Intel X79 INTEL(INTEL Xeon E5/Core i7 DMI2 - C600/C200 Cipset

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 28%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 64%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 27%
Raft
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (36th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 64 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. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 62.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics45.1% 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)
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.
Run History
MotherboardIntel X79 INTEL(INTEL Xeon E5/Core i7 DMI2 - C600/C200 Cipset  (all builds)
Memory11.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1600 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20170626
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 18 '22 at 04:12
Run Duration128 Seconds
Run User PHL-User
Background CPU6%
Watch Gameplay: 570 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (36th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon E5-4650 v2
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 10 cores, 20 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
62.3% Good
Memory 74.7
1-Core 70.1
2-Core 132
56% 92.4 Pts
4-Core 269
8-Core 563
49% 416 Pts
64-Core 873
54% 873 Pts
Poor: 62%
This bench: 62.3%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 570-$130
Gigabyte(1458 2312) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1420 MHz, MLim: 2200 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 22.10.3
Performing below potential (56th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
45.1% Average
Lighting 53.5
Reflection 66.6
Parallax 75.4
44% 65.2 fps
MRender 70.3
Gravity 60.8
Splatting 49.5
48% 60.2 fps
Poor: 37%
This bench: 45.1%
Great: 49%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$23
36GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 05.00E.6
Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete
Read 150
107% 150 MB/s
4K Read 321
4K Write 0.5
4K Mixed 0.8
13,469% 107 MB/s
Poor: 24% Great: 69%
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016)-$37
52GB free
Firmware: CC43
SusWrite @10s intervals: 133 134 150 150 144 133 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
98.6% Outstanding
Read 204
Write 196
Mixed 77.8
SusWrite 141
113% 154 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.9
163% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 98.6%
Great: 113%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M393B1G70QH0- 2x8GB
2 of 8 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
42% Average
MC Read 16.4
MC Write 14.4
MC Mixed 14.2
43% 15 GB/s
SC Read 11.9
SC Write 9.6
SC Mixed 9.5
30% 10.3 GB/s
Latency 91
44% 91 ns
Poor: 40%
This bench: 42%
Great: 85%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X79 INTEL(INTEL Xeon E5/Core i7 DMI2 - C600/C200 Cipset Builds (Compare 50 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 24%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 76%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 20%
Surfboard

Motherboard: Intel X79 INTEL(INTEL Xeon E5/Core i7 DMI2 - C600/C200 Cipset

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 118% - Outstanding Total price: $59
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