User System

Performance Results


Gaming 5% Tree trunk	Desktop 38% Jet ski	Workstation 4% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (33rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 67 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.
Processor	With 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 37.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics	4.34% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	26.8% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory	8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS Version	Although Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 8 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.

Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

System	. .
Motherboard	http://www.abit.com.tw/ IP35 Pro(Intel P35-ICH9R)
Memory	1 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 7
BIOS Date	20080526
Uptime	0.6 Days
Run Date	Mar 23 '17 at 19:05
Run Duration	687 Seconds
Run User	USA-User
Background CPU	100%

PC Performing below expectations (33^rd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core2 Duo E6850-$57 4,150 User benchmarks, average bench 40% Socket 775, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads Base clock 3.4 GHz Performing below expectations (27^th percentile)	37.3% Below average	Memory 66.6 1-Core 35.1 2-Core 36.4 34% 46 Pts	4-Core 47.4 8-Core 66.3 7% 56.9 Pts	64-Core 68.3 4% 68.3 Pts
Poor: 32% ↑ This bench: 37.3% Great: 45%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX 1,377 User benchmarks, average bench 6% EVGA(3842 C831) 768MB Ram: 768MB, Driver: 341.95 Performing way below expectations (1^st percentile)	4.34% Terrible	Lighting 4.8 Reflection 8.04 Parallax 2.97 4% 5.27 fps	MRender 7 Gravity 6 Splatting 6.04 5% 6.35 fps
Poor: 5% ↑ This bench: 4.34% Great: 6%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
SanDisk Ultra II 960GB-$226 35,454 User benchmarks, average bench 85% 374GB free (System drive) Firmware: X355 Relative performance (0^th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable	26.8% Poor	Read 181 Write 110 Mixed 106 29% 132 MB/s	4K Read 8.75 4K Write 14.5 4K Mixed 8.61 32% 10.6 MB/s	DQ Read 86 DQ Write 48.1 DQ Mixed 25.6 30% 53.2 MB/s
Poor: 62% ↑ This bench: 26.8% Great: 107%
Hitachi HDS5C3020ALA632 2TB-$270 9,828 User benchmarks, average bench 55% 671GB free Firmware: ML6OA180 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing above expectations (62^nd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 136 136 94 (03) Spinup time 133 133 34386608539 (04) Start/Stop count 97 97 13654 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 148 148 28 (09) Power-on hours count 95 95 38313 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 437 (C0) Power-off retract count 89 89 13922 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 89 89 13926 (C2) HDA temperature 166 166 219044446244 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 21	58.7% Above average	Read 102 Write 103 Mixed 26.8 56% 77.2 MB/s	4K Read 0.52 4K Write 1.33 4K Mixed 0.35 85% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 33% ↑ This bench: 58.7% Great: 73%
Hitachi HDS5C3020ALA632 2TB-$270 9,828 User benchmarks, average bench 55% 489GB free Firmware: ML6OA180 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing as expected (45^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 136 136 95 (03) Spinup time 131 131 34387067297 (04) Start/Stop count 96 96 17590 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 148 148 28 (09) Power-on hours count 94 94 47471 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 455 (C0) Power-off retract count 85 85 18401 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 85 85 18401 (C2) HDA temperature 150 150 227634380840 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 14	51.8% Above average	Read 87.4 Write 93.2 Mixed 22.7 49% 67.8 MB/s	4K Read 0.5 4K Write 1.24 4K Mixed 0.36 84% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 33% ↑ This bench: 51.8% Great: 73%
Hitachi HDS5C3020ALA632 2TB-$270 9,828 User benchmarks, average bench 55% 291GB free Firmware: ML6OA180 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (22^nd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 137 137 89 (03) Spinup time 137 137 34386674055 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 3083 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 150 150 27 (09) Power-on hours count 94 94 47658 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 462 (C0) Power-off retract count 98 98 3154 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 98 98 3155 (C2) HDA temperature 136 136 227634380844 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 40	42.6% Average	Read 75.9 Write 72.4 Mixed 23.9 42% 57.4 MB/s	4K Read 0.46 4K Write 1.19 4K Mixed 0.31 76% 0.65 MB/s
Poor: 33% ↑ This bench: 42.6% Great: 73%
PNY USB 3.0 FD 16GB 194 User benchmarks, average bench 17% 15GB free, PID 00ad Operating at USB 2.1 Speed Performing below expectations (31^st percentile)	9.9% Terrible	Read 32.4 Write 9.53 Mixed 11.2 18% 17.7 MB/s	4K Read 3.05 4K Write 0.78 4K Mixed 0.64 60% 1.49 MB/s
Poor: 8% ↑ This bench: 9.9% Great: 23%
Generic SD/MMC 1GB 4 User benchmarks, average bench 3% 0GB free, PID null Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	2.12% Terrible	Read 8.98 Write 3.06 Mixed 4.41 6% 5.48 MB/s	4K Read 0.19 4K Write 0.04 4K Mixed 0.03 3% 0.08 MB/s
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 2.12% Great: 4%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown 4x2GB 183,252 User benchmarks, average bench 25% 4 of 4 slots used 8GB DIMM Performing as expected (42^nd percentile)	20% Poor	MC Read 7.5 MC Write 6.1 MC Mixed 6.3 19% 6.63 GB/s	SC Read 4.6 SC Write 5.1 SC Mixed 5.1 14% 4.93 GB/s	Latency 110 36% 110 ns
Poor: 14% ↑ This bench: 20% Great: 45%

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

MBD

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184	Nvidia RTX 4070 $409	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) $35	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

User System

Performance Results

PC Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)

System Memory Latency Ladder

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

Feedback

PC Performing below expectations (33^rd percentile)