How to Properly Benchmark Your PC
To casual observers, PC builders who fixate on benchmarks are geeks unable to see the forest from the trees. “Why,” they ask, “can’t you just enjoy your new computer and let it be?” Our answer: the difference between a person who cares about benchmarking and one who doesn’t is how much that person values their free time.
Case in point, we recently did something as simple as download two large zip files at the end of the work day. Instead of strolling out at 6 p.m., we ended up waiting 15 minutes for the files to be decompressed on our work-issued PC. To care about benchmark is to care about performance. And to care about performance is to care about having more free time on your hand.

But you shouldn’t just download any benchmarking tool to run--there’s a right and wrong way to benchmark your machine if you want to get meaningful results. We’ll teach you proper benchmarking techniques and how to interpret your results. Read on to learn how to benchmark the Maximum PC way.
Preflight your PC
Getting repeatable, reliable benchmark results isn’t just about picking the right benchmark, it’s also about configuring your PC properly too. Here are some basic tips every armchair benchmarker should perform before running his or her first benchmark run:
Turn off any screen saver: Even though the screen saver is supposed to stay inactive during use, you should always completely disable the screensaver.
Turn off power saving modes: Unless you’re interested in measuring power consumption of the machine using a Watt meter, all benchmark runs should be conducted with the machine set to high performance mode in the OS.
Disconnect from Internet: Remove any Ethernet cable or disconnect any Wi-Fi connection unless it’s needed for your benchmarking run.
Disable antivirus apps: Unless you want to see the impact of having AV overhead on a machine, disable any antivirus tools for your benchmarking run.
Turn off autoupdate: Windows update should be switched off to prevent it from download a massive huge patch (You did disconnect the network connection right?) or to prevent it from eating CPU cycles looking for one. Other apps that autoupdate should also be turned off as well.
Defrag your hard drive: If the drive is heavily fragmented, we recommend that you invoke a defrag of the disk. Those with SSD’s, obviously, need not perform this step.
Disable System Restore: Turning off System Restore will prevent Windows from creating those restore points.
Reboot: Self explanatory.
Wait for the machine to fully boot: As we all know, it takes a minute or a few minutes for the OS to load all of the files it needs – even after you’re presented with the desktop. Wait a few minutes until disk activity has subsided.
Run ProcessIdleTasks: Spawn a “DOS box” by typing run CMD and type: “Rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks” This will order Windows to perform all of the tasks it would normally do when the system is idle.
Repeat your benchmark: We recommend that you run your benchmark at least three times to five times and to take the median score.
The Three ‘Rs of benchmarking
Real-world
Real-world benchmark wasn’t always the en vogue. Years ago, the enthusiast community mostly relied on synthetic benchmarks (some prefer the term ‘artificial benchmarks’). That trend broke when people realized that vendors were skewing their drivers to increase performance in the synthetic tests, which actually hurt real-world gaming performance. This move pushed benchmarkers toward real-world apps and games with the thought that performance enhancements will deliver real benefit.
Relevance
Just like you wouldn’t bring a Klingon d’k tahg to a phaser fight, you shouldn’t use a CPU benchmark to test a hard drive. As easy as it would be to understand, you wouldn’t believe how many times we see people cite a benchmark intended as a GPU test to illustrate CPU performance. For every benchmark you run, you’ll want to understand what component it’s most influenced by: CPU, GPU, RAM or HDD.
Repeatability
So you’ve found a benchmark actually works for your needs. Great! But is it repeatable? Can you run it five times on the same machine and have it produce the same results within a tolerable level of variance of, say, three percent?
Synthetic vs. Real World
As we mentioned, real-world applications have been established as the preferred benchmarking tools for quite some time, but that doesn’t mean synthetic benchmarks are irrelevant. In fact, synthetic benchmarks can be quite useful in evaluating a focused set of components such as RAM, the CPU or hard drive. Some synthetic tests can even be considered partially real-world.
The classic complaint against synthetic tests is that they used tests or engines that were optimized solely for the benefit of the benchmark results. But many synthetic tests today are based on real-world engines or use algorithms developed from popular applications. PC Mark’s hard drive tests, for example, uses traces of what apps or the OS does. It then runs these traces against the hard drive to measure hard drive performance.
