bin bin

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (41st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 59 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 39.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics6.49% 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 Drive59.2% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
System
MotherboardIntel DG33BU
Memory0.8 GB free of 4 GB @ 0 GHz
DisplayЦвета: 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20070502
Uptime0.5 Days
Run DateDec 03 '20 at 20:17
Run Duration222 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing as expected (41st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Duo E6550-$20
J1PR, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.35 GHz, turbo 2.3 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (66th percentile)
39.2% Below average
Memory 71.6
1-Core 23.1
2-Core 52.2
35% 49 Pts
4-Core 43.2
8-Core 45.4
6% 44.3 Pts
64-Core 47.4
3% 47.4 Pts
Poor: 26%
This bench: 39.2%
Great: 43%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD HD 5770
Sapphire(174B 1482) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.301.1901.0
Relative performance (0th percentile)
6.49% Terrible
Lighting 8.7
Reflection 8.6
Parallax 8.6
7% 8.63 fps
MRender 7.2
Gravity 6.8
Splatting 5.8
5% 6.6 fps
Poor: 10%
This bench: 6.49%
Great: 11%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 250GB-$52
198GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT04B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 186 196 197 200 209 199 MB/s
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
59.2% Above average
Read 224
Write 218
Mixed 205
SusWrite 198
48% 211 MB/s
4K Read 30.3
4K Write 46.9
4K Mixed 33.2
113% 36.8 MB/s
DQ Read 42
DQ Write 89.4
DQ Mixed 54.3
45% 61.9 MB/s
Poor: 75%
This bench: 59.2%
Great: 128%
Samsung HD321KJ 320GB-$42
9GB free
Firmware: CP100-10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 74 74 74 73 74 74 MB/s
Performing above expectations (84th percentile)
40.1% Average
Read 65.7
Write 49.6
Mixed 50.3
SusWrite 73.9
44% 59.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
144% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 21%
This bench: 40.1%
Great: 43%
Samsung HD322HJ 320GB-$44
3GB free
Firmware: 1AC01118
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 83.2
Write 56.6
Mixed 50.3
47% 63.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 1
171% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 23% Great: 62%
HP v165w 2GB
0GB free, PID 5307
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 6.5 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.5 6.8 MB/s
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
5.68% Terrible
Read 17.7
Write 5.3
Mixed 4.2
SusWrite 6.7
9% 8.48 MB/s
4K Read 7
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
26% 2.33 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5.68%
Great: 8%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 1.5TB
482GB free, PID a006
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 14 14 14 14 14 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
12.3% Very poor
Read 29.2
Write 25.3
Mixed 20
SusWrite 14
29% 22.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.6
76% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 12.3%
Great: 42%
SPCC PHD 500GB
222GB free, PID 1d40
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 13 14 14 14 14 14 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
11.8% Very poor
Read 28
Write 21.3
Mixed 20.5
SusWrite 13.8
27% 20.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.6
73% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 11.8%
Great: 19%
PHD 3.0 Silicon-Power 2TB
1.5TB free, PID 55aa
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 13 13 14 14 14 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
20.9% Poor
Read 30.1
Write 17.5
Mixed 20.6
SusWrite 13.6
26% 20.4 MB/s
4K Read 1.7
4K Write 4.3
4K Mixed 0.4
166% 2.13 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 20.9%
Great: 56%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x1GB
4 of 4 slots used
4GB DIMM DDR2
Performing above expectations (66th percentile)
18.3% Very poor
MC Read 6.4
MC Write 5.6
MC Mixed 5.4
17% 5.8 GB/s
SC Read 3.9
SC Write 5
SC Mixed 4.5
13% 4.47 GB/s
Latency 97.8
41% 97.8 ns
Poor: 11%
This bench: 18.3%
Great: 28%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical bin Builds (Compare 24,458 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 61%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Disqualified System: bin bin

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 64% - Good Total price: $325
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark challenges their narrative so they attack our reputation with a co-ordinated charade.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of profit on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes the youtubers that are paid to promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar PC brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which collectively saves our users millions.
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) $40Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk 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