Today's hottest deals

Asus P8P67 PRO REV 3.1

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 80.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Boot Drive75.3% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system 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 15 years and 2 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardAsus P8P67 PRO REV 3.1  (all builds)
Memory20.6 GB free of 32 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors, 2050 x 1280 - 32 Bit colors, 1280 x 800 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20121101
Uptime0.9 Days
Run DateApr 06 '18 at 01:03
Run Duration608 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 12%

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-2500K-$246
LGA1155, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
80.2% Excellent
Memory 97.4
1-Core 97
2-Core 193
76% 129 Pts
4-Core 364
8-Core 374
49% 369 Pts
64-Core 376
23% 376 Pts
Poor: 44%
This bench: 80.2%
Great: 79%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB-$175
76GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXM0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
75.3% Very good
Read 498
Write 170
Mixed 192
62% 287 MB/s
4K Read 30.6
4K Write 70
4K Mixed 24.7
115% 41.8 MB/s
DQ Read 292
DQ Write 186
DQ Mixed 70.4
98% 183 MB/s
Poor: 68%
This bench: 75.3%
Great: 116%
Intel X25-M 80GB
82GB free
Firmware: 2CV1 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
39.9% Below average
Read 256
Write 84.4
Mixed 127
34% 156 MB/s
4K Read 19.9
4K Write 55.8
4K Mixed 6.89
68% 27.5 MB/s
DQ Read 159
DQ Write 78.2
DQ Mixed 44.3
53% 93.7 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 39.9%
Great: 44%
OCZ Vertex 450 128GB-$80
41GB free
Firmware: 2.0 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
61.9% Good
Read 347
Write 236
Mixed 279
64% 287 MB/s
4K Read 17.3
4K Write 60.2
4K Mixed 24.4
89% 34 MB/s
DQ Read 179
DQ Write 95.3
DQ Mixed 85.2
77% 120 MB/s
Poor: 57%
This bench: 61.9%
Great: 90%
WD Green 6TB (2014)-$209
3.5TB free
Firmware: 01.0 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)
80.5% Excellent
Read 151
Write 129
Mixed 137
105% 139 MB/s
4K Read 0.38
4K Write 1.95
4K Mixed 0.25
80% 0.86 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 80.5%
Great: 98%
Seagate Desktop HDD 6TB (2014)-$220
1.5TB free
Firmware: CC46 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing below expectations (37th percentile)
84.9% Excellent
Read 162
Write 134
Mixed 131
107% 142 MB/s
4K Read 0.52
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.33
99% 1.02 MB/s
Poor: 48%
This bench: 84.9%
Great: 118%
Seagate Desktop HDD 6TB (2014)-$220
1.5TB free
Firmware: CC45 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
82.4% Excellent
Read 152
Write 135
Mixed 125
103% 137 MB/s
4K Read 0.55
4K Write 2.16
4K Mixed 0.33
100% 1.01 MB/s
Poor: 48%
This bench: 82.4%
Great: 118%
WD Black 2.5" 500GB (2010)-$80
227GB free
Firmware: 01.0 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
47.6% Average
Read 82.1
Write 83.4
Mixed 82.5
62% 82.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.73
4K Write 2.03
4K Mixed 0.52
126% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 47.6%
Great: 58%
ORICO H/ W LARGE 6.5TB
5TB free, PID 0539
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
48.6% Average
Read 106
Write 120
Mixed 98.4
141% 108 MB/s
4K Read 0.59
4K Write 2.26
4K Mixed 0.49
96% 1.11 MB/s
ASMT 2115 4TB
3TB free, PID 55aa
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
24.9% Poor
Read 29
Write 25
Mixed 25.4
34% 26.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.84
4K Write 4.9
4K Mixed 0.46
185% 2.07 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 24.9%
Great: 95%
JMicron Generic DISK04 3TB
1.5TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
46.1% Average
Read 113
Write 120
Mixed 36.6
109% 90 MB/s
4K Read 0.92
4K Write 1.05
4K Mixed 0.28
49% 0.75 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 46.1%
Great: 63%
JMicron Generic DISK00 640GB
596GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
44.2% Average
Read 105
Write 104
Mixed 15.5
87% 74.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.72
4K Write 1.99
4K Mixed 0.38
83% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 44.2%
Great: 44%
JMicron Generic DISK01 320GB
298GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
30.6% Below average
Read 72.8
Write 73.5
Mixed 30.5
72% 58.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.66
4K Write 1.26
4K Mixed 0.4
59% 0.77 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 30.6%
Great: 31%
JMicron Generic DISK02 320GB
298GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
30.7% Below average
Read 71.3
Write 74
Mixed 13.6
63% 53 MB/s
4K Read 0.68
4K Write 1.33
4K Mixed 0.4
61% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 30.7%
Great: 31%
JMicron Generic DISK03 320GB
298GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
31.1% Below average
Read 63.9
Write 75.4
Mixed 16.5
63% 51.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.66
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.32
71% 0.89 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 31.1%
Great: 33%
Samsung Flash Drive 128GB
119GB free, PID 1000
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
40.3% Average
Read 131
Write 71.9
Mixed 40.1
89% 81.1 MB/s
4K Read 4.38
4K Write 1.49
4K Mixed 1.05
103% 2.31 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 40.3%
Great: 103%
Seagate Backup+ RD 1TB
78GB free, PID ab21
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
15.1% Very poor
Read 28.8
Write 27.9
Mixed 26.4
35% 27.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.51
4K Write 1.53
4K Mixed 0.35
66% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 15.1%
Great: 42%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL RipjawsX DDR3 2133 C9 4x8GB
4 of 4 slots used
32GB DIMM DDR3 2133 MHz
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
75.8% Very good
MC Read 26.1
MC Write 29.1
MC Mixed 25.3
77% 26.8 GB/s
SC Read 19.8
SC Write 18.5
SC Mixed 19.7
55% 19.3 GB/s
Latency 48.6
82% 48.6 ns
Poor: 46%
This bench: 75.8%
Great: 122%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical P8P67 PRO REV 3.1 Builds (Compare 477 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 42%
Speed boat
Desktop
Desktop 78%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 34%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Asus P8P67 PRO REV 3.1

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $516
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 $155Nvidia RTX 4060 $299WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $375WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i5-13600K $230Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial 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