Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming 0% Tree trunk	Desktop 10% Tree trunk	Workstation 0% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (21st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 79 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.
Processor	With an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 23.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics	1.95% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory	2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS Version	Although 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.

Very high background CPU (94%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

PC Performing below expectations (21^st percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
1st CPU: Intel Xeon 5110 66 User benchmarks, average bench 32% LGA771/CPU1, 2 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads Base clock 1.6 GHz Performing way below expectations (6^th percentile)	23.5% Poor	Memory 35.9 1-Core 17.5 2-Core 34 20% 29.1 Pts	4-Core 65.6 8-Core 68.6 9% 67.1 Pts	64-Core 70.2 4% 70.2 Pts
Poor: 24% ↑ This bench: 23.5% Great: 36%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
ATI HD 3650 4,070 User benchmarks, average bench 2% Sapphire(174B E410) 512MB Driver: atidxx32.dll Ver. 8.56.1.16 Performing as expected (55^th percentile)	1.95% Terrible	Lighting 2.27 Reflection 4.15 Parallax 1.19 2% 2.54 fps	MRender 2.62 Gravity 1.1 Splatting 3.74 2% 2.49 fps
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 1.95% Great: 2%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k
ATP Velocity SI 2.5 SATA 64GB 13GB free (System drive) Firmware: 2010 SusWrite @10s intervals: 34 64 55 63 64 68 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples

Volume0 320GB 138 User benchmarks, average bench 57% 226GB free Firmware: 1.0. SusWrite @10s intervals: 50 64 63 64 64 64 MB/s Performing below expectations (21^st percentile)	36.2% Below average	Read 64 Write 56.5 Mixed 47.8 SusWrite 61.5 42% 57.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.7 4K Write 2.3 4K Mixed 1 183% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 17% ↑ This bench: 36.2% Great: 110%
SAMSUNG SP2504C 250GB 110GB free, PID 2509 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 25 25 25 25 25 MB/s Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	13% Very poor	Read 28.8 Write 24.8 Mixed 23.5 SusWrite 24.2 34% 25.3 MB/s	4K Read 0.6 4K Write 1.1 4K Mixed 0.8 67% 0.83 MB/s

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown 1x2GB 99,586 User benchmarks, average bench 17% 1 of 4 slots used 2GB DIMM DDR2 Performing way below expectations (3^rd percentile)	7.41% Terrible	MC Read 3 MC Write 1.5 MC Mixed 2.6 7% 2.37 GB/s	SC Read 2.2 SC Write 1.4 SC Mixed 1 4% 1.53 GB/s	Latency 223 18% 223 ns
Poor: 7% ↑ This bench: 7.41% Great: 26%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 10%

Tree trunk

Desktop 47%

Yacht

Workstation 9%

Tree trunk

CPU
CPU: Intel Xeon E54101stBench 42%, 249 samples	2x
CPU: Intel Xeon X54501stBench 47%, 826 samples	2x
CPU: Intel Xeon E54301stBench 46%, 705 samples	2x

GPU
GT 1030NvidiaBench 14%, 185,384 samples	2x
GTX 660Nvidia $170Bench 20%, 123,956 samples	2x
Quadro FX 1500NvidiaBench 1%, 499 samples	1x

SSD
INTENSO 256GBBench 72%, 4,055 samples	2x
SSD340 128GBTranscend $88Bench 67%, 2,082 samples	1x
SSD 240GBBench 75%, 38,401 samples	1x