Performance Results


Gaming 3% Tree trunk	Desktop 19% Surfboard	Workstation 3% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing way below expectations (12th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 88 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 17.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Graphics	1.46% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	35.4% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Very high background CPU (64%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

PC Performing way below expectations (12^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Celeron N3150 3,131 User benchmarks, average bench 26% CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 2.1 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (8^th percentile)	17.7% Very poor	Memory 24 1-Core 19.3 2-Core 35.9 16% 26.4 Pts	4-Core 65.4 8-Core 74.6 9% 70 Pts	64-Core 74.6 5% 74.6 Pts
Poor: 18% ↑ This bench: 17.7% Great: 32%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Intel HD Graphics 60,712 User benchmarks, average bench 1% ASRock(1849 22B1) 1GB Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.4531 Performing below expectations (25^th percentile)	1.46% Terrible	Lighting 1.6 Reflection 1.4 Parallax 2.5 1% 1.83 fps	MRender 2.3 Gravity 1.8 Splatting 2.3 2% 2.13 fps
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 1.46% Great: 2%

Drive	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
INTENSO 128GB 3,345 User benchmarks, average bench 65% 34GB free (System drive) Firmware: S9FM02.6 SusWrite @10s intervals: 35 45 56 39 53 44 MB/s Performing way below expectations (6^th percentile)	35.4% Below average	Read 332 Write 39.3 Mixed 124 SusWrite 45.3 29% 135 MB/s	4K Read 18.3 4K Write 19.5 4K Mixed 9.8 51% 15.9 MB/s	DQ Read 127 DQ Write 71.7 DQ Mixed 6.5 30% 68.4 MB/s
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 35.4% Great: 91%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Kingston 99U5469-045.A00LF 2x4GB 788 User benchmarks, average bench 43% 2 of 2 slots used 8GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz Performing way below expectations (7^th percentile)	20.3% Poor	MC Read 6.7 MC Write 9.4 MC Mixed 7.4 22% 7.83 GB/s	SC Read 2 SC Write 4.8 SC Mixed 3.2 10% 3.33 GB/s	Latency 292 14% 292 ns
Poor: 18% ↑ This bench: 20.3% Great: 55%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 2%

Tree trunk

Desktop 27%

Raft

Workstation 2%

Tree trunk

CPU
Celeron N3150IntelBench 26%, 3,131 samples	7x

GPU
HD GraphicsIntelBench 1%, 60,712 samples	7x

SSD
128GB 128GBKingchuxingBench 69%, 246 samples	3x
PX-128M6M 128GBPlextorBench 80%, 527 samples	1x
SB2 256GBBench 70%, 169 samples	1x

RAM
TS256MSK64W6N 2x2GBTranscendBench 39%, 40 samples	3x
HyperX DDR3 1600 C9 2x4GBKingstonBench 47%, 1,963 samples	2x
RMT3170MN68F9F1600 2x4GBRAMAXELBench 42%, 3,176 samples	1x

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $32	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16