Samsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (39th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 61 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.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 48.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.28% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive57.5% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Run History
SystemSamsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG NP300E4C-A0TMX
Memory5.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20131101
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 24 '20 at 03:40
Run Duration138 Seconds
Run User MEX-User
Background CPU7%

 PC Performing below expectations (39th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-3110M-$70
CPU Socket - U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 2.4 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
48.5% Average
Memory 69.4
1-Core 66.3
2-Core 115
51% 83.7 Pts
4-Core 162
8-Core 165
22% 163 Pts
64-Core 166
10% 166 Pts
Poor: 32%
This bench: 48.5%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4000 (Mobile 1.25 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C652) 2GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4276
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
3.28% Terrible
Lighting 3.63
Reflection 4.85
Parallax 2.5
3% 3.66 fps
MRender 4.62
Gravity 2.03
Splatting 6.83
4% 4.49 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.28%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Adata Ultimate SU800 512GB-$66
298GB free (System drive)
Firmware: Q0922FS
SusWrite @10s intervals: 197 218 220 236 235 234 MB/s
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
57.5% Above average
Read 246
Write 238
Mixed 225
SusWrite 223
52% 233 MB/s
4K Read 19.8
4K Write 39
4K Mixed 25.4
83% 28.1 MB/s
DQ Read 175
DQ Write 185
DQ Mixed 173
132% 178 MB/s
Poor: 71%
This bench: 57.5%
Great: 127%
General USB Flash Disk 16GB
15GB free, PID 0918
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 5.7 7.2 9.6 7.8 7.2 9.6 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
7.05% Terrible
Read 27.3
Write 4.5
Mixed 16.4
SusWrite 7.9
16% 14 MB/s
4K Read 5.8
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
22% 1.93 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 7.05%
Great: 24%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 04CB AM1U16BC4P2-B19C 8GB
1600, 1600 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
50.5% Above average
MC Read 18.5
MC Write 19.4
MC Mixed 17.3
53% 18.4 GB/s
SC Read 11.6
SC Write 12.8
SC Mixed 14.4
37% 12.9 GB/s
Latency 103
39% 103 ns
Poor: 24%
This bench: 50.5%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C Builds (Compare 1,058 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
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 $39SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair 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