Samsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way above expectations (97th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 3 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. This PC is likely operated by a technical master!
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 58.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
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.
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 8 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.
SystemSamsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG NP300E5C-T01CH
Memory6.9 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20131101
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 03 '20 at 22:31
Run Duration106 Seconds
Run User DZA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3210M-$52
CPU Socket - U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
58.8% Above average
Memory 83.4
1-Core 84.9
2-Core 162
65% 110 Pts
4-Core 200
8-Core 203
27% 201 Pts
64-Core 204
13% 204 Pts
Poor: 31%
This bench: 58.8%
Great: 57%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD WD5000LPLX-00ZNTT0 500GB
211GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 02.01A02
SusWrite @10s intervals: 141 145 143 129 125 138 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (92nd percentile)
79.7% Very good
Read 141
Write 143
Mixed 57.7
SusWrite 137
87% 120 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.9
166% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 79.7%
Great: 82%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata AM1U16BC4P2-B19C 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
57.9% Above average
MC Read 21.5
MC Write 21.2
MC Mixed 18.5
58% 20.4 GB/s
SC Read 16
SC Write 16
SC Mixed 17.7
47% 16.6 GB/s
Latency 74.5
54% 74.5 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 57.9%
Great: 58%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C Builds (Compare 1,054 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 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 57% - Above average Total price: $80
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.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