Asrock H81M-HDS

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 29%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 82%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 23%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 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. 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 68.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics35.9% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive95.5% 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.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (40%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
MotherboardAsrock H81M-HDS  (all builds)
Memory4.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150109
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 20 '18 at 22:09
Run Duration159 Seconds
Run User NZL-User
Background CPU 40%

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4790-$135
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 2.8 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
68.5% Good
Memory 91.5
1-Core 109
2-Core 224
80% 141 Pts
4-Core 252
8-Core 330
37% 291 Pts
64-Core 323
20% 323 Pts
Poor: 58%
This bench: 68.5%
Great: 80%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R9 380-$200
CLim: 985 MHz, MLim: 1450 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 18.5.1
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
35.9% Below average
Lighting 45.1
Reflection 51.3
Parallax 61.1
37% 52.5 fps
MRender 50.8
Gravity 40.5
Splatting 36.8
34% 42.7 fps
Poor: 31%
This bench: 35.9%
Great: 35%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX300 525GB-$150
215GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M0CR060
SusWrite @10s intervals: 428 454 324 248 248 229 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
95.5% Outstanding
Read 427
Write 435
Mixed 357
SusWrite 322
87% 385 MB/s
4K Read 23.2
4K Write 105
4K Mixed 39.8
142% 55.9 MB/s
DQ Read 348
DQ Write 326
DQ Mixed 320
245% 331 MB/s
Poor: 65%
This bench: 95.5%
Great: 99%
WDC WD50 00AACS-00G8B1 500GB
102GB free, PID 2773
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 84 85 85 86 86 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
36.9% Below average
Read 87.5
Write 86.2
Mixed 57.2
SusWrite 84.9
106% 78.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.7
87% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 19%
This bench: 36.9%
Great: 38%
Kingston SUV300S37/240GB 240GB
173GB free, PID 2773
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 83 84 85 85 86 86 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
133% Outstanding
Read 232
Write 218
Mixed 180
SusWrite 84.8
232% 179 MB/s
4K Read 7.8
4K Write 25.6
4K Mixed 7.9
1,168% 13.8 MB/s
DQ Read 12.9
DQ Write 37.5
DQ Mixed 9.6
1,650% 20 MB/s
Poor: 66%
This bench: 133%
Great: 164%
WD Elements 1TB
215GB free, PID 1042
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 30 28 30 29 30 29 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
15.1% Very poor
Read 33.8
Write 26
Mixed 20
SusWrite 29.4
36% 27.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.5
59% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 15.1%
Great: 43%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown F3-14900CL9-4GBXL 1313 SRT4G88U1-P9Z 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
58.1% Above average
MC Read 21.3
MC Write 21.1
MC Mixed 17.3
57% 19.9 GB/s
SC Read 15.4
SC Write 21.1
SC Mixed 17.7
52% 18.1 GB/s
Latency 64.9
62% 64.9 ns
Poor: 56%
This bench: 58.1%
Great: 58%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical H81M-HDS Builds (Compare 1,146 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 66%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Asrock H81M-HDS - $147

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 74% - Very good Total price: $325
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $164Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $149
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $245Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $359
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback