Panasonic CF-C2CEAZXCM

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (24th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 76 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 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 44.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.22% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive60.8% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory8.02GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 8.02GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (13%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU. CPU throttled at 32% 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.
Run History
SystemPanasonic CF-C2CEAZXCM  (all builds)
MotherboardPanasonic CFC2-2
Memory4.6 GB free of 8.01563 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140530
Uptime3.6 Days
Run DateDec 28 '18 at 14:30
Run Duration119 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 13%
CPU Throttled 32%

 PC Performing below expectations (24th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-4300U
IC1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 2.5 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (42nd percentile)
44.4% Average
Memory 55.2
1-Core 81.5
2-Core 134
52% 90.4 Pts
4-Core 195
8-Core 193
26% 194 Pts
64-Core 159
10% 159 Pts
Poor: 18%
This bench: 44.4%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4400 (Mobile 1.0/1.1 GHz)
Device(10F7 8338) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.4835
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
2.22% Terrible
Lighting 2.23
Reflection 3.27
Parallax 3.5
2% 3 fps
MRender 4.95
Gravity 1.6
Splatting 4.3
3% 3.62 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.22%
Great: 3%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX300 525GB-$150
95GB free (System drive)
Firmware: M0CR031
SusWrite @10s intervals: 258 330 343 237 207 219 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
60.8% Good
Read 335
Write 309
Mixed 306
SusWrite 265
68% 304 MB/s
4K Read 11.5
4K Write 41.8
4K Mixed 20.5
66% 24.6 MB/s
DQ Read 198
DQ Write 276
DQ Mixed 287
203% 254 MB/s
Poor: 65%
This bench: 60.8%
Great: 99%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Hynix HMT451S6AFR8A-PB HMT351S6CFR8A-H9 56GB
1600, 1333, 0 MHz
4096, 4096, 49152 MB
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
42% Average
MC Read 13.3
MC Write 17.1
MC Mixed 13.8
42% 14.7 GB/s
SC Read 12.7
SC Write 15.2
SC Mixed 14.3
40% 14.1 GB/s
Latency 143
28% 143 ns
Poor: 42%
This bench: 42%
Great: 49%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.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