Asrock X99M Killer/3.1

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 97%
Nuclear submarine
Desktop
Desktop 89%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 88%
Aircraft carrier
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 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 85.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics112% 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.
Boot Drive105% 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.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
MotherboardAsrock X99M Killer/3.1  (all builds)
Memory25.9 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20180406
Uptime1 Days
Run DateMay 12 '20 at 01:26
Run Duration301 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU8%
Watch Gameplay: 2070S + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-6850K-$115
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
85.3% Excellent
Memory 81.8
1-Core 118
2-Core 232
80% 144 Pts
4-Core 477
8-Core 749
76% 613 Pts
64-Core 922
57% 922 Pts
Poor: 74%
This bench: 85.3%
Great: 93%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2070S (Super)-$210
Nvidia(10DE 139E) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2100 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 8GB, Driver: 445.87
Performing below potential (32nd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
112% Outstanding
Lighting 143
Reflection 149
Parallax 157
117% 150 fps
MRender 188
Gravity 135
Splatting 107
113% 143 fps
Poor: 105%
This bench: 112%
Great: 123%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$80
310GB free
Firmware: RVT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 474 465 462 456 430 346 MB/s
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
112% Outstanding
Read 480
Write 455
Mixed 431
SusWrite 439
102% 451 MB/s
4K Read 39.4
4K Write 86.9
4K Mixed 52.8
173% 59.7 MB/s
DQ Read 248
DQ Write 298
DQ Mixed 239
190% 262 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 112%
Great: 129%
Samsung 860 Evo 1TB-$137
371GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 464 450 430 370 387 353 MB/s
Performing below expectations (31st percentile)
105% Outstanding
Read 482
Write 454
Mixed 431
SusWrite 409
100% 444 MB/s
4K Read 35.8
4K Write 85.7
4K Mixed 48
161% 56.5 MB/s
DQ Read 247
DQ Write 242
DQ Mixed 49
91% 179 MB/s
Poor: 81%
This bench: 105%
Great: 133%
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
162GB free
Firmware: 3B7Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1318 308 307 308 308 307 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
231% Outstanding
Read 1,944
Write 1,508
Mixed 704
SusWrite 476
256% 1,158 MB/s
4K Read 44.2
4K Write 205
4K Mixed 56.5
248% 102 MB/s
DQ Read 1,058
DQ Write 1,193
DQ Mixed 719
654% 990 MB/s
Poor: 142%
This bench: 231%
Great: 236%
WD easystore 25FB 10TB
5.5TB free, PID 25fb
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 14 13 13 13 13 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
20.9% Poor
Read 30.7
Write 25.3
Mixed 25.8
SusWrite 13.4
31% 23.8 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 4.3
4K Mixed 1
186% 2.27 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 20.9%
Great: 99%
HITACHI HUS724040ALE640 4TB
268GB free, PID 0578
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 14 14 14 14 14 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
13.8% Very poor
Read 31
Write 26
Mixed 26.3
SusWrite 13.7
32% 24.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
98% 1.2 MB/s
WDC WD20 EZRZ-00Z5HB0 2TB
1TB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 14 14 13 14 14 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
14.7% Very poor
Read 30.8
Write 24.7
Mixed 24.7
SusWrite 13.6
30% 23.4 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.9
112% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 14.7%
Great: 54%
WDC WD20 EZRZ-00Z5HB0 2TB
431GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 19 19 19 20 19 20 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
15.9% Very poor
Read 32.5
Write 26
Mixed 23.3
SusWrite 19.4
33% 25.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.9
109% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 15.9%
Great: 54%
WDC WD20 EZRZ-00Z5HB0 2TB
439GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 19 19 19 19 19 20 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
15.6% Very poor
Read 32.3
Write 26.3
Mixed 25.8
SusWrite 19.3
34% 25.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.9
105% 1.3 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 15.6%
Great: 54%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x16GB-$103
2 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing below potential (14th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
67% Good
MC Read 27.3
MC Write 24.2
MC Mixed 22
70% 24.5 GB/s
SC Read 12.8
SC Write 19.4
SC Mixed 18
48% 16.7 GB/s
Latency 77.3
52% 77.3 ns
Poor: 59%
This bench: 67%
Great: 114%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical X99M Killer/3.1 Builds (Compare 72 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 82%
Aircraft carrier
Desktop
Desktop 86%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 72%
Battleship

Motherboard: Asrock X99M Killer/3.1

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 108% - Outstanding Total price: $563
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