a better homescreen.
Run History
SystemQEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory43.9 GB free of 46.7773 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 8.1
BIOS Date20150206
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 05 '20 at 22:08
Run Duration152 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU7%

 PC Performing below expectations (26th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
1st CPU: Intel Xeon X5690
CPU 0, 2 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 2.95 GHz, turbo 2.95 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
59.9% Above average
Memory 73.7
1-Core 68.4
2-Core 121
54% 87.6 Pts
4-Core 249
8-Core 419
41% 334 Pts
64-Core 602
37% 602 Pts
Poor: 48%
This bench: 59.9%
Great: 66%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 970-$200
Asus(1043 851A) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1475 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 441.66
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
43.5% Average
Lighting 55.2
Reflection 55.3
Parallax 48.5
45% 53 fps
MRender 55.4
Gravity 50.5
Splatting 45.3
41% 50.4 fps
Poor: 43%
This bench: 43.5%
Great: 54%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Red Hat VirtIO 644GB
265GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 348 363 373 375 376 369 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 28% Great: 85%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
QEMU 46GB
0, 0, 0 MHz
16384, 16384, 15132 MB
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
21.1% Poor
MC Read 6.8
MC Write 6.1
MC Mixed 6.3
18% 6.4 GB/s
SC Read 8.1
SC Write 6
SC Mixed 7.4
20% 7.17 GB/s
Latency 93
43% 93 ns
Poor: 21%
This bench: 21.1%
Great: 130%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) Builds (Compare 611 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 83%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 74%
Battleship

System: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $485
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 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 $174Nvidia 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