Lenovo 10110

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 54%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. Use the charts in the benchmark sections of this report to identify problem areas.
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 53%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics1.39% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive62.6% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
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.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago.
SystemLenovo 10110  (all builds)
MotherboardLENOVO INVALID
Memory10.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130226
Uptime5.6 Days
Run DateJun 16 '21 at 15:58
Run Duration293 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing below expectations (30th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-3240
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.4 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
53% Above average
Memory 71.5
1-Core 89.2
2-Core 143
60% 101 Pts
4-Core 206
8-Core 183
26% 194 Pts
64-Core 232
14% 232 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 53%
Great: 65%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 2500 (Desktop 1.05 GHz)
Intel(8086 2011) 2GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4252
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
1.39% Terrible
Lighting 1.5
Reflection 0.5
Parallax 1.5
1% 1.17 fps
MRender 3.3
Gravity 1.1
Splatting 2
2% 2.13 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.39%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 1TB-$139
762GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 213 228 228 228 227 230 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
62.6% Good
Read 257
Write 227
Mixed 222
SusWrite 226
52% 233 MB/s
4K Read 23.8
4K Write 42.4
4K Mixed 28.7
95% 31.6 MB/s
DQ Read 205
DQ Write 192
DQ Mixed 181
140% 192 MB/s
Poor: 81%
This bench: 62.6%
Great: 133%
Toshiba USB2.0 Drive R00 1TB
163GB free, PID a000
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 16 16 16 16 16 16 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
17.6% Very poor
Read 22.4
Write 25.6
Mixed 22.9
SusWrite 16.2
30% 21.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 3.5
4K Mixed 0.4
134% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 17.6%
Great: 19%
WD A MQ01A External 1TB
823GB free, PID 0704
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 16 17 16 16 16 17 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
12.9% Very poor
Read 31.7
Write 25.3
Mixed 20.4
SusWrite 16.4
30% 23.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.5
70% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 12.9%
Great: 20%
Generic Flash Disk 2GB
1GB free, PID 6387
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.8 4.3 4.2 4.2 4 4.1 MB/s
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
3.68% Terrible
Read 14.5
Write 3.7
Mixed 4.2
SusWrite 4.1
7% 6.63 MB/s
4K Read 2.9
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
11% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.68%
Great: 8%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Crucial CT102464BF160B.C16 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (38th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
50.6% Above average
MC Read 19.8
MC Write 19.2
MC Mixed 17
53% 18.7 GB/s
SC Read 8.9
SC Write 10.2
SC Mixed 15.4
33% 11.5 GB/s
Latency 98
41% 98 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 50.6%
Great: 59%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 8 12 9 60 23.1" 1920 1080 LEN2000 Lenovo AIO PC
Typical 10110 Builds (Compare 90 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Lenovo 10110

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 15% - Very poor Total price: $25
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 support 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 and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $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