Fujitsu S6421

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (63rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 37 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 42.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Boot Drive25.3% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 12 years and 2 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 (48%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemFujitsu S6421  (all builds)
MotherboardFUJITSU FJNB1E6
Memory1.3 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.4 GHz
Display1280 x 800 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20090909
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 20 '21 at 11:12
Run Duration417 Seconds
Run User HKG-User
Background CPU 48%

 PC Performing above expectations (63rd percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
Intel Pentium T4400-$110
Onboard, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.2 GHz
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
42.7% Average
Memory 72.8
1-Core 37.2
2-Core 70.1
41% 60 Pts
4-Core 77
8-Core 77.7
11% 77.3 Pts
64-Core 76.2
5% 76.2 Pts
Poor: 21%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 43%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
DM F500 120G 120GB
71GB free (System drive)
Firmware: FW20
SusWrite @10s intervals: 160 149 128 146 139 190 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
25.3% Poor
Read 238
Write 176
Mixed 146
SusWrite 152
40% 178 MB/s
4K Read 4.5
4K Write 8.3
4K Mixed 6
19% 6.27 MB/s
DQ Read 10.8
DQ Write 13.2
DQ Mixed 7.4
7% 10.5 MB/s
Poor: 50%
This bench: 25.3%
Great: 94%
WD WD3200BEVS-16VAT0 320GB
140GB free
Firmware: 11.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 42 41 37 40 40 50 MB/s
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
28.1% Poor
Read 56
Write 54.6
Mixed 33
SusWrite 41.7
34% 46.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
122% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 28.1%
Great: 37%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown 2x2GB
2 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM 15h Reserved
Performing below potential (37th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
15% Very poor
MC Read 5.2
MC Write 3.8
MC Mixed 4.1
12% 4.37 GB/s
SC Read 4.5
SC Write 4
SC Mixed 4
12% 4.17 GB/s
Latency 95.1
42% 95.1 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 15%
Great: 45%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-11600K $270Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Crucial MX500 250GB $45
Intel Core i5-11400F $260Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
Intel Core i7-11700K $380Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $183
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $40Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $74SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $22Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $77SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $72G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $649SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback