User System

Performance Results

Benchmarks - excluding SSD
Gaming
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 29%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 15%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (45th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 55 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 32.1%, this CPUs suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics0.7% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. Find active processes with Windows task manager (CTRL+SHIFT+ESC).
Run History
7 months ago, 7 months ago.
SystemCCE Capella & IbexPeak-M Chipset
MotherboardCCE Calpella CRB
Memory1.2 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20100810
Uptime2.9 Days
Run DateMar 21 '17 at 01:02
Run Duration104 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU 24%

 PC Performing as expected (45th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Single core Quad core Multi core
Intel Core i5 M 450
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 2.6 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
32.1% Below average
SC Int 59.9
SC Float 28.1
SC Mixed 58.2
39% 48.7 Pts
QC Int 105
QC Float 131
QC Mixed 145
29% 127 Pts
MC Int 126
MC Float 139
MC Mixed 143
20% 136 Pts
Poor: 16%
This bench: 32.1%
Great: 36%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
Intel HD Graphics (Arrandale 0.667/0.766 GHz)
Intel(8086 0046) 1.8GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 8.15.10.2900
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
0.7% Terrible
Lighting 1.8
Reflection 2
Parallax 2
1% 1.93 fps
MRender 2
Gravity 1.5
Splatting 2.4
1% 1.97 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 0.7%
Great: 1%
Drive Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Samsung HM641JI 640GB-$40
311GB free
Firmware: 2AJ10001 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
SYSTEM NCQ 5400 RPM 4KALIGNED S.M.A.R.T
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
34.8% Below average
Read 61.2
Write 60.1
Mixed 30.9
38% 50.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.1
4K Write 0.53
4K Mixed 0.09
24% 0.24 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 34.8%
Great: 50%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown DEDDDDDDEEDDDDDDDD 1x4GB
1 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM DDR3 1600 MHz
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
13.3% Very poor
MC Read 4.3
MC Write 4.8
MC Mixed 2.9
11% 4 GB/s
SC Read 3.7
SC Write 3.8
SC Mixed 2.9
10% 3.47 GB/s
Latency 116
35% 116 ns
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i7-7700K $298Nvidia GTX 1070 $395Samsung 850 Evo 250GB $95
AMD Ryzen 7 1700 $280AMD RX 480 $491Samsung 850 Pro 256GB $121
Intel Core i5-7600K $220Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB $260Samsung 850 Evo 500GB $159
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $42Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $163SanDisk Extreme 64GB $33
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $77G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $785SanDisk Extreme 32GB $22
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $60HyperX Fury DDR4 2133 C14 2x8GB $157SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $12
Today's hottest deals
User Guide  •  About  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback