Samsung 400T8A/400S8A/400T9A/400S9A

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 17%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 80%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 14%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (43rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 57 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith 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 81.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very good.
Graphics16% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
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 (34%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
17 months ago, 17 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 16 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 15 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 14 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 13 months ago, 12 months ago, 12 months ago, 12 months ago, 12 months ago. (Only the first run influences device rankings)
SystemSamsung 400T8A/400S8A/400T9A/400S9A  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG SAMSUNG_DT_DB400T8A
Memory13.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20191209
Uptime0 Days
Run DateApr 01 '23 at 04:04
Run Duration105 Seconds
Run User EGY-User
Background CPU 34%
Watch Gameplay: 570 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (43rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-9100F-$135
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
81.7% Excellent
Memory 81.8
1-Core 123
2-Core 247
83% 151 Pts
4-Core 471
8-Core 470
63% 470 Pts
64-Core 472
29% 472 Pts
Poor: 72%
This bench: 81.7%
Great: 86%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD RX 570-$130
Sapphire(1DA2 E353) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1340 MHz, MLim: 1900 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 23.2.2
Relative performance (0th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
16% Very poor
Lighting 0.2
Reflection 59.3
Parallax 80.7
0% 46.7 fps
MRender 61.9
Gravity 68.5
Splatting 45.2
47% 58.5 fps
Poor: 37%
This bench: 16%
Great: 49%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$24
108GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HP74
SusWrite @10s intervals: 39 56 54 61 64 67 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
40.3% Average
Read 83.5
Write 81.7
Mixed 52
SusWrite 57
50% 68.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.5
97% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 40.3%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CB8GU2666.C8RT 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing as expected (49th percentile)
78.3% Very good
MC Read 28.9
MC Write 31.5
MC Mixed 23.6
80% 28 GB/s
SC Read 18
SC Write 29.9
SC Mixed 23.5
68% 23.8 GB/s
Latency 77.3
52% 77.3 ns
Poor: 46%
This bench: 78.3%
Great: 90%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 400T8A/400S8A/400T9A/400S9A Builds (Compare 52 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 38%
Jet ski
Desktop
Desktop 86%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 30%
Raft

System: Samsung 400T8A/400S8A/400T9A/400S9A

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 90% - Excellent Total price: $265
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $79G.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