Fujitsu AMILO Xa 2529

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 22%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 1%
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 relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 28.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.82% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive18.7% is an extremely low SSD score, this system will benefit from a faster SSD.
Memory3GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 3GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemFujitsu AMILO Xa 2529  (all builds)
MotherboardFUJITSU XTB72___
Memory1.6 GB free of 3 GB @ 0 GHz
Display1440 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20081112
Uptime0 Days
Run DateOct 01 '17 at 18:51
Run Duration128 Seconds
Run User ROU-User
Background CPU 100%

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core TK-53
Socket A, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.7 GHz, turbo 1.7 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
28.7% Poor
Memory 49.3
1-Core 25.2
2-Core 48.1
28% 40.9 Pts
4-Core 49.3
8-Core 47.7
6% 48.5 Pts
64-Core 48.8
3% 48.8 Pts
Poor: 13%
This bench: 28.7%
Great: 34%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 8600M GS
Fijitsu Siemens(1734 110C) 256MB
Ram: 256MB, Driver: 342.1
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
0.82% Terrible
Lighting 0.9
Reflection 1.5
Parallax 0.16
1% 0.85 fps
MRender 1.95
Gravity 0.63
Splatting 1.09
1% 1.22 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 0.82%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston SUV400S3712 120GB
96GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0C3K Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
18.7% Very poor
Read 105
Write 47.7
Mixed 56.8
15% 69.8 MB/s
4K Read 14.8
4K Write 12.3
4K Mixed 5.78
36% 11 MB/s
DQ Read 19.7
DQ Write 27.2
DQ Mixed 4.41
9% 17.1 MB/s
Poor: 19%
This bench: 18.7%
Great: 49%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 3GB
null MHz
2048, 1024 MB
Performing below potential (27th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
10.5% Very poor
MC Read 3
MC Write 3.7
MC Mixed 2.8
9% 3.17 GB/s
SC Read 3
SC Write 3.9
SC Mixed 2.6
9% 3.17 GB/s
Latency 163
24% 163 ns
Poor: 8%
This bench: 10.5%
Great: 23%

 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 $273Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $132Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $186Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $34Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair 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