ADD TO PC
BUILD

Quanta JASPER12

Performance Results


Gaming 11% Tree trunk	Desktop 67% Battle cruiser	Workstation 11% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle typical workstation, and even moderate server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 74.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	2.06% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	94.1% 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.
Memory	64GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 64GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

System	Quanta JASPER12 (all builds)
Motherboard	Quanta S2ML
Memory	61.9 GB free of 64 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display	Цвета: 1600 x 900 - 32 Bit, Цвета: 1600 x 900 - 32 Bit
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20180719
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Jul 09 '20 at 23:31
Run Duration	182 Seconds
Run User	RUS-User
Background CPU	1%

PC Performing as expected (57^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
1st CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2689 0 461 User benchmarks, average bench 66% SOCKET 0, 2 CPU, 16 cores, 32 threads Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (97^th percentile)	74.9% Very good	Memory 83.7 1-Core 93.3 2-Core 167 68% 115 Pts	4-Core 356 8-Core 684 62% 520 Pts	64-Core 1,776 110% 1,776 Pts
Poor: 55% ↑ This bench: 74.9% Great: 75%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 610 62,458 User benchmarks, average bench 2% Gigabyte(1458 3611) 1GB CLim: 810 MHz, MLim: 333 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35 Performing as expected (55^th percentile)	2.06% Terrible	Lighting 2.53 Reflection 3.04 Parallax 1.94 2% 2.5 fps	MRender 3.05 Gravity 2.37 Splatting 2.26 2% 2.56 fps
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 2.06% Great: 2%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 250GB-$52 296,814 User benchmarks, average bench 104% 208GB free (System drive) Firmware: RVT04B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 452 445 418 347 362 385 MB/s Performing below expectations (31^st percentile)	94.1% Outstanding	Read 474 Write 315 Mixed 420 SusWrite 401 90% 403 MB/s	4K Read 28.4 4K Write 46.8 4K Mixed 35.1 113% 36.8 MB/s	DQ Read 355 DQ Write 338 DQ Mixed 324 249% 339 MB/s
Poor: 75% ↑ This bench: 94.1% Great: 128%
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$24 496,077 User benchmarks, average bench 53% 313GB free Firmware: 19.01H19 SusWrite @10s intervals: 109 108 110 110 108 109 MB/s Performing above expectations (76^th percentile)	62.7% Good	Read 110 Write 102 Mixed 67 SusWrite 109 71% 96.8 MB/s	4K Read 0.6 4K Write 1.6 4K Mixed 0.9 155% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 24% ↑ This bench: 62.7% Great: 69%
Kingston DataTraveler 2.0 16GB 13,169 User benchmarks, average bench 6% 11GB free, PID 1665 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.3 2.6 2 3.4 4.6 6.5 MB/s Performing above expectations (71^st percentile)	5.79% Terrible	Read 28 Write 3.7 Mixed 8.5 SusWrite 3.6 11% 10.9 MB/s	4K Read 4 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 15% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 5.79% Great: 8%
SanDisk Extreme Go USB 3.1 64GB-$23 2,139 User benchmarks, average bench 37% 44GB free, PID 558b Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 16 16 18 16 MB/s Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete		Read 28.3 Write 1.5 SusWrite 15 15% 14.9 MB/s	4K Read 4.3 4K Write 2.1 4K Mixed 2.2 162% 2.87 MB/s
Poor: 10% Great: 64%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Samsung M393B1K70QB0-CMA 8x8GB 33 User benchmarks, average bench 102% 8 of 16 slots used 64GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz Performing below potential (9^th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP	91.9% Outstanding	MC Read 42 MC Write 35.4 MC Mixed 34 106% 37.1 GB/s	SC Read 13.2 SC Write 6.1 SC Mixed 7.5 26% 8.93 GB/s	Latency 73.9 54% 73.9 ns
Poor: 92% ↑ This bench: 91.9% Great: 112%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

The Best.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163	Nvidia RTX 4070 $539	Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $31	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback