ECS 915-M5

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (47th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 53 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 42.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
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.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
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.
Very high background CPU (42%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardECS 915-M5  (all builds)
Memory0.8 GB free of 2 GB @ 0 GHz
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20041124
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateFeb 07 '21 at 15:46
Run Duration161 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 42%

 PC Performing as expected (47th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Celeron 3.06GHz
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 1 threads
Base clock 3.05 GHz
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
42.9% Average
Memory 83.1
1-Core 17.1
2-Core 21
34% 40.4 Pts
4-Core 20.5
8-Core 22.6
3% 21.5 Pts
64-Core 20.6
1% 20.6 Pts
Poor: 4%
This bench: 42.9%
Great: 43%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Maxtor 6Y160M0 160GB-$117
113GB free (System drive)
Firmware: YAR511W0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 36 34 34 18 1.1 0.4 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
18.1% Very poor
Read 42
Write 48.3
Mixed 35
SusWrite 20.5
27% 36.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 1
174% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 18.1%
Great: 33%
Seagate ST340014A 40GB-$43
17GB free
Firmware: 8.01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 45 40 36 23 1.1 0.4 MB/s
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
19.9% Very poor
Read 44.8
Write 10.3
Mixed 25.3
SusWrite 24.3
20% 26.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.7
119% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 5%
This bench: 19.9%
Great: 31%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x0.5GB
4 of 4 slots used
2GB DIMM SDRAM
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
10.2% Very poor
MC Read 3
MC Write 2.1
MC Mixed 2.6
7% 2.57 GB/s
SC Read 0.4
SC Write 1.3
SC Mixed 1
3% 0.9 GB/s
Latency 74.9
53% 74.9 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 10.2%
Great: 19%

 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 $269Nvidia RTX 4060 $295Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $178Nvidia 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