Daewoo Solo Top

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 61%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (39th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 61 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 60.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics7.5% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive18.8% is an extremely low SSD score, this system will benefit from a faster SSD.
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 (62%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
2 years ago, 2 years ago.
SystemDaewoo Solo top
MotherboardDaewoo Solo Top  (all builds)
Memory0.9 GB free of 6 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120425
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateSep 27 '21 at 12:34
Run Duration192 Seconds
Run User LKA-User
Background CPU 62%

 PC Performing below expectations (39th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-3220-$60
SOCKET 1155, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz, turbo 3.3 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (92nd percentile)
60.2% Good
Memory 84
1-Core 83.1
2-Core 138
62% 102 Pts
4-Core 211
8-Core 220
29% 216 Pts
64-Core 222
14% 222 Pts
Poor: 38%
This bench: 60.2%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 550-Ti-$250
Device(0000 0000) 1GB
CLim: 900 MHz, MLim: 1026 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
7.5% Terrible
Lighting 7.6
Reflection 13.8
Parallax 7.1
6% 9.5 fps
MRender 15.3
Gravity 11.4
Splatting 10.8
10% 12.5 fps
Poor: 7%
This bench: 7.5%
Great: 9%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
SSD 120GB 120GB
8GB free (System drive)
Firmware: Q1204B0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 165 162 2.8 26 21 40 MB/s
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
18.8% Very poor
Read 201
Write 196
Mixed 19.2
SusWrite 69.4
27% 121 MB/s
4K Read 10.9
4K Write 8.9
4K Mixed 0.6
22% 6.8 MB/s
DQ Read 16.8
DQ Write 11.5
DQ Mixed 1.6
5% 9.97 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 18.8%
Great: 81%
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$24
47GB free
Firmware: 15.01H15
SusWrite @10s intervals: 70 76 76 78 79 79 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
44.5% Average
Read 78.4
Write 74.7
Mixed 48.4
SusWrite 76.5
51% 69.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.7
138% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 44.5%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$24
14GB free
Firmware: 15.01H15
SusWrite @10s intervals: 89 93 105 81 75 71 MB/s
Performing as expected (41st percentile)
50.8% Above average
Read 91.3
Write 85.1
Mixed 59.9
SusWrite 85.6
59% 80.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
140% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 50.8%
Great: 69%
WD Blue 500GB (2010)-$24
445GB free
Firmware: 15.01H15
SusWrite @10s intervals: 111 115 116 115 118 117 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
66.5% Good
Read 117
Write 109
Mixed 63.6
SusWrite 115
74% 101 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.9
149% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 24%
This bench: 66.5%
Great: 69%
WD My Passport 25E1 2TB
121GB free, PID 25e1
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 23 24 25 25 25 22 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
16.4% Very poor
Read 7.7
Write 21.3
Mixed 10.5
SusWrite 23.9
24% 15.9 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 3.2
4K Mixed 0.7
137% 1.67 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 16.4%
Great: 61%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 99U5471-032.A00LF 9905471-009.A00Ls 6GB
1333, 1333 MHz
2048, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
40.8% Average
MC Read 14.4
MC Write 14.1
MC Mixed 13
40% 13.8 GB/s
SC Read 10.4
SC Write 12.4
SC Mixed 12.2
33% 11.7 GB/s
Latency 73.4
54% 73.4 ns
Poor: 38%
This bench: 40.8%
Great: 46%

 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% 0 8 6 60 23.8" 1280 720 AOC2401 24B1W1
Typical Solo Top Builds (Compare 82 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: Daewoo Solo Top

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 97% - Outstanding Total price: $59
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