Acer, Aspire 5920G

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 37%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 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 40.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics1.32% 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.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
SystemAcer, Aspire 5920G  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer, Chapala
Memory1.6 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1280 x 800 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20080618
Uptime1 Days
Run DateMar 09 '20 at 13:41
Run Duration145 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Duo T9300-$70
U2E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 2.5 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
40.1% Average
Memory 69.1
1-Core 36.4
2-Core 67.3
39% 57.6 Pts
4-Core 67.1
8-Core 69.1
9% 68.1 Pts
64-Core 68.2
4% 68.2 Pts
Poor: 23%
This bench: 40.1%
Great: 42%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 8600M GT
Acer(1025 0121) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 342.01
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
1.32% Terrible
Lighting 1.57
Reflection 3.35
Parallax 0.53
1% 1.81 fps
MRender 1.48
Gravity 1.23
Splatting 2.26
1% 1.66 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.32%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Hitachi HTS725050A7E630 500GB-$125
365GB free (System drive)
Firmware: GH2ZB390
SusWrite @10s intervals: 88 83 101 98 95 88 MB/s
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
62.5% Good
Read 126
Write 105
Mixed 21.3
SusWrite 92.3
62% 86.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.3
74% 0.5 MB/s
Poor: 26%
This bench: 62.5%
Great: 72%
WD Elements 750GB
546GB free, PID 13fd
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 98 98 98 98 97 95 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
40.8% Average
Read 100
Write 97.5
Mixed 40
SusWrite 97.3
111% 83.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.6
77% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 40.8%
Great: 40%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 2x2GB
2 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM DDR2
Performing below potential (35th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
15.2% Very poor
MC Read 5.5
MC Write 4
MC Mixed 4.1
13% 4.53 GB/s
SC Read 4.3
SC Write 4
SC Mixed 4.7
12% 4.33 GB/s
Latency 103
39% 103 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 15.2%
Great: 44%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Aspire 5920G Builds (Compare 41 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 32%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Acer, Aspire 5920G

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 35% - Below average Total price: $180
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 more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
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 and they return repeatedly.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair 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