AMD QXc5200

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 44%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 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 43.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.92% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive60.7% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait 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.
Very high background CPU (44%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemAMD QXc5200  (all builds)
MotherboardAMD Lamar
Memory3.1 GB free of 6 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20180308
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 03 '21 at 00:28
Run Duration130 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 44%

 PC Performing as expected (49th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD RX-427BB R7 Graphics
Socket FP3, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.7 GHz, turbo 2.75 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
43.9% Average
Memory 64.2
1-Core 50.1
2-Core 90.3
43% 68.2 Pts
4-Core 137
8-Core 148
19% 143 Pts
64-Core 150
9% 150 Pts
Poor: 32%
This bench: 43.9%
Great: 46%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
AMD(1002 0123) 1GB
CLim: 705 MHz, MLim: 992 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 17.1.1
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
3.92% Terrible
Lighting 4.3
Reflection 7.8
Parallax 7.5
4% 6.53 fps
MRender 5.2
Gravity 4.3
Splatting 7.2
5% 5.57 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 3.92%
Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
SanDisk Z400s 128GB-$109
76GB free (System drive)
Firmware: Z2333000
SusWrite @10s intervals: 163 172 172 177 175 171 MB/s
Performing as expected (47th percentile)
60.7% Good
Read 441
Write 168
Mixed 190
SusWrite 172
54% 243 MB/s
4K Read 25.2
4K Write 64.1
4K Mixed 12.3
88% 33.9 MB/s
DQ Read 162
DQ Write 165
DQ Mixed 74.1
80% 134 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 60.7%
Great: 71%
Seagate Laptop Thin SSHD 2.5" 500GB-$30
355GB free
Firmware: SM14
SusWrite @10s intervals: 103 102 104 103 104 103 MB/s
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
51.5% Above average
Read 74.7
Write 86.5
Mixed 24.9
SusWrite 103
52% 72.3 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 5.2
4K Mixed 1.5
305% 2.57 MB/s
Poor: 18%
This bench: 51.5%
Great: 64%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Micron 16JSF51264HZ-1G4D1 Elpida EBJ20UF8BDU0-GN-F 6GB
667, 800 MHz
4096, 2048 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
25.8% Poor
MC Read 8.8
MC Write 7.4
MC Mixed 10.2
25% 8.8 GB/s
SC Read 7.2
SC Write 6.6
SC Mixed 7.7
20% 7.17 GB/s
Latency 116
34% 116 ns
Poor: 8%
This bench: 25.8%
Great: 28%

 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 thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
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) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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