Asus X205TAW

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 19%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way above expectations (85th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 15 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. This PC is likely operated by a technical master!
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 42.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics0.95% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive26.5% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (33%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemAsus X205TAW  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK X205TAW
Memory0.5 GB free of 2 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150918
Uptime25.5 Days
Run DateAug 14 '17 at 18:46
Run Duration119 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 33%

 PC Performing way above expectations (85th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Atom Z3735F
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.35 GHz, turbo 1.55 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
42.8% Average
Memory 74.3
1-Core 19.6
2-Core 38.5
34% 44.1 Pts
4-Core 68.9
8-Core 69.3
9% 69.1 Pts
64-Core 69.7
4% 69.7 Pts
Poor: 24%
This bench: 42.8%
Great: 38%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail 0.667 - 0.854 GHz)
Asus(1043 18CD) 1,020MB
Driver: igdumdim32.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4358
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
0.95% Terrible
Lighting 0.97
Reflection 1.23
Parallax 1.03
1% 1.08 fps
MRender 1.95
Gravity 0.87
Splatting 1.74
1% 1.52 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.95%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk SDW32G 31GB
2GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0.1
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
26.5% Poor
Read 218
Write 59.9
Mixed 59.1
24% 112 MB/s
4K Read 16.9
4K Write 17.6
4K Mixed 5.39
42% 13.3 MB/s
DQ Read 76.1
DQ Write 25.9
DQ Mixed 5.22
16% 35.8 MB/s
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x2GB
1 of 1 slots used
2GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
25.1% Poor
MC Read 8.9
MC Write 9.5
MC Mixed 7.8
25% 8.73 GB/s
SC Read 3
SC Write 5.8
SC Mixed 5.1
13% 4.63 GB/s
Latency 91.8
44% 91.8 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 25.1%
Great: 26%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $182Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $30Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.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