Lenovo 2552CJ9

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 74.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics4.02% 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.
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 VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 9 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.
SystemLenovo 2552CJ9  (all builds)
MotherboardLENOVO MAHOBAY
Memory14.1 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1680 x 1050 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20120807
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 06 '17 at 18:00
Run Duration82 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU7%

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Xeon E3-1275 V2-$400
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
74.5% Very good
Memory 84.5
1-Core 108
2-Core 214
77% 136 Pts
4-Core 348
8-Core 520
54% 434 Pts
64-Core 519
32% 519 Pts
Poor: 65%
This bench: 74.5%
Great: 82%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD P4000 (Server 1.25 GHz)
Legend(17AA 102E) 2.2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 8.15.10.2752
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
4.02% Terrible
Lighting 4.27
Reflection 5.38
Parallax 3.16
4% 4.27 fps
MRender 6.57
Gravity 2.57
Splatting 8.61
5% 5.92 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.02%
Great: 4%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$32
871GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CC62 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing above expectations (80th percentile)
105% Outstanding
Read 183
Write 182
Mixed 100
115% 155 MB/s
4K Read 0.65
4K Write 0.95
4K Mixed 0.32
81% 0.64 MB/s
Poor: 55%
This bench: 105%
Great: 112%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Micron 18JSF1G72AZ-1G6D1 Samsung M391B1G73BH0-CK0 16GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
56.7% Above average
MC Read 21.5
MC Write 19.9
MC Mixed 17.3
56% 19.6 GB/s
SC Read 16.6
SC Write 18.2
SC Mixed 18.8
51% 17.9 GB/s
Latency 72.6
55% 72.6 ns
Poor: 31%
This bench: 56.7%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $273Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $177Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback