Cisco N20-B6625-1

Performance Results

Benchmarks - excluding GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (5th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 95 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 moderate gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 40.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Boot Drive48.2% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory96GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 96GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 10 years and 6 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.
Very high background CPU (77%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. Find active processes with Windows task manager (CTRL+SHIFT+ESC).
SystemCisco N20-B6625-1  (all builds)
MotherboardCisco N20-B6625-1
Memory34.2 GB free of 96 GB @ 1.3 GHz
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20150811
Uptime0.3 Days
Run DateMay 03 '19 at 14:34
Run Duration128 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 77%

 PC Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Extreme
1st CPU: Intel Xeon X5675
CPU1, 2 CPU, 12 cores, 24 threads
Base clock 3.05 GHz
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
40.5% Average
1-Core 57.6
2-Core 114
40% 85.6 Pts
4-Core 232
8-Core 441
42% 337 Pts
64-Core 741
50% 741 Pts
Poor: 49%
This bench: 40.5%
Great: 58%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Citrix Virtual Hard Disk 42GB
5GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0 30 74 74 74 70 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
48.2% Average
Read 59.3
Write 21.3
Mixed 66.5
SusWrite 53.8
11% 50.2 MB/s
4K Read 40
4K Write 37.2
4K Mixed 37.7
129% 38.3 MB/s
DQ Read 51.3
DQ Write 63.9
DQ Mixed 58.6
44% 57.9 MB/s
Poor: 48%
This bench: 48.2%
Great: 57%
Lsilogic Logical Volume 146GB
108GB free
Firmware: 3000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0 37 43 51 36 37 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
27.2% Poor
Read 60.3
Write 23.5
Mixed 35.8
SusWrite 34.3
28% 38.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.5
4K Mixed 0.6
105% 0.6 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 27.2%
Great: 112%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown 12x8GB
12 of 12 slots used
96GB DIMM
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
33.7% Below average
MC Read 14.4
MC Write 12
MC Mixed 12
37% 12.8 GB/s
SC Read 4.9
SC Write 3.1
SC Mixed 4.8
12% 4.27 GB/s
Latency 106
38% 106 ns
Poor: 38%
This bench: 33.7%
Great: 62%
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-9400F $159Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Crucial MX500 250GB $49
Intel Core i5-9600K $210Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super) $160Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-9700K $370Nvidia RTX 2060 $338Samsung 850 Pro 512GB $249
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $82SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $73SanDisk Extreme 32GB $46
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $683SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback