Philco 14A4

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 38%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 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 below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 41.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics1.41% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (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.
Memory4GB 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. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Run History
SystemPhilco 14A4  (all builds)
MotherboardPHILCO 14A4
Memory1 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit cores
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20110209
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 06 '23 at 21:09
Run Duration115 Seconds
Run User BRA-User
Background CPU8%

 PC Performing below expectations (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-2350M
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.3 GHz, turbo 2.3 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
41.2% Average
Memory 60.3
1-Core 54.4
2-Core 95.5
43% 70.1 Pts
4-Core 130
8-Core 130
18% 130 Pts
64-Core 123
8% 123 Pts
Poor: 30%
This bench: 41.2%
Great: 56%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 3000 (Mobile V1 1.1/1.2 GHz)
Device(1297 2020) 2GB
Driver: igdumd64.dll Ver. 9.17.10.4459
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
1.41% Terrible
Lighting 1.7
Reflection 2.2
Parallax 1.5
1% 1.8 fps
MRender 2.6
Gravity 0.5
Splatting 2.2
2% 1.77 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.41%
Great: 2%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung HN-M500MBB 500GB-$80
435GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2AR10001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 68 61 58 88 94 74 MB/s
Performing above expectations (72nd percentile)
49.5% Average
Read 98.4
Write 90.7
Mixed 50.7
SusWrite 73.9
58% 78.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.9
152% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 49.5%
Great: 60%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Smart SH564568FH8NZPHSCR 2x2GB
2 of 4 slots used
4GB SODIMM DDR3 1333 MHz
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
33.5% Below average
MC Read 12
MC Write 11.9
MC Mixed 11.3
34% 11.7 GB/s
SC Read 9.5
SC Write 10
SC Mixed 10.1
28% 9.87 GB/s
Latency 127
32% 127 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 33.5%
Great: 48%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 14A4 Builds (Compare 5 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 47%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk

System: Philco 14A4

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 56% - Above average Total price: $160
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay more to market weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. 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 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they return repeatedly.
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) $29Corsair 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