Compaq-presario WC839AA-ABE CQ5305ES

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (44th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 56 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 41%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
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.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (20%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemCompaq-presario WC839AA-ABE CQ5305ES  (all builds)
MotherboardPEGATRON Narra6
Memory0.3 GB free of 2 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1024 x 768 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20091106
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 20 '20 at 14:15
Run Duration139 Seconds
Run User ESP-User
Background CPU 20%

 PC Performing as expected (44th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X2 215-$29
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.7 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
41% Average
Memory 71.4
1-Core 39.2
2-Core 66.1
40% 58.9 Pts
4-Core 65.5
8-Core 61.5
9% 63.5 Pts
64-Core 59.6
4% 59.6 Pts
Poor: 27%
This bench: 41%
Great: 47%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 500GB-$25
78GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HP34
SusWrite @10s intervals: 71 60 51 64 51 31 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
42.1% Average
Read 92
Write 83.4
Mixed 45.8
SusWrite 54.8
51% 69 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.8
117% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 28%
This bench: 42.1%
Great: 70%
Linux File-Stor Gadget 500GB
8GB free, PID 1265
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 22 22 22 22 22 22 MB/s
Performing above expectations (80th percentile)
11.6% Very poor
Read 20.7
Write 21.9
Mixed 20.4
SusWrite 22.2
29% 21.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 0.6
63% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 2%
This bench: 11.6%
Great: 12%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x2GB
1 of 2 slots used
2GB DIMM DDR3
Performing below potential (3rd percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
14.1% Very poor
MC Read 4.7
MC Write 3.4
MC Mixed 4.8
12% 4.3 GB/s
SC Read 2.9
SC Write 4.3
SC Mixed 1.2
8% 2.8 GB/s
Latency 98.2
41% 98.2 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 14.1%
Great: 26%

 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 endorse 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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160Nvidia 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 $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