Quanta NL5A

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (17th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 83 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 51.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics9.71% 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.
Memory16GB 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (22%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemQuanta NL5A  (all builds)
MotherboardQuanta NL5
Memory10.8 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20170914
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 17 '22 at 11:18
Run Duration133 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU 22%

 PC Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
51.3% Above average
Memory 66.3
1-Core 84.7
2-Core 145
58% 98.8 Pts
4-Core 197
8-Core 355
33% 276 Pts
64-Core 265
16% 265 Pts
Poor: 38%
This bench: 51.3%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1060 (Mobile)
Quanta(152D 1154) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1911 MHz, MLim: 2002 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 511.65
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
9.71% Terrible
Lighting 10.6
Reflection 13.4
Parallax 13.6
9% 12.5 fps
MRender 18.1
Gravity 11.8
Splatting 13.8
12% 14.6 fps
Poor: 35%
This bench: 9.71%
Great: 52%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 250GB-$45
19GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 3B7Q Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 1,710
Write 798
Mixed 507
219% 1,005 MB/s
4K Read 41.6
4K Write 87.2
4K Mixed 40.4
161% 56.4 MB/s
DQ Read 636
DQ Write 310
DQ Mixed 520
374% 489 MB/s
Poor: 142% Great: 236%
Mushkin MKNSSDTR500GB-3DX 500GB
211GB free
Firmware: R1016ANR
SusWrite @10s intervals: 333 348 345 360 398 354 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
95.1% Outstanding
Read 425
Write 319
Mixed 386
SusWrite 356
84% 372 MB/s
4K Read 29.9
4K Write 62.9
4K Mixed 40.7
131% 44.5 MB/s
DQ Read 364
DQ Write 328
DQ Mixed 284
230% 325 MB/s
Poor: 85%
This bench: 95.1%
Great: 127%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
G.SKILL F4 DDR4 2400 C16 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
66.7% Good
MC Read 26.9
MC Write 24.9
MC Mixed 22.4
71% 24.7 GB/s
SC Read 12.5
SC Write 22.3
SC Mixed 17.2
50% 17.3 GB/s
Latency 111
36% 111 ns
Poor: 54%
This bench: 66.7%
Great: 86%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical NL5A Builds (Compare 31 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 48%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 70%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 41%
Speed boat

System: Quanta NL5A

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.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia 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) $39Corsair 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