You can see how the line between synthetic and real-world benchmarks can get easily blurred today. In some cases, actually finding real-world benchmarks that stress a particular component is difficult. RAM is probably one of the best examples of that. It’s actually very difficult to find real-world benchmarks that will exploit either the low latency or high bandwidth features of modern RAM. It’s only through synthetic benchmarks that you can actually see that you’re benefiting from any additional bandwidth at all. Hard drive features is also fairly difficult to discern without the use of at least some synthetic benchmarks.
Next: Let's get on to the actual benchmarking tools!
![]()
Philips
October 25, 2011 at 5:12am
Thank you for the casualty of providing all of these information. This is a lot actually. These are very helpful.
![]()
Azrael808
February 16, 2011 at 7:13am
This is a great article; I'm currently using this as a basis to benchmark my home machine so I can see how it stacks up against other rigs, but mainly so I can see how much an upgrade improves the overall system. Some useful comments too! :)
I did have one question: when taking an average of the benchmark runs, why do you use the median, and not the mean score? Is it simply because a mean score will most likely produce a result that wasn't actually obtained by a run of a utility?
![]()
jlfrank83
January 27, 2010 at 7:12am
The article states that real-world performance is what you are shooting for when you run your benchmarks, Yet they also want you to disable antivirus, disconnect from your network, manually launch idle process, etc, before benchmarking. Isn't creating a "virtual clean room" tainting your results as much as a synthetic benchmark application or biased video driver would? I don't go through all these preflight steps before playing a game or running Photoshop, so why would I do them before benchmarking and expect realistic, real-world results?
![]()
mrvander
January 27, 2010 at 7:40am
... one has to eliminate as many variables as possible in order to produce repeatable results. This is a basic of any scientific testing method - whether it be life sciences or computer sciences. Once you can produce a repeatable result - you have established a control (or a baseline.) THEN add in the other variables to determine the effect it has, preferably one at a time. Turn on your virus scanner. Repeat the testing and compare it to your control. Analyze the data. Add in another variable, say your network. Repeat and rinse.
This is also why they don't recommend using FRAPS and just running through a level of your favorite game. It's not accurately reproducable. It can give you a general idea over many runs, but it can vary wildly.
Of course you can customize this to your heart's content and maybe just a general idea is all you need. The article does mention the idea of "play more games" as opposed to just endlessly benchmarking one's PC and analyzing every last little detail to get that extra tenth of a framerate.
![]()
nekollx
January 26, 2010 at 5:06pm
Daz 3d is good real world test since the preview/maniptlation window is GPU bound but renders are CPU bound
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
![]()
Modred189
January 26, 2010 at 4:55pm
No furmark?
It's one of the most stressing GPU-only benches I know of.
And I must say, real-world benchmarking your graphics card is the best way to go. Pick a game or two you know well (HL2 works well), and play through a level a few times, measuring your fps with fraps. Throw the data into excel and average the columns. You can even make nice graphs from multiple data sets and compare them to show what scenes your PC is best at and which it has issues with.
![]()
jlfrank83
January 27, 2010 at 7:19am
Your columns are going to be radically different if you are controlling the action yourself. It's better to use a game that has in-game, real time rendered cutscenes, like Mass Effect or Assassin's Creed. If you use a playable section of a game, your graphics card will be rendering differently every time, since each playthrough is going to vary in length, FOV, etc.
![]()
Modred189
January 27, 2010 at 4:54pm
I have done this a few times before, and if you play through the level a few times first, you can get it relatively reproducible. The problem with in-game benchmarks is that they disable a lot of things like AI, which is a big CPU drain.
![]()
bikerbub
January 27, 2010 at 9:39am
GTA IV also has a benchmark option. it's not very long, but it is an actively rendered test with AI and lots of gunfire. also somewhat humorous, as you are a clown (if i remember correctly) riding on a moped, through the streets, weaving in between the Liberty City skyscrapers.














