Epson Endeavor MR3500

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 43%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (50th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 50 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 49.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.16% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory5GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 5GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (11%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
5 years ago, 4 years ago.
SystemEpson Endeavor MR3500  (all builds)
MotherboardPEGATRON MR3500
Memory0.9 GB free of 5 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20091005
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateJun 07 '19 at 09:24
Run Duration138 Seconds
Run User JPN-User
Background CPU 11%

 PC Performing as expected (50th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Quad Q9550-$161
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.85 GHz
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
49.6% Average
Memory 74.4
1-Core 40.3
2-Core 79.4
43% 64.7 Pts
4-Core 146
8-Core 148
20% 147 Pts
64-Core 152
9% 152 Pts
Poor: 37%
This bench: 49.6%
Great: 57%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 520
Device(0000 0000) 1GB
CLim: 843 MHz, MLim: 320 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing as expected (54th percentile)
2.16% Terrible
Lighting 2.57
Reflection 2.96
Parallax 0.81
2% 2.11 fps
MRender 3.1
Gravity 2.73
Splatting 2.61
2% 2.81 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.16%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$29
643GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 125 120 149 148 165 174 MB/s
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
86.5% Excellent
Read 154
Write 161
Mixed 72.5
SusWrite 147
98% 134 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 2.8
4K Mixed 1.2
239% 1.77 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 86.5%
Great: 109%
USB-HS ST3320620A 320GB
92GB free, PID 002a
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 18 18 18 18 18 18 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
12% Very poor
Read 27.8
Write 15.3
Mixed 20.3
SusWrite 17.6
26% 20.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.7
70% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 12%
Great: 13%
BUFFALO External HDD 1TB
94GB free, PID 0108
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 21 21 21 21 21 21 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
14% Very poor
Read 32.5
Write 19
Mixed 27.8
SusWrite 20.7
32% 25 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.8
80% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 14%
Great: 20%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 5GB
null MHz
2048, 1024, 2048 MB
Performing above expectations (79th percentile)
21% Poor
MC Read 7.9
MC Write 6.1
MC Mixed 6.4
19% 6.8 GB/s
SC Read 4.9
SC Write 5
SC Mixed 5.1
14% 5 GB/s
Latency 91.6
44% 91.6 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 21%
Great: 34%

 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 thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. 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, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $164Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $369
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback