Casper NIRVANA ONE PC

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 63.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics2.3% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
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.
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 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.
SystemCasper NIRVANA ONE PC  (all builds)
MotherboardINTEL MAHOBAY
Memory5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit renk
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20121113
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 01 '21 at 19:10
Run Duration197 Seconds
Run User TUR-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3470S
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 3.2 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
63.6% Good
Memory 77.1
1-Core 92.7
2-Core 170
66% 113 Pts
4-Core 280
8-Core 345
40% 313 Pts
64-Core 302
19% 302 Pts
Poor: 52%
This bench: 63.6%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 630M
Device(1991 5584) 1GB
CLim: 475 MHz, MLim: 450 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing way below expectations (5th percentile)
2.3% Terrible
Lighting 2.7
Reflection 3.9
Parallax 0.6
2% 2.4 fps
MRender 4.3
Gravity 3
Splatting 2.2
2% 3.17 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.3%
Great: 4%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
294GB free (System drive)
Firmware: KC45
SusWrite @10s intervals: 48 47 65 83 70 75 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
47% Average
Read 99.1
Write 101
Mixed 54.1
SusWrite 64.8
59% 79.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.7
127% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 47%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5273DM0-CH9 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
49.7% Average
MC Read 18.1
MC Write 18.3
MC Mixed 15.9
50% 17.4 GB/s
SC Read 14.5
SC Write 13.8
SC Mixed 15.1
41% 14.5 GB/s
Latency 86
46% 86 ns
Poor: 22%
This bench: 49.7%
Great: 52%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 33: 4R 3G 4B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
33% 19% 59 46 36 60 14.5" 1536 864 NVD0800 Nvidia Default Flat Panel
History: Score 22: 4R 0G 2B | Score 33: 4R 3G 4B
Typical NIRVANA ONE PC Builds (Compare 19 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 60%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Casper NIRVANA ONE PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 9% - Terrible Total price: $57
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 $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 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