ECS MCP61M-M3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 39%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (45th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 55 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 38.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics4.74% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive37.8% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
MotherboardECS MCP61M-M3  (all builds)
Memory2.1 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.5 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20100610
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 09 '19 at 18:53
Run Duration135 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU4%

 PC Performing as expected (45th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X2 250 (2013 D.Ri)
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 4.1 GHz, turbo 4.1 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
38.1% Below average
Memory 69
1-Core 22.8
2-Core 44.3
33% 45.4 Pts
4-Core 46.2
8-Core 45.4
6% 45.8 Pts
64-Core 44.9
3% 44.9 Pts
Poor: 27%
This bench: 38.1%
Great: 48%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 5570
PwrHis(1787 2009) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1062.1004
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
4.74% Terrible
Lighting 6.1
Reflection 6.77
Parallax 5.06
5% 5.98 fps
MRender 5.71
Gravity 4.37
Splatting 5.57
4% 5.22 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.74%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 120GB-$109
85GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXT0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 119 125 123 125 125 125 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
37.8% Below average
Read 218
Write 121
Mixed 107
SusWrite 124
32% 142 MB/s
4K Read 14.2
4K Write 40.7
4K Mixed 14.8
62% 23.2 MB/s
DQ Read 28.9
DQ Write 91.4
DQ Mixed 20.7
27% 47 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 37.8%
Great: 73%
WD Blue 2.5" 160GB (2009)-$21
139GB free
Firmware: 01.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 75 75 79 80 81 80 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
44.1% Average
Read 74.9
Write 74
Mixed 46.5
SusWrite 78.6
50% 68.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
147% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 44.1%
Great: 36%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown RM25664BA1339.8FD0 RM25664BA1339.8FD0 4GB
533, 533 MHz
2048, 2048 MB
Performing below potential (6th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
21.5% Poor
MC Read 7.7
MC Write 5.6
MC Mixed 7.7
20% 7 GB/s
SC Read 5.9
SC Write 5.3
SC Mixed 6.6
17% 5.93 GB/s
Latency 104
38% 104 ns
Poor: 21%
This bench: 21.5%
Great: 34%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical MCP61M-M3 Builds (Compare 67 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: ECS MCP61M-M3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 21% - Poor Total price: $28
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, UserBenchmark's data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've dedicated 13 years to publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
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