Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing as expected (58th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 42 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With 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 35.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics	1.97% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (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.

High background CPU (21%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

PC Performing as expected (58^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Celeron J4105 1,216 User benchmarks, average bench 36% SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads Base clock 1.5 GHz, turbo 2.4 GHz (avg) Performing as expected (41^st percentile)	35.3% Below average	Memory 39.5 1-Core 49.8 2-Core 106 36% 65 Pts	4-Core 179 8-Core 185 24% 182 Pts	64-Core 185 11% 185 Pts
Poor: 24% ↑ This bench: 35.3% Great: 42%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Intel UHD Graphics 600 35,976 User benchmarks, average bench 1% Fijitsu Siemens(1734 1240) 1GB Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 31.0.101.2114 Performing above expectations (75^th percentile)	1.97% Terrible	Lighting 2.1 Reflection 1.7 Parallax 2.4 2% 2.07 fps	MRender 3 Gravity 2.1 Splatting 3.7 2% 2.93 fps
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 1.97% Great: 2%

Drives	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Kingchuxing 512GB 512GB 505 User benchmarks, average bench 141% 419GB free (System drive) Firmware: VE0R530F Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete	Read 362 Write 158 Mixed 165 50% 228 MB/s	4K Read 7.5 4K Write 41.2 4K Mixed 15.7 53% 21.5 MB/s	DQ Read 138 DQ Write 252 DQ Mixed 182 142% 191 MB/s
Poor: 42% Great: 224%
Generic Flash Disk 8GB 32,093 User benchmarks, average bench 5% 4GB free, PID 6387 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete	Read 12.5 Write 2.7 Mixed 4.5 7% 6.57 MB/s	4K Read 3.6 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 13% 1.2 MB/s
Poor: 2% Great: 7%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Toshiba HyperX DDR4 2666 C15 1x16GB 3 User benchmarks, average bench 23% 1 of 2 slots used 16GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	22.2% Poor	MC Read 7.9 MC Write 8.7 MC Mixed 8.7 24% 8.43 GB/s	SC Read 2.8 SC Write 4.6 SC Mixed 3.7 11% 3.7 GB/s	Latency 204 20% 204 ns
Poor: 23% ↑ This bench: 22.2% Great: 23%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 5%

Tree trunk

Desktop 36%

Jet ski

Workstation 5%

Tree trunk

CPU
Celeron J4105IntelBench 36%, 1,216 samples	20x

GPU
UHD Graphics 600IntelBench 1%, 35,976 samples	20x

SSD
860 EVO M.2 250GBSamsungBench 100%, 26,055 samples	3x
TS512GMTS430S 512GBTranscendBench 85%, 550 samples	2x
NE-512 512GBBench 177%, 5,933 samples	2x

RAM
M471A1K43CB1-CTD 1x8GBSamsungBench 40%, 96,646 samples	5x
8ATF1G64HZ-2G6E1 1x8GBMicron_Bench 20%, 21 samples	3x
M471A5244CB0-CTD 1x4GBSamsungBench 30%, 48,985 samples	3x

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $39	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $32	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16