To Be Filled By O.E.M.

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 (53rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 47 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 55.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is 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.
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 VersionAlthough 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.
MotherboardTo Be Filled By O.E.M.  (all builds)
Memory1.3 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20101102
Uptime1.8 Days
Run DateAug 24 '17 at 00:41
Run Duration93 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T-$175
CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 6 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz
Performing above expectations (66th percentile)
55.2% Above average
Memory 80.2
1-Core 47
2-Core 92.1
48% 73.1 Pts
4-Core 166
8-Core 244
26% 205 Pts
64-Core 248
15% 248 Pts
Poor: 46%
This bench: 55.2%
Great: 61%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 7300 SE
XFX(1682 227B) 128MB
Ram: 128MB, Driver: 309.8
Relative performance n/a - atypical extreme
Poor: 0% Great: 0%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Hitachi HDS721010CLA 1TB-$54
859GB free (System drive)
Firmware: JP4O
Performing above expectations (66th percentile)
58% Above average
Read 98
Write 104
Mixed 99.7
76% 101 MB/s
4K Read 0.69
4K Write 1.34
4K Mixed 0.4
98% 0.81 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 58%
Great: 72%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x4GB
1 of 2 slots used
4GB DIMM
Performing below potential (29th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
19% Very poor
MC Read 6
MC Write 5.7
MC Mixed 5.4
16% 5.7 GB/s
SC Read 5.5
SC Write 4.3
SC Mixed 5.6
15% 5.13 GB/s
Latency 80.2
50% 80.2 ns
Poor: 13%
This bench: 19%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Be Filled By O.E.M. Builds (Compare 5,552 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: To Be Filled By O.E.M.

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $87
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $273Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $132Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $186Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $34Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair 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