Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 40%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 34%
Sail boat
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 66.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics56.1% 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)
Boot Drive96.7% 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 VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
Sub-optimal background CPU (11%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
MotherboardGigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3  (all builds)
Memory9.8 GB free of 16 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display3840 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130205
Uptime2.7 Days
Run DateJan 08 '21 at 12:20
Run Duration214 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 11%
Watch Gameplay: 1060-6GB + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
AMD FX-8350-$130
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 4.05 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
66.9% Good
Memory 85.4
1-Core 76.6
2-Core 140
63% 100 Pts
4-Core 262
8-Core 481
46% 371 Pts
64-Core 468
31% 468 Pts
Poor: 55%
This bench: 66.9%
Great: 72%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB-$290
Device(0000 0000) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1949 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 461.09
Performing below potential (50th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
56.1% Above average
Lighting 69.1
Reflection 74.6
Parallax 68.5
56% 70.7 fps
MRender 66.2
Gravity 70.4
Splatting 68.1
56% 68.2 fps
Poor: 52%
This bench: 56.1%
Great: 61%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 1TB-$110
685GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 281 325 394 360 366 383 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
96.7% Outstanding
Read 427
Write 417
Mixed 430
SusWrite 352
92% 407 MB/s
4K Read 34.3
4K Write 74.4
4K Mixed 47
152% 51.9 MB/s
DQ Read 234
DQ Write 242
DQ Mixed 95.5
111% 190 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 96.7%
Great: 134%
Toshiba Q300 240GB-$85
46GB free
Firmware: SAFM12.3
SusWrite @10s intervals: 116 107 104 124 112 109 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
41.5% Average
Read 270
Write 341
Mixed 213
SusWrite 112
53% 234 MB/s
4K Read 15.7
4K Write 44.4
4K Mixed 18.2
71% 26.1 MB/s
DQ Read 17.6
DQ Write 81.5
DQ Mixed 17
23% 38.7 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 41.5%
Great: 93%
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$75
314GB free
Firmware: RVT04B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 243 303 308 302 288 272 MB/s
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
94.3% Outstanding
Read 472
Write 443
Mixed 423
SusWrite 286
91% 406 MB/s
4K Read 35.8
4K Write 73.4
4K Mixed 46.6
153% 51.9 MB/s
DQ Read 211
DQ Write 244
DQ Mixed 12.2
69% 156 MB/s
Poor: 76%
This bench: 94.3%
Great: 130%
Toshiba DT01ABA200 2TB
861GB free
Firmware: MZ4OABB0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 116 107 104 124 111 110 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
44.6% Average
Read 43.2
Write 65
Mixed 18.8
SusWrite 112
43% 59.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.4
93% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 45%
This bench: 44.6%
Great: 86%
WD Green 1TB (2010)-$152
587GB free
Firmware: 51.0AB51
SusWrite @10s intervals: 61 63 63 62 63 62 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
33.3% Below average
Read 53.3
Write 56
Mixed 44
SusWrite 62.5
40% 54 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.6
126% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 33.3%
Great: 60%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
G.SKILL F3 DDR3 1600 C9 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 800 MHz clocked @ 667 MHz
Performing below potential (30th percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
43.6% Average
MC Read 16.9
MC Write 14.6
MC Mixed 14.8
44% 15.4 GB/s
SC Read 9.3
SC Write 8.5
SC Mixed 11.8
28% 9.87 GB/s
Latency 71.7
56% 71.7 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 43.6%
Great: 98%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical GA-990FXA-UD3 Builds (Compare 6,435 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 71%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 32%
Sail boat

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 - $100

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 60% - Good Total price: $525
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-11400F $220Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-11600K $259Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-10700K $300Nvidia RTX 3080 $700Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $79SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $94SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $649SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback