Samsung 550P5C/550P7C

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (67th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 33 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 58.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.63% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive59.2% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 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 (14%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
SystemSamsung 550P5C/550P7C  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG SAMSUNG_NP1234567890
Memory1.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20130220
Uptime0.3 Days
Run DateJun 20 '19 at 21:06
Run Duration129 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU 14%

 PC Performing above expectations (67th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3210M-$52
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
58.9% Above average
Memory 84.8
1-Core 66.3
2-Core 119
57% 89.9 Pts
4-Core 192
8-Core 196
26% 194 Pts
64-Core 191
12% 191 Pts
Poor: 31%
This bench: 58.9%
Great: 57%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4000 (Mobile 1.25 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C0D1) 2GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4276
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
3.63% Terrible
Lighting 4.03
Reflection 4.81
Parallax 2.75
3% 3.86 fps
MRender 4.81
Gravity 2.27
Splatting 7.65
4% 4.91 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.63%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial M500 960GB-$59
91GB free (System drive)
Firmware: MU03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 327 168 61 231 11 22 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
59.2% Above average
Read 364
Write 353
Mixed 290
SusWrite 137
64% 286 MB/s
4K Read 16
4K Write 36.9
4K Mixed 22.1
72% 25 MB/s
DQ Read 302
DQ Write 317
DQ Mixed 186
174% 268 MB/s
Poor: 60%
This bench: 59.2%
Great: 101%
Netac SS D 960GB
860GB free, PID 2339
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 27 24 24 26 23 23 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
31% Below average
Read 32.5
Write 22.8
Mixed 22.5
SusWrite 24.6
34% 25.6 MB/s
4K Read 6.5
4K Write 6.3
4K Mixed 5.1
412% 5.97 MB/s
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5469-055.A00LF 0194 SH564128FH8NZQNSCR 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
53.7% Above average
MC Read 19.2
MC Write 19.6
MC Mixed 17.6
54% 18.8 GB/s
SC Read 14.5
SC Write 15.1
SC Mixed 15.7
43% 15.1 GB/s
Latency 72
56% 72 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 53.7%
Great: 54%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 550P5C/550P7C Builds (Compare 603 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Samsung 550P5C/550P7C

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 52% - Above average Total price: $448
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 endorse 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 $160Nvidia 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