Casper NIRVANA N240

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 23.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.72% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
CPU throttled at 37% by Windows. Ensure maximum processor state is set to 100% via Settings > System > Power & sleep > Additional power settings > Change plan settings > Change advanced power settings > Processor power management > Maximum processor state.
SystemCasper NIRVANA N240  (all builds)
MotherboardCASPER CASPER NIRVANA N240
Memory0.9 GB free of 2 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display800 x 1280 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150911
Uptime0.4 Days
Run DateNov 11 '18 at 08:52
Run Duration148 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU0%
CPU Throttled 37%

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Atom Z3735F
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.35 GHz, turbo 0.5 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
23.2% Poor
Memory 44.4
1-Core 4.4
2-Core 9.5
17% 19.4 Pts
4-Core 14.4
8-Core 14.5
2% 14.4 Pts
64-Core 16.5
1% 16.5 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 23.2%
Great: 38%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail 0.667 - 0.854 GHz)
Device(1027 2014) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim32.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4358
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
0.72% Terrible
Lighting 0.73
Reflection 0.92
Parallax 0.75
1% 0.8 fps
MRender 1.52
Gravity 0.6
Splatting 1.35
1% 1.16 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.72%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston DataTraveler 100 G3 USB 3.0 32GB-$9
12GB free, PID 1666
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7 7.8 8.4 7.2 8.6 7.2 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
5.89% Terrible
Read 21.9
Write 3.5
Mixed 16.7
SusWrite 7.7
15% 12.4 MB/s
4K Read 4.4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
16% 1.47 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 5.89%
Great: 28%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
To be filled by O.E.M be filled by O.E.M 1x2GB
1 of 2 slots used
2GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
15.5% Very poor
MC Read 5.4
MC Write 6
MC Mixed 6.3
17% 5.9 GB/s
SC Read 0.4
SC Write 2.4
SC Mixed 0.6
3% 1.13 GB/s
Latency 183
22% 183 ns
Poor: 9%
This bench: 15.5%
Great: 22%

 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 $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