Asus X99-DELUXE

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 21%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 82%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 20%
Surfboard
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (32nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 68 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 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 moderate workstation, and even light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 81%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics18.4% 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 Drive98.2% 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.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
MotherboardAsus X99-DELUXE  (all builds)
Memory6.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20170330
Uptime9.4 Days
Run DateJan 03 '20 at 12:04
Run Duration294 Seconds
Run User BEL-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-5960X-$400
SOCKET 2011, 1 CPU, 8 cores, 16 threads
Base clock 3 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
81% Excellent
Memory 88.7
1-Core 99
2-Core 200
75% 129 Pts
4-Core 395
8-Core 690
66% 543 Pts
64-Core 1,066
66% 1,066 Pts
Poor: 70%
This bench: 81%
Great: 94%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R9 290-$399
Asus(1043 0468) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 947 MHz, MLim: 1250 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 19.20
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
18.4% Very poor
Lighting 21
Reflection 21.8
Parallax 22.5
17% 21.8 fps
MRender 27
Gravity 21.3
Splatting 27.5
21% 25.2 fps
Poor: 41%
This bench: 18.4%
Great: 50%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB-$110
43GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 332 432 404 134 88 65 MB/s
Performing below expectations (22nd percentile)
98.2% Outstanding
Read 496
Write 474
Mixed 434
SusWrite 242
92% 412 MB/s
4K Read 36.9
4K Write 71.3
4K Mixed 47.7
155% 52 MB/s
DQ Read 379
DQ Write 300
DQ Mixed 340
254% 340 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 98.2%
Great: 133%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 3TB-$75
0GB free
Firmware: CC24
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 44.5
Write 30.5
Mixed 45
30% 40 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.6
108% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 56% Great: 113%
WD Green 3TB (2011)-$59
133GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 96 99 100 100 100 98 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
49.4% Average
Read 73
Write 66.2
Mixed 43
SusWrite 98.8
51% 70.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
146% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 49.4%
Great: 83%
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB (2013)-$49
107GB free
Firmware: CC52
SusWrite @10s intervals: 58 70 63 100 113 95 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
51.4% Above average
Read 96
Write 100
Mixed 64.7
SusWrite 83.1
63% 86.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.6
108% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 51.4%
Great: 96%
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB (2013)-$49
94GB free
Firmware: CC52
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 72 74 73 73 73 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
49.7% Average
Read 101
Write 82.8
Mixed 62.7
SusWrite 72.1
59% 79.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.6
111% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 49.7%
Great: 96%
WDC WD10 EADS-00M2B0 1TB
50GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 61 63 63 63 62 61 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
31.5% Below average
Read 80.2
Write 81.5
Mixed 60.5
SusWrite 62.4
96% 71.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.6
91% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 31.5%
Great: 32%
SAMSUNG HD154UI 1.5TB
290GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: MB/s
Performing as expected (40th percentile)
17.8% Very poor
Read 86.8
Write 89.3
Mixed 49.5
SusWrite 1.8
71% 56.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
77% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 17.8%
Great: 40%
WDC WD10 EACS-00D6B1 1TB
109GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.4 0 0 0 0.2 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
11.7% Very poor
Read 42.7
Write 48.3
Mixed 39
SusWrite 0.7
42% 32.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
84% 1 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 11.7%
Great: 40%
WDC WD10 EACS-00D6B1 1TB
77GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 57 62 63 64 62 62 MB/s
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
30.6% Below average
Read 71
Write 69.7
Mixed 52.2
SusWrite 61.7
86% 63.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.7
101% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 30.6%
Great: 40%
WDC WD10 02FAEX-00Z3A0 1TB
13GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.3 0 0 0 0.1 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
15% Very poor
Read 67
Write 67.8
Mixed 77.5
SusWrite 0.5
70% 53.2 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
86% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 15%
Great: 53%
WDC WD10 EACS-00D6B1 1TB
2GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 75.5
Write 73.8
Mixed 54.5
85% 67.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.8
108% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 12% Great: 40%
WDC WD10 EADS-00M2B0 1TB
109GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 5.6 0.2 0.2 0 0.2 0.1 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
15.7% Very poor
Read 63.3
Write 62.7
Mixed 55.8
SusWrite 1
58% 45.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.5
87% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 15.7%
Great: 32%
WDC WD10 02FAEX-00Z3A0 1TB
6GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.4 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
13.7% Very poor
Read 61
Write 60
Mixed 68.2
SusWrite 0.3
62% 47.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
78% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 13.7%
Great: 53%
WD My Passport 0741 2TB
1TB free, PID 0741
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 91 94 96 94 95 95 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
39.2% Below average
Read 96.3
Write 98
Mixed 56.2
SusWrite 94.3
116% 86.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
77% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 39.2%
Great: 44%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 2666 C15 4x4GB
4 of 8 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing below potential (3rd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
64.4% Good
MC Read 26.8
MC Write 21.3
MC Mixed 21
66% 23 GB/s
SC Read 14
SC Write 18.5
SC Mixed 18.6
49% 17 GB/s
Latency 68.8
58% 68.8 ns
Poor: 68%
This bench: 64.4%
Great: 110%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X99-DELUXE Builds (Compare 1,895 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 82%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 82%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 73%
Battleship

Motherboard: Asus X99-DELUXE - $349

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 86% - Excellent Total price: $884
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 $160Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $363
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