Samsung 700Z3A/700Z4A/700Z5A/700Z5B

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 51%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (54th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 46 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 60.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics2.09% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
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.
Memory6GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 6GB 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
3 years ago, 3 years ago.
SystemSamsung 700Z3A/700Z4A/700Z5A/700Z5B  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG 700Z3A/700Z4A/700Z5A/700Z5B
Memory4.4 GB free of 6 GB @ 1.3 GHz
DisplayЦвета: 1600 x 900 - 32 Bit,
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20121106
Uptime1 Days
Run DateDec 03 '20 at 09:00
Run Duration123 Seconds
Run User UKR-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing as expected (54th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2675QM
CPU, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.2 GHz, turbo 2.05 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (56th percentile)
60.2% Good
Memory 83.2
1-Core 66.2
2-Core 114
56% 87.7 Pts
4-Core 211
8-Core 252
30% 231 Pts
64-Core 251
16% 251 Pts
Poor: 37%
This bench: 60.2%
Great: 68%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 3000 (Mobile V1 1.1/1.2 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C0B3) 2GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
2.09% Terrible
Lighting 2.7
Reflection 4.8
Parallax 2.4
2% 3.3 fps
MRender 2.6
Gravity 1.9
Splatting 2.4
2% 2.3 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 2.09%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 2.5" 500GB (2012)-$79
280GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 55 54 60 62 61 60 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
31.5% Below average
Read 50.9
Write 84.9
Mixed 22.1
SusWrite 58.5
39% 54.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.1
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
130% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 31.5%
Great: 63%
StoreJet Transcend 640GB
103GB free, PID 2329
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 38 38 38 38 37 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
17.6% Very poor
Read 33.8
Write 35
Mixed 31.1
SusWrite 37.9
47% 34.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.6
70% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 17.6%
Great: 19%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5273CH0-CH9 Kingston KF073F-ELD 6GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 2048 MB
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
38.7% Below average
MC Read 14.8
MC Write 14
MC Mixed 11.5
38% 13.4 GB/s
SC Read 8.3
SC Write 11
SC Mixed 8.8
27% 9.37 GB/s
Latency 74.9
53% 74.9 ns
Poor: 23%
This bench: 38.7%
Great: 48%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 700Z3A/700Z4A/700Z5A/700Z5B Builds (Compare 85 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 53%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

System: Samsung 700Z3A/700Z4A/700Z5A/700Z5B

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 21% - Poor Total price: $28
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia 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 $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair 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