Samsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
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 an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 48.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics1.58% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive33% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait 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.
High background CPU (24%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemSamsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA
Memory1.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20111214
Uptime7.6 Days
Run DateJan 04 '22 at 07:05
Run Duration123 Seconds
Run User ZAF-User
Background CPU 24%

 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 i3-2350M
CPU, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.3 GHz, turbo 1.8 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
48.8% Average
Memory 81.3
1-Core 54.5
2-Core 81.6
49% 72.5 Pts
4-Core 97.4
8-Core 103
13% 100 Pts
64-Core 105
6% 105 Pts
Poor: 30%
This bench: 48.8%
Great: 56%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 3000 (Mobile V1 1.1/1.2 GHz)
Sanyo(144D C606) 2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing above expectations (69th percentile)
1.58% Terrible
Lighting 1.8
Reflection 1.8
Parallax 1.5
2% 1.7 fps
MRender 2.6
Gravity 1.7
Splatting 2.3
2% 2.2 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.58%
Great: 2%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Emtec X150 240GB
100GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SN4763
SusWrite @10s intervals: 21 8 6.5 10 10 9.7 MB/s
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
33% Below average
Read 220
Write 201
Mixed 93.4
SusWrite 11
29% 131 MB/s
4K Read 21.4
4K Write 26.9
4K Mixed 16
67% 21.4 MB/s
DQ Read 115
DQ Write 29
DQ Mixed 41.5
38% 61.8 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 33%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905428-051.A00LF Hynix HMT351S6BFR8C-H9 8GB
1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (27th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
43.1% Average
MC Read 15.5
MC Write 15.4
MC Mixed 14.9
44% 15.3 GB/s
SC Read 9.3
SC Write 10.6
SC Mixed 10.8
29% 10.2 GB/s
Latency 78.2
51% 78.2 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 43.1%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA Builds (Compare 586 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Samsung 300E4A/300E5A/300E7A/3430EA/3530EA

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 48% - Average Total price: $253
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $48
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback