Medion Erazer X7843 MD99692

Performance Results


Gaming 38% Jet ski	Desktop 78% Battleship	Workstation 33% Sail boat


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (83rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 17 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 71%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	44.7% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	77.7% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory	16GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Very high background CPU (31%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

System	Medion Erazer X7843 MD99692 (all builds)
Motherboard	MEDION P670RG1M
Memory	12.6 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kolorów
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20151105
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Dec 28 '17 at 16:32
Run Duration	126 Seconds
Run User	GBR-User
Background CPU	31%

PC Performing above expectations (83^rd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-6700HQ 320,434 User benchmarks, average bench 59% U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.15 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (99^th percentile)	71% Very good	Memory 76.5 1-Core 107 2-Core 203 73% 129 Pts	4-Core 353 8-Core 549 56% 451 Pts	64-Core 544 34% 544 Pts
Poor: 34% ↑ This bench: 71% Great: 69%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 980M 14,160 User benchmarks, average bench 41% Clevo(1558 6780) ≥ 4GB Driver: nvldumdx.dll Ver. 22.21.13.8264 Performing way above expectations (92^nd percentile)	44.7% Average	Lighting 57 Reflection 53.1 Parallax 45.5 46% 51.9 fps	MRender 56.2 Gravity 48.5 Splatting 48.2 41% 51 fps
Poor: 29% ↑ This bench: 44.7% Great: 60%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung MZNTE512HMJH-000L2 512GB 1,377 User benchmarks, average bench 69% 253GB free (System drive) Firmware: EXT26L0Q Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing above expectations (74^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (09) Power-on hours count 99 99 750 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 441 (AF) Unknown 100 100 0 (B0) Unknown 100 100 0 (B1) Unknown 99 99 3 (B2) Unknown 100 100 0 (B3) Unknown 100 100 0 (B4) Unknown 99 100 8819 (B5) Unknown 100 100 0 (B6) Unknown 100 100 0 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 59 42 41 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 0 (E9) Unknown 199 199 5 (EA) Unknown 100 100 0 (EB) Unknown 99 99 16 (EC) Unknown 99 99 2 (ED) Unknown 99 99 3 (EE) Unknown 100 100 0	77.7% Very good	Read 496 Write 252 Mixed 326 79% 358 MB/s	4K Read 30.4 4K Write 67.6 4K Mixed 16.7 103% 38.2 MB/s	DQ Read 356 DQ Write 204 DQ Mixed 43 95% 201 MB/s
Poor: 42% ↑ This bench: 77.7% Great: 91%
WD Blue 2.5" 1TB (2013)-$40 57,200 User benchmarks, average bench 45% 892GB free Firmware: 02.01A02 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing as expected (53^rd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 190 187 1500 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 302 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 253 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 12 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 253 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 31 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 8 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 200 200 382 (C2) HDA temperature 122 97 25 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 253 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 100 253 0 (F0) Head flying hours 100 100 5	45.5% Average	Read 115 Write 43.2 Mixed 59.2 54% 72.6 MB/s	4K Read 0.47 4K Write 1.88 4K Mixed 0.17 74% 0.84 MB/s
Poor: 21% ↑ This bench: 45.5% Great: 63%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 2x8GB 55,289 User benchmarks, average bench 70% 2 of 4 slots used 16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz Performing way above expectations (96^th percentile)	75.7% Very good	MC Read 28.1 MC Write 28.8 MC Mixed 24.1 77% 27 GB/s	SC Read 17.7 SC Write 29.8 SC Mixed 24.2 68% 23.9 GB/s	Latency 87.3 46% 87.3 ns
Poor: 53% ↑ This bench: 75.7% Great: 76%

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 $273	Nvidia RTX 4060 $295	Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $179	Nvidia RTX 4070 $539	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) $37	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

Medion Erazer X7843 MD99692

Performance Results

PC Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)

System Memory Latency Ladder

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

Feedback

PC Performing above expectations (83^rd percentile)