Samsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 55%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 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.
Graphics2.21% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive27.7% 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.
High background CPU (26%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemSamsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA
Memory5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120228
Uptime0.7 Days
Run DateOct 15 '19 at 11:54
Run Duration114 Seconds
Run User PRT-User
Background CPU 26%

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-2450M-$225
CPU, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 2.9 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (96th percentile)
58.9% Above average
Memory 85.5
1-Core 59.3
2-Core 136
57% 93.4 Pts
4-Core 189
8-Core 193
26% 191 Pts
64-Core 192
12% 192 Pts
Poor: 25%
This bench: 58.9%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 3000 (Mobile V2 1.3 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C606) 2GB
Driver: Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
2.21% Terrible
Lighting 2.43
Reflection 3.15
Parallax 1.62
2% 2.4 fps
MRender 3.33
Gravity 1.33
Splatting 4.52
3% 3.06 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 2.21%
Great: 2%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 480GB-$38
411GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFKB1C2
SusWrite @10s intervals: 200 158 181 179 185 173 MB/s
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
27.7% Poor
Read 104
Write 93.7
Mixed 76.5
SusWrite 180
26% 113 MB/s
4K Read 11.9
4K Write 17
4K Mixed 9.5
39% 12.8 MB/s
DQ Read 14.7
DQ Write 16.5
DQ Mixed 14.6
11% 15.3 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 27.7%
Great: 102%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5273DH0-CH9 04CB AO1L16BC4R1-BQSS 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
46.5% Average
MC Read 16.8
MC Write 15.9
MC Mixed 15.3
46% 16 GB/s
SC Read 11.7
SC Write 13.8
SC Mixed 14.1
38% 13.2 GB/s
Latency 71.6
56% 71.6 ns
Poor: 41%
This bench: 46.5%
Great: 47%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA Builds (Compare 586 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Samsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 48% - Average Total price: $253
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/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 $174Nvidia 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 $45SanDisk 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