TEST
YOUR PC
ADD TO PC
BUILD

Essentielb EB Dark'DESK 1004-1/B709

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 47%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 73%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 36%
Jet ski
Save results Copy results User guide
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 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 good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 61.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics70.6% is a good 3D score. This GPU can handle the majority of recent games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
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.
Very high background CPU (37%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemEssentielb EB Dark'DESK 1004-1/B709  (all builds)
Motherboardessentielb H81H3-EM2
Memory9.4 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150717
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateMar 27 '23 at 23:48
Run Duration147 Seconds
Run User FRA-User
Background CPU 37%
Watch Gameplay: 1660S + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing below expectations (30th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-4460-$194
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.2 GHz, turbo 3.2 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (43rd percentile)
61.7% Good
Memory 79.6
1-Core 89.2
2-Core 176
67% 115 Pts
4-Core 250
8-Core 280
35% 265 Pts
64-Core 268
17% 268 Pts
Poor: 46% ↑
This bench: 61.7%
 Great: 72%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super)-$195
Asus(1043 878A) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2145 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 531.41
Performing below potential (52nd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
70.6% Very good
Lighting 87.8
Reflection 88.2
Parallax 89
72% 88.3 fps
MRender 109
Gravity 78.5
Splatting 71.4
69% 86.3 fps
Poor: 65% ↑
This bench: 70.6%
 Great: 76%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB-$100
8GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT03B6Q
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 400
Write 320
Mixed 358
80% 359 MB/s
4K Read 29.5
4K Write 50
4K Mixed 36.5
118% 38.7 MB/s
DQ Read 351
DQ Write 284
DQ Mixed 321
240% 319 MB/s
Poor: 72% Great: 124%
Samsung 870 EVO 1TB-$100
89GB free
Firmware: SVT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 157 214 216 234 227 229 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
69% Good
Read 238
Write 225
Mixed 225
SusWrite 213
51% 225 MB/s
4K Read 32.1
4K Write 48
4K Mixed 36.9
121% 39 MB/s
DQ Read 197
DQ Write 191
DQ Mixed 191
144% 193 MB/s
Poor: 82% ↑
This bench: 69%
 Great: 137%
Seagate Desktop SSHD 1TB-$68
138GB free
Firmware: CC41
SusWrite @10s intervals: 130 130 128 130 130 130 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
64.9% Good
Read 95.2
Write 81.7
Mixed 28.4
SusWrite 130
61% 83.7 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 5.1
4K Mixed 2
371% 2.8 MB/s
Poor: 48% ↑
This bench: 64.9%
 Great: 112%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown M2F8G64CB8HD5N-DI 16GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (36th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
57.5% Above average
MC Read 20.4
MC Write 22.4
MC Mixed 18.3
58% 20.4 GB/s
SC Read 13.1
SC Write 17.3
SC Mixed 19.3
47% 16.6 GB/s
Latency 81.3
49% 81.3 ns
Poor: 56% ↑
This bench: 57.5%
 Great: 60%
Take a copy of your results

 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 MBD
Typical EB Dark'DESK 1004-1/B709 Builds (Compare 13 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 70%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk

System: Essentielb EB Dark'DESK 1004-1/B709

CPU
Core i5-4460Intel  $194Bench 62%, 245,403 samples12x
Core i7-4790KIntel  $348Bench 79%, 455,746 samples1x
GPU
GTX 750-TiNvidia  $92Bench 17%, 309,423 samples7x
GTX 1660S (Super)Nvidia  $195Bench 71%, 428,800 samples4x
GTX 1050Nvidia  $101Bench 26%, 269,381 samples1x
SSD
870 EVO 1TBSamsung  $100Bench 112%, 129,044 samples2x
870 EVO 2TBSamsung  $190Bench 113%, 31,076 samples2x
SSD 120GBBench 68%, 22,748 samples1x
RAM
M2F8G64CB8HD5N-DI 1x8GBNanyaBench 30%, 653 samples5x
M2F8G64CB8HD5N-DI 16GBUnknownBench 58%, 14 samples4x
M2F8G64CB8HD5N-DI 2x8GBNanyaBench 54%, 842 samples1x
EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 56% - Above average Total price: $387
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial 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
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