Samsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (60th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 40 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 58%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics2.97% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive37.2% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Very high background CPU (84%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemSamsung 300E4C/300E5C/300E7C  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG SAMSUNG_NP1234567890
Memory6.1 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20121025
Uptime0 Days
Run DateFeb 02 '21 at 11:56
Run Duration119 Seconds
Run User ARG-User
Background CPU 84%

 PC Performing as expected (60th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3210M-$52
CPU Socket - U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
58% Above average
Memory 81.5
1-Core 74.7
2-Core 127
58% 94.3 Pts
4-Core 202
8-Core 202
27% 202 Pts
64-Core 204
13% 204 Pts
Poor: 31%
This bench: 58%
Great: 57%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4000 (Mobile 1.25 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C652) 2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 8.15.10.2712
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
2.97% Terrible
Lighting 3.5
Reflection 1.7
Parallax 2.7
3% 2.63 fps
MRender 4.4
Gravity 2.3
Splatting 4.7
3% 3.8 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.97%
Great: 4%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Green 480GB (2018)-$69
205GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UG22
SusWrite @10s intervals: 189 41 93 99 52 132 MB/s
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
37.2% Below average
Read 240
Write 227
Mixed 175
SusWrite 101
42% 186 MB/s
4K Read 16.8
4K Write 28.8
4K Mixed 12.3
56% 19.3 MB/s
DQ Read 109
DQ Write 97.8
DQ Mixed 25.5
40% 77.4 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 37.2%
Great: 60%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
MAGNUMTECH 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
48.9% Average
MC Read 17.5
MC Write 17.7
MC Mixed 15.9
49% 17 GB/s
SC Read 13.4
SC Write 14.4
SC Mixed 13.9
40% 13.9 GB/s
Latency 77.8
51% 77.8 ns
Poor: 42%
This bench: 48.9%
Great: 50%

 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?
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