Lenovo 9457CTO

Performance Results

Benchmarks - excluding GPU, SSD
Gaming 0%
Desktop 0%
Workstation 0%
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 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.
ProcessorWith an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 8.4%, this CPUs suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
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 8 years and 11 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 (57%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. Find active processes with Windows task manager (CTRL+SHIFT+ESC).
SystemLenovo 9457CTO  (all builds)
MotherboardLENOVO 9457CTO
Memory0.5 GB free of 2 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1400 x 1050 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20080528
Uptime0.8 Days
Run DateOct 13 '17 at 00:34
Run Duration534 Seconds
Run User SVK-User
Background CPU 57%

 PC Performing below expectations (30th 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 Core2 T5600-$20
None, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.85 GHz
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
8.4% Terrible
SC Int 36.3
SC Float 16.7
SC Mixed 22
20% 25 Pts
QC Int 69.7
QC Float 24.9
QC Mixed 24.8
9% 39.8 Pts
MC Int 82.6
MC Float 39.4
MC Mixed 46.9
9% 56.3 Pts
Poor: 6%
This bench: 8.4%
Great: 14%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Hitachi HTS725050A7E630 500GB-$125
115GB free (System drive)
Firmware: GS2OA230 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
42.7% Average
Read 73.7
Write 75
Mixed 8.22
38% 52.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.25
4K Write 1.42
4K Mixed 0.2
58% 0.62 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 71%
Kingston DataTraveler 2.0 32GB
28GB free, PID 6545
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
5.82% Terrible
Read 20.1
Write 8.09
Mixed 8.85
14% 12.3 MB/s
4K Read 4.74
4K Write 0.008
4K Mixed 0.009
18% 1.59 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 5.82%
Great: 9%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown 2x1GB
2 of 2 slots used
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
9.9% Terrible
MC Read 3.4
MC Write 2.6
MC Mixed 2.9
8% 2.97 GB/s
SC Read 2.6
SC Write 2.5
SC Mixed 3
8% 2.7 GB/s
Latency 155
26% 155 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 9.9%
Great: 22%
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 9457CTO Builds (Compare 0 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming 0%
Desktop 0%
Workstation 0%

System: Lenovo 9457CTO

The Best.
Intel Core i7-8700K $320Nvidia GTX 1070 $408Samsung 850 Evo 250GB $100
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 $150Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB $289Samsung 850 Evo 500GB $121
Intel Core i5-8600K $235AMD RX 480 $280Samsung 850 Pro 256GB $160
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $44Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $176SanDisk Extreme 64GB $44
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $951SanDisk Extreme 32GB $46
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $59HyperX Fury DDR4 2133 C14 2x8GB $219SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $12
Today's hottest deals
User Guide  •  About  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback