Razer Blade

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (61st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 39 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 84.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics36.5% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
CPU throttled at 99% by Windows. Ensure maximum processor state is set to 100% via Settings > System > Power & sleep > Additional power settings > Change plan settings > Change advanced power settings > Processor power management > Maximum processor state.
Run History
SystemRazer Blade  (all builds)
MotherboardRazer CH530
Memory11.7 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs,
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190709
Uptime1.1 Days
Run DateJul 13 '20 at 19:24
Run Duration248 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU7%
CPU Throttled 99%

 PC Performing above expectations (61st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-9750H
U3E1, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.55 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
84.9% Excellent
Memory 92.6
1-Core 123
2-Core 236
86% 151 Pts
4-Core 416
8-Core 597
64% 507 Pts
64-Core 641
40% 641 Pts
Poor: 49%
This bench: 84.9%
Great: 87%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2070 (Mobile Max-Q)
Device(1A58 2005) ≥ 4GB
Driver: nvldumdx.dll Ver. 27.21.14.5148
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
36.5% Below average
Lighting 13.3
Reflection 15.4
Parallax 107
11% 45.1 fps
MRender 144
Gravity 90.7
Splatting 90.3
86% 108 fps
Poor: 52%
This bench: 36.5%
Great: 94%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Liteon CA3-8D512 512GB
381GB free (System drive)
Firmware: C490903
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,622
Write 1,765
Mixed 1,349
353% 1,579 MB/s
4K Read 48
4K Write 102
4K Mixed 66.3
212% 72 MB/s
DQ Read 1,088
DQ Write 736
DQ Mixed 815
635% 880 MB/s
Poor: 98% Great: 228%
Sandisk Extreme SSD 1TB
195GB free
Firmware: 1012
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 428
Write 428
Mixed 258
83% 372 MB/s
4K Read 21.7
4K Write 36.7
4K Mixed 26.6
86% 28.3 MB/s
DQ Read 107
DQ Write 104
DQ Mixed 100
77% 104 MB/s
Poor: 52% Great: 87%
Microsoft Storage Space Device 249GB
115GB free
Firmware: 0.1
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 37.2
Write 30.3
Mixed 34.5
26% 34 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.8
143% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 22% Great: 72%
WDC WD50 00LUCT-62C26Y0 500GB
223GB free, PID 2338
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 36.5
Write 37.3
Mixed 26.5
42% 33.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.8
87% 1 MB/s
Poor: 14% Great: 19%
SanDisk Ultra USB 3.0 123GB
107GB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 149
Write 52.5
Mixed 85.3
107% 95.5 MB/s
4K Read 5.4
4K Write 3.2
4K Mixed 3.3
241% 3.97 MB/s
Poor: 12% Great: 40%
Hitachi HTS543232A7A384 320GB
30GB free, PID 0621
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 38
Write 33.2
Mixed 23.7
39% 31.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.5
49% 0.6 MB/s
Poor: 11% Great: 32%
Generic STORAGE DEVICE 268GB
249GB free, PID null
Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete
Read 0.5
0% 0.5 MB/s
4K Read 1.8
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
7% 0.6 MB/s
Poor: 1% Great: 20%
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 64GB
54GB free, PID 5567
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 25.2
Write 6
Mixed 6.8
12% 12.7 MB/s
4K Read 4.1
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 1.7
100% 2.2 MB/s
Poor: 5% Great: 18%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A1K43DB1-CTD 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2667 MHz
Performing below potential (32nd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
73.8% Very good
MC Read 29.5
MC Write 26
MC Mixed 21.6
73% 25.7 GB/s
SC Read 15.7
SC Write 29.1
SC Mixed 25.4
67% 23.4 GB/s
Latency 62.9
64% 62.9 ns
Poor: 56%
This bench: 73.8%
Great: 85%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Blade Builds (Compare 4,069 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 13%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 70%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 12%
Tree trunk

System: Razer Blade

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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