Acer Swift SFA16-41

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 17%
Surfboard
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 19%
Surfboard
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. 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 37.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics15.7% 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 Drive259% 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.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
Run History
SystemAcer Swift SFA16-41  (all builds)
MotherboardRB Globefish_RBU
Memory6.4 GB free of 16 GB
Display3840 x 2400 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20230104
Uptime1.6 Days
Run DateJun 27 '23 at 08:48
Run Duration111 Seconds
Run User ROU-User
Background CPU2%

 PC Performing below expectations (35th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Ryzen 5 6600U Graphics
FP7, 1 CPU, 6 cores, 12 threads
Base clock 2.9 GHz, turbo 3.25 GHz (avg)
Relative performance (0th percentile)
37.7% Below average
Memory 66.1
1-Core 159
2-Core 311
93% 179 Pts
4-Core 47.3
8-Core 762
37% 405 Pts
64-Core 909
56% 909 Pts
Poor: 52%
This bench: 37.7%
Great: 90%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon Graphics
Acer(1025 1635) 2GB
Ram: 2GB, Driver: 23.5.2
Performing below potential (10th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
15.7% Very poor
Lighting 18.2
Reflection 26.5
Parallax 32.1
15% 25.6 fps
MRender 22.7
Gravity 20
Splatting 20.8
17% 21.2 fps
Poor: 15%
This bench: 15.7%
Great: 35%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung MZVL2512HCJQ-00B07 512GB
213GB free (System drive)
Firmware: GXA7402Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1758 1933 1976 755 756 751 MB/s
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
259% Outstanding
Read 2,348
Write 2,202
Mixed 2,083
SusWrite 1,321
447% 1,989 MB/s
4K Read 51.2
4K Write 68.5
4K Mixed 55.9
186% 58.5 MB/s
DQ Read 736
DQ Write 466
DQ Mixed 663
477% 622 MB/s
Poor: 175%
This bench: 259%
Great: 423%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Micron MT62F1G32D4DR-031 WT 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB 23h clocked @ 6400 MHz
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
99% Outstanding
MC Read 36.9
MC Write 34.4
MC Mixed 40.2
106% 37.2 GB/s
SC Read 20.2
SC Write 33.2
SC Mixed 25.9
76% 26.4 GB/s
Latency 111
36% 111 ns
Poor: 74%
This bench: 99%
Great: 111%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Swift SFA16-41 Builds (Compare 8 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 28%
Raft
Desktop
Desktop 83%
Aircraft carrier
Workstation
Workstation 28%
Raft

System: Acer Swift SFA16-41

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 $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $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