TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Acer Aspire E5-553

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 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 42.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics4.73% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive35.8% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory8GB 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
SystemAcer Aspire E5-553  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer Wasp_BR
Memory4.6 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180328
Uptime1.3 Days
Run DateApr 26 '19 at 11:04
Run Duration184 Seconds
Run User IND-User
Background CPU7%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD A10-9600P APU (2016 M.BR)
Socket FP4, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 2.5 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
42.7% Average
Memory 61.6
1-Core 34.4
2-Core 92
39% 62.7 Pts
4-Core 140
8-Core 137
19% 138 Pts
64-Core 135
8% 135 Pts
Poor: 18% ↑
This bench: 42.7%
 Great: 43%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Acer(1025 109F) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 19.3.3
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
4.73% Terrible
Lighting 5.5
Reflection 8.04
Parallax 7.47
4% 7 fps
MRender 5.67
Gravity 5.4
Splatting 7.52
5% 6.2 fps
Poor: 3% ↑
This bench: 4.73%
 Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston SSDNow V300 240GB-$35
53GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 600ABBF0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 91 70 49 50 61 31 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
35.8% Below average
Read 190
Write 125
Mixed 168
SusWrite 58.6
30% 135 MB/s
4K Read 18.4
4K Write 33.4
4K Mixed 14.3
64% 22 MB/s
DQ Read 116
DQ Write 127
DQ Mixed 129
95% 124 MB/s
Poor: 41% ↑
This bench: 35.8%
 Great: 85%
Microsoft Virtual Disk 21GB
4GB free
Firmware: 1.0
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
Read 154
Write 162
Mixed 168
36% 161 MB/s
4K Read 9.4
4K Write 24.7
4K Mixed 9
39% 14.4 MB/s
DQ Read 71.3
DQ Write 79.3
DQ Mixed 85.3
62% 78.6 MB/s
Poor: 32% Great: 75%
Seagate Momentus 2.5" 1TB
655GB free
Firmware: 2BA30001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 86 94 94 95 95 95 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
53.2% Above average
Read 91.8
Write 52.8
Mixed 52.5
SusWrite 93.3
53% 72.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.6
128% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 14% ↑
This bench: 53.2%
 Great: 59%
Lio-org FILEIO 64GB
30GB free
Firmware: 4.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.9 3 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.3 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
3.17% Terrible
Read 7.5
Write 5
Mixed 6.2
SusWrite 3.1
4% 5.45 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 0.7
4K Mixed 0.7
124% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 2% ↑
This bench: 3.17%
 Great: 6%
Lio-org FILEIO 86GB
44GB free
Firmware: 4.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 2.9 3 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.1 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
3.2% Terrible
Read 7.7
Write 5.2
Mixed 5.5
SusWrite 3.1
4% 5.38 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.7
4K Mixed 0.8
123% 0.67 MB/s
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905624-010.A00G 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR4 1067 MHz clocked @ 933 MHz
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that the top XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
27.7% Poor
MC Read 12.1
MC Write 6.9
MC Mixed 11.1
29% 10 GB/s
SC Read 5.5
SC Write 4.1
SC Mixed 7.1
16% 5.57 GB/s
Latency 123
32% 123 ns
Poor: 34% ↑
This bench: 27.7%
 Great: 93%
Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM MBD
Typical Aspire E5-553 Builds (Compare 32 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 37%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Acer Aspire E5-553

CPU
A10-9600P APU (2016 M.BR)AMDBench 33%, 13,243 samples22x
A12-9700P APU (2016 M.BR)AMDBench 34%, 5,770 samples10x
GPU
Radeon R5 GraphicsAMDBench 5%, 13,858 samples15x
Radeon R5 GraphicsAMDBench 4%, 6,195 samples7x
Radeon R7 GraphicsAMDBench 6%, 37,078 samples6x
SSD
RBU-SNS 128GBKingstonBench 59%, 3 samples2x
A400 480GBKingston  $38Bench 74%, 237,487 samples2x
Ultimate SU800 512GBAdata  $66Bench 104%, 31,280 samples2x
RAM
4ATF51264HZ-2G3B1 2x4GBMicronBench 55%, 14,447 samples5x
8ATF1G64HZ-2G3B1 2x8GBMicronBench 69%, 13,778 samples4x
HMA851S6AFR6N-UH 2x4GBHynixBench 57%, 26,973 samples3x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 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
Amazon Ebay
deals
Build Test EFps
Can You Run It?
►
YouTube
*NEW*
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback