NEC I-SELECT

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 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 a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 31.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Boot Drive28.2% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 8 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
High background CPU (23%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
5 years ago, 5 years ago.
SystemNEC I-SELECT  (all builds)
MotherboardNEC Rhea B
Memory1.1 GB free of 2 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1280 x 800 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20040816
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 05 '19 at 16:01
Run Duration131 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 23%

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Pentium M processor 2.00GHz
mPGA478, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 1 threads
Base clock 2 GHz
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
31.1% Below average
Memory 59.6
1-Core 19.2
2-Core 18.8
26% 32.5 Pts
4-Core 19.3
8-Core 19.5
3% 19.4 Pts
64-Core 19.4
1% 19.4 Pts
Poor: 23%
This bench: 31.1%
Great: 33%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9600/9700
Device(1631 C005) 64MB
Driver: atiumdag.dll Ver. 8.593.100.0
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
Lighting 0.2
Reflection 0.19
0% 0.2 fps
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intel 525 Series mSATA 30GB-$110
5GB free (System drive)
Firmware: LLKi
SusWrite @10s intervals: 32 34 36 37 36 37 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
28.2% Poor
Read 74.6
Write 35
Mixed 59.2
SusWrite 35.3
11% 51 MB/s
4K Read 21
4K Write 28.4
4K Mixed 18.8
71% 22.7 MB/s
DQ Read 23.7
DQ Write 36.1
DQ Mixed 22.2
19% 27.3 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 28.2%
Great: 45%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 2x1GB
2 of 2 slots used
2GB DIMM DRAM
Performing below potential (10th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
7.36% Terrible
MC Read 2.1
MC Write 1.8
MC Mixed 1.6
5% 1.83 GB/s
SC Read 2.2
SC Write 1.7
SC Mixed 1.8
5% 1.9 GB/s
Latency 129
31% 129 ns
Poor: 6%
This bench: 7.36%
Great: 20%

 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 $279Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair 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