Panasonic CF-54-3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 60%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (54th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 46 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
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 55.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics5.6% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive96% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum IO wait times.
Memory32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
SystemPanasonic CF-54-3  (all builds)
MotherboardPanasonic CF54-3
Memory27.3 GB free of 32.0156 GB @ 2.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20220906
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMay 30 '23 at 12:37
Run Duration133 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU6%

 PC Performing as expected (54th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-7300U
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.7 GHz, turbo 3.45 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
55.4% Above average
Memory 66.9
1-Core 98.4
2-Core 178
65% 115 Pts
4-Core 254
8-Core 260
34% 257 Pts
64-Core 259
16% 259 Pts
Poor: 22%
This bench: 55.4%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 620 (Mobile Kaby Lake)
Device(10F7 8338) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 27.20.100.8682
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
5.6% Terrible
Lighting 6.4
Reflection 5.3
Parallax 6.3
5% 6 fps
MRender 6.6
Gravity 6.3
Splatting 9.6
6% 7.5 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5.6%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Timetec MS07 1TB
66GB free
Firmware: V0718B0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 332 295 371 350 388 145 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
71.8% Very good
Read 420
Write 355
Mixed 352
SusWrite 313
81% 360 MB/s
4K Read 20.6
4K Write 59.2
4K Mixed 16.2
83% 32 MB/s
DQ Read 188
DQ Write 317
DQ Mixed 38.2
89% 181 MB/s
Poor: 53%
This bench: 71.8%
Great: 103%
Samsung 870 EVO 4TB-$368
2.5TB free (System drive)
Firmware: SVT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 345 313 401 378 420 423 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
96% Outstanding
Read 446
Write 392
Mixed 354
SusWrite 380
88% 393 MB/s
4K Read 30.9
4K Write 56.9
4K Mixed 38.2
126% 42 MB/s
DQ Read 376
DQ Write 328
DQ Mixed 351
263% 352 MB/s
Poor: 90%
This bench: 96%
Great: 137%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown BL16G32C16S4B.16FE 859B BL16G32C16S4B.16FE 80GB
2667, 2667, 0 MHz
16384, 16384, 49152 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
65.2% Good
MC Read 23
MC Write 25.6
MC Mixed 21.8
67% 23.5 GB/s
SC Read 13.5
SC Write 25.9
SC Mixed 20.7
57% 20 GB/s
Latency 109
37% 109 ns
Poor: 65%
This bench: 65.2%
Great: 65%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical CF-54-3 Builds (Compare 59 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: Panasonic CF-54-3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. We expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads of money on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia 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 $549Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $45SanDisk 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