Performance Results


Gaming 3% Tree trunk	Desktop 15% Surfboard	Workstation 3% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (22nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 78 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.
Processor	With an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 11.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Graphics	0.83% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	16.6% is an extremely low SSD score, this system will benefit from a faster SSD.
Memory	8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Very high background CPU (98%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

PC Performing below expectations (22^nd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD E-350 6,654 User benchmarks, average bench 25% Socket FT1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 1.6 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (4^th percentile)	11.9% Very poor	Memory 20.1 1-Core 15.7 2-Core 36.9 14% 24.2 Pts	4-Core 22.3 8-Core 24.2 3% 23.2 Pts	64-Core 23.4 1% 23.4 Pts
Poor: 13% ↑ This bench: 11.9% Great: 36%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 6310 13,166 User benchmarks, average bench 1% Legend(17AA 397B) 384MB Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.201.1151.0 Performing as expected (59^th percentile)	0.83% Terrible	Lighting 1 Reflection 1.35 Parallax 1.25 1% 1.2 fps	MRender 1.19 Gravity 0.63 Splatting 1.26 1% 1.03 fps
Poor: 0% ↑ This bench: 0.83% Great: 1%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100 951,591 User benchmarks, average bench 103% 212GB free (System drive) Firmware: EMT03B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 103 116 121 134 122 149 MB/s Relative performance (0^th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable	16.6% Very poor	Read 126 Write 139 Mixed 111 SusWrite 124 28% 125 MB/s	4K Read 3.4 4K Write 6.8 4K Mixed 3.3 13% 4.5 MB/s
Poor: 72% ↑ This bench: 16.6% Great: 124%
SanDisk Ultra USB 3.0 32GB-$8 33,725 User benchmarks, average bench 26% 29GB free, PID 5581 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 10 12 14 13 15 MB/s Performing way below expectations (3^rd percentile)	8.22% Terrible	Read 16.9 Write 11.2 Mixed 14.1 SusWrite 12.6 18% 13.7 MB/s	4K Read 1.1 4K Write 0.9 4K Mixed 0.8 62% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 11% ↑ This bench: 8.22% Great: 38%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown 4836343147553637 1x8GB 1 of 1 slots used 8GB SODIMM DDR3 1066 MHz Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	7.66% Terrible	MC Read 2.7 MC Write 2.1 MC Mixed 3.1 8% 2.63 GB/s	SC Read 1.8 SC Write 1.2 SC Mixed 2 5% 1.67 GB/s	Latency 320 12% 320 ns

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 0%

Incomplete

Desktop 0%

Incomplete

Workstation 0%

Incomplete

CPU
E-350AMDBench 25%, 6,654 samples	1x

GPU
Radeon HD 6310AMDBench 1%, 13,166 samples	1x

RAM
4D34373142353737 2x2GBUnknownBench 11%, 60 samples	1x

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $30	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