Lenovo 20BFS1RF16

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 9%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 61%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 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 60.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics5.95% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive56% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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.
High background CPU (26%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemLenovo 20BFS1RF16  (all builds)
MotherboardLENOVO 20BFS1RF16
Memory11.9 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190320
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 23 '20 at 08:29
Run Duration220 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 26%

 PC Performing as expected (42nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4810MQ-$400
CPU Socket - U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 3.05 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
60.3% Good
Memory 75.8
1-Core 96.9
2-Core 138
63% 103 Pts
4-Core 242
8-Core 386
39% 314 Pts
64-Core 382
24% 382 Pts
Poor: 33%
This bench: 60.3%
Great: 75%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 730M
Legend(17AA 221E) 1GB
Driver: nvldumdx.dll Ver. 25.21.14.2591
Performing above expectations (80th percentile)
5.95% Terrible
Lighting 7.5
Reflection 7.31
Parallax 8.25
6% 7.69 fps
MRender 5.86
Gravity 7.1
Splatting 7.39
6% 6.78 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 5.95%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 480GB-$38
113GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFK71B1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 238 190 11 26 81 30 MB/s
Performing below potential (21st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
56% Above average
Read 224
Write 109
Mixed 204
SusWrite 95.9
35% 159 MB/s
4K Read 20.9
4K Write 55.5
4K Mixed 26.5
95% 34.3 MB/s
DQ Read 246
DQ Write 288
DQ Mixed 193
166% 243 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 56%
Great: 102%
Sandisk S-1T00 1TB
687GB free
Firmware: 411040RL
SusWrite @10s intervals: 427 414 426 436 442 431 MB/s
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
102% Outstanding
Read 462
Write 442
Mixed 362
SusWrite 430
95% 424 MB/s
4K Read 31.6
4K Write 71.5
4K Mixed 40.5
138% 47.9 MB/s
DQ Read 367
DQ Write 309
DQ Mixed 254
213% 310 MB/s
Poor: 70%
This bench: 102%
Great: 120%
ST500LM0 00-SSHD-8GB 500GB
456GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 46 48 47 47 48 95 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
29.6% Poor
Read 114
Write 8.2
Mixed 44.5
SusWrite 55.2
62% 55.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.4
26% 0.4 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 29.6%
Great: 55%
TOSHIBA HDWQ140 4TB
1.5TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.4 1.4 1.9 1 1.1 2.5 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
24.8% Poor
Read 100
Write 114
Mixed 65
SusWrite 1.5
89% 70.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 3.1
4K Mixed 1.1
148% 1.87 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 24.8%
Great: 62%
ST2000LM 015-2E8174 2TB
2TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 47 50 48 48 48 96 MB/s
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
32.6% Below average
Read 97.7
Write 118
Mixed 75
SusWrite 55.8
116% 86.7 MB/s
4K Read 2
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.9
103% 1.6 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 32.6%
Great: 49%
ST4000DM 004-2CV104 4TB
1.5TB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.4 1.5 1.9 1 1.1 2.5 MB/s
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
27.4% Poor
Read 80.3
Write 98.2
Mixed 63.2
SusWrite 1.5
79% 60.8 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 4.9
4K Mixed 0.4
186% 2.23 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 27.4%
Great: 70%
Sony QD-G32E 30GB
26GB free, PID 087c
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 17 19 19 19 19 19 MB/s
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
13% Very poor
Read 37
Write 11
Mixed 20
SusWrite 18.7
26% 21.7 MB/s
4K Read 8.5
4K Write 0.5
4K Mixed 0.7
72% 3.23 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 13%
Great: 34%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Hynix HMT41GS6BFR8A-PB 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (22nd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
48.5% Average
MC Read 18.5
MC Write 18.5
MC Mixed 15.3
50% 17.4 GB/s
SC Read 9
SC Write 15.1
SC Mixed 12.6
35% 12.2 GB/s
Latency 88.6
45% 88.6 ns
Poor: 33%
This bench: 48.5%
Great: 59%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

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 youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
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 keep returning.
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 $45SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair 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