Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X415EA_F1400EA

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 75%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 13%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (35th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 65 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 67.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics15.2% 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 Drive180% is an exceptional SSD score. This drive is suitable for heavy workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and allow for fast transfers of multi-gigabyte files.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemAsus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X415EA_F1400EA  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK X415EA
Memory3.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 3.2 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20221110
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 22 '23 at 17:35
Run Duration112 Seconds
Run User ESP-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing below expectations (35th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-1135G7
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 3.6 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
67.1% Good
Memory 62
1-Core 142
2-Core 223
78% 142 Pts
4-Core 396
8-Core 524
58% 460 Pts
64-Core 506
31% 506 Pts
Poor: 57%
This bench: 67.1%
Great: 77%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel Iris Xe
Asus(1043 17D2) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 27.20.100.9268
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
15.2% Very poor
Lighting 18.9
Reflection 17.4
Parallax 22.7
15% 19.7 fps
MRender 12.6
Gravity 26.9
Splatting 15.4
15% 18.3 fps
Poor: 8%
This bench: 15.2%
Great: 20%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 960 Evo NVMe PCIe M.2 500GB-$140
438GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2B7QCXE7 Max speed: PCIe 16,000 MB/s
SusWrite @10s intervals: 750 777 638 668 594 584 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (15th percentile)
180% Outstanding
Read 1,340
Write 995
Mixed 470
SusWrite 668
193% 868 MB/s
4K Read 39.4
4K Write 107
4K Mixed 52
183% 66.2 MB/s
DQ Read 915
DQ Write 376
DQ Mixed 730
518% 674 MB/s
Poor: 153%
This bench: 180%
Great: 254%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A1G44AB0-CWE 1x8GB
1 of 1 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing below potential (23rd percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
34.8% Below average
MC Read 12.8
MC Write 13
MC Mixed 9.4
34% 11.7 GB/s
SC Read 11.6
SC Write 14.6
SC Mixed 10.8
35% 12.3 GB/s
Latency 122
33% 122 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 34.8%
Great: 44%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X415EA_F1400EA Builds (Compare 25 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk

System: Asus VivoBook_ASUSLaptop X415EA_F1400EA

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
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 keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $156Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair 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