Asrock Z370 Extreme4

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 116%
UFO
Desktop
Desktop 91%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 110%
UFO
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 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 89.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics132% is an outstanding 3D score, it's the bee's knees. This GPU can handle almost 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (13%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsrock Z370 Extreme4  (all builds)
Memory23.7 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20171124
Uptime0.3 Days
Run DateJan 10 '21 at 18:55
Run Duration167 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 13%

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-8700K-$177
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.7 GHz, turbo 4.35 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
89.2% Excellent
Memory 82.9
1-Core 142
2-Core 277
91% 167 Pts
4-Core 513
8-Core 845
83% 679 Pts
64-Core 1117
69% 1117 Pts
Poor: 76%
This bench: 89.2%
Great: 100%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2080S (Super)-$466
Asus(1043 876B) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2145 MHz, MLim: 3875 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 461.09
Performing below potential (61st percentile) - GPU OC Guide
132% Outstanding
Lighting 177
Reflection 174
Parallax 179
144% 176 fps
MRender 198
Gravity 164
Splatting 135
132% 166 fps
Poor: 116%
This bench: 132%
Great: 139%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
39GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 3B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,917
Write 1,058
Mixed 430
247% 1,135 MB/s
4K Read 39.8
4K Write 62.8
4K Mixed 40.9
146% 47.8 MB/s
DQ Read 1,156
DQ Write 115
DQ Mixed 241
276% 504 MB/s
Poor: 142% Great: 236%
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
89GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 423 401 303 274 234 209 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
97.8% Outstanding
Read 478
Write 456
Mixed 389
SusWrite 308
92% 407 MB/s
4K Read 42.9
4K Write 57.7
4K Mixed 47.7
157% 49.4 MB/s
DQ Read 384
DQ Write 109
DQ Mixed 210
164% 234 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 97.8%
Great: 134%
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
198GB free
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 344 320 320 314 320 311 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
86.9% Excellent
Read 365
Write 375
Mixed 325
SusWrite 322
78% 347 MB/s
4K Read 41.4
4K Write 52.2
4K Mixed 41.2
143% 44.9 MB/s
DQ Read 280
DQ Write 93.9
DQ Mixed 189
139% 188 MB/s
Poor: 72%
This bench: 86.9%
Great: 124%
Seagate FireCuda SSHD 2TB (2016)-$81
1.5TB free
Firmware: CC41
SusWrite @10s intervals: 171 180 179 176 180 175 MB/s
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
94.1% Outstanding
Read 150
Write 121
Mixed 28.1
SusWrite 177
86% 119 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 5.1
4K Mixed 1.9
351% 2.7 MB/s
Poor: 53%
This bench: 94.1%
Great: 110%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown F4-3200C16-8GTZR 04CD F4-3200C14-8GTZR 04CD F4-3200C16-8GTZR 04CD F4-3200C14-8GTZR 32GB
2133, 2133, 2133, 2133 MHz
8192, 8192, 8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (9th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
65.7% Good
MC Read 23.8
MC Write 25.6
MC Mixed 20.4
66% 23.3 GB/s
SC Read 15.4
SC Write 22.8
SC Mixed 20.5
56% 19.6 GB/s
Latency 75.2
53% 75.2 ns
Poor: 66%
This bench: 65.7%
Great: 104%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Z370 Extreme4 Builds (Compare 3,427 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 94%
Nuclear submarine
Desktop
Desktop 96%
Nuclear submarine
Workstation
Workstation 86%
Aircraft carrier

Motherboard: Asrock Z370 Extreme4 - $250

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 116% - Outstanding Total price: $765
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 $160
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 $350
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