ADD TO PC
BUILD

Medion Erazer X7841 MD99556

Performance Results


Gaming 46% Yacht	Desktop 84% Aircraft carrier	Workstation 39% Jet ski


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (80th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 20 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 76.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics	51.6% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory	16GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Run History

3 years ago, 3 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago, 2 years ago.

System	Medion Erazer X7841 MD99556 (all builds)
Motherboard	MEDION P670RS-GM
Memory	12.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit kleuren
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20170725
Uptime	0.1 Days
Run Date	Feb 24 '22 at 12:05
Run Duration	156 Seconds
Run User	BEL-User
Background CPU	4%

PC Performing above expectations (80^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-6820HK 20,362 User benchmarks, average bench 69% U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 2 GHz, turbo 3.1 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (87^th percentile)	76.5% Very good	Memory 92.5 1-Core 109 2-Core 185 76% 129 Pts	4-Core 327 8-Core 517 52% 422 Pts	64-Core 517 32% 517 Pts
Poor: 50% ↑ This bench: 76.5% Great: 82%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060 (Mobile) 177,775 User benchmarks, average bench 47% Clevo(1558 6B02) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1999 MHz, MLim: 2027 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 441.66 Performing way above expectations (96^th percentile)	51.6% Above average	Lighting 62.2 Reflection 73.5 Parallax 63.2 51% 66.3 fps	MRender 66.1 Gravity 63.6 Splatting 65.3 53% 65 fps
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 51.6% Great: 52%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung MZNLN256HMHQ-00000 256GB 10,917 User benchmarks, average bench 96% 22GB free (System drive) Firmware: MAV2100Q Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete		Read 462 Write 427 Mixed 366 93% 418 MB/s	4K Read 41.5 4K Write 90.6 4K Mixed 53.7 180% 61.9 MB/s	DQ Read 367 DQ Write 334 DQ Mixed 343 259% 348 MB/s
Poor: 68% Great: 116%
OCZ Vector 150 120GB-$89 1,360 User benchmarks, average bench 82% 73GB free Firmware: 1.2 SusWrite @10s intervals: 323 415 419 419 419 419 MB/s Performing way above expectations (86^th percentile)	96% Outstanding	Read 449 Write 409 Mixed 322 SusWrite 402 89% 396 MB/s	4K Read 23.6 4K Write 93.3 4K Mixed 34.6 130% 50.5 MB/s	DQ Read 306 DQ Write 310 DQ Mixed 290 223% 302 MB/s
Poor: 54% ↑ This bench: 96% Great: 100%
Seagate Momentus 5400.6 2.5" 500GB-$27 83,084 User benchmarks, average bench 31% 238GB free Firmware: 0003SDM1 SusWrite @10s intervals: 47 51 51 50 51 51 MB/s Performing below expectations (29^th percentile)	27% Poor	Read 43.8 Write 38.6 Mixed 27.3 SusWrite 50.1 29% 39.9 MB/s	4K Read 0.4 4K Write 0.7 4K Mixed 0.5 85% 0.53 MB/s
Poor: 9% ↑ This bench: 27% Great: 43%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Hynix HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 2x8GB 55,289 User benchmarks, average bench 70% 2 of 4 slots used 16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	85% Excellent	MC Read 30.7 MC Write 32.7 MC Mixed 26.1 85% 29.8 GB/s	SC Read 19.9 SC Write 34.8 SC Mixed 27.6 78% 27.4 GB/s	Latency 63.1 63% 63.1 ns
Poor: 53% ↑ This bench: 85% Great: 76%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical Erazer X7841 MD99556 Builds (Compare 32 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 10%

Tree trunk

Desktop

Desktop 56%

Gunboat

Workstation

Workstation 9%

Tree trunk

System: Medion Erazer X7841 MD99556

CPU
Core i7-6700HQIntelBench 59%, 320,434 samples	16x
Core i7-6820HKIntelBench 69%, 20,362 samples	10x
Core i5-6300HQIntelBench 54%, 41,531 samples	4x

GPU
HD 530 (Mobile Skylake)IntelBench 5%, 213,495 samples	12x
GTX 970MNvidiaBench 31%, 21,995 samples	9x
GTX 1070 (Mobile)NvidiaBench 72%, 73,882 samples	8x

SSD
MZNLF128HCHP-00000 128GBSamsungBench 47%, 6,038 samples	7x
850 Evo 500GBSamsung $94Bench 112%, 695,664 samples	3x
PM981 NVMe PCIe M.2 512GBSamsungBench 217%, 80,540 samples	3x

RAM
HMA41GS6AFR8N-TF 2x8GBHynixBench 70%, 55,289 samples	9x
HyperX DDR4 2666 C15 2x8GBKingstonBench 79%, 9,568 samples	7x
HyperX DDR4 2400 C14 2x8GBKingstonBench 78%, 5,327 samples	2x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.

Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?

PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.

Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?

We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.

Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?

Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.

The Best.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170	Nvidia RTX 4060 $293	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback