Acer Aspire XC-780

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 60%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 58.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics4.81% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive62.5% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait 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 (56%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemAcer Aspire XC-780  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer Aspire XC-780(KBL)
Memory10.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20171012
Uptime0 Days
Run DateDec 03 '23 at 19:26
Run Duration118 Seconds
Run User CHE-User
Background CPU 56%

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-7400-$70
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3 GHz, turbo 3.3 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
58.7% Above average
Memory 74.8
1-Core 90.3
2-Core 178
66% 114 Pts
4-Core 238
8-Core 301
35% 270 Pts
64-Core 312
19% 312 Pts
Poor: 43%
This bench: 58.7%
Great: 73%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 630 (Desktop Kaby Lake)
Acer(1025 108E) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 31.0.101.2125
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
4.81% Terrible
Lighting 5.2
Reflection 5.9
Parallax 6
4% 5.7 fps
MRender 7.6
Gravity 4.8
Splatting 8.7
6% 7.03 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 4.81%
Great: 7%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
HFS256G39TND-N210A 256GB
101GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 30001P10
SusWrite @10s intervals: 208 230 222 229 225 219 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
62.5% Good
Read 329
Write 230
Mixed 192
SusWrite 222
54% 243 MB/s
4K Read 19.7
4K Write 46.6
4K Mixed 21.1
82% 29.1 MB/s
DQ Read 243
DQ Write 244
DQ Mixed 182
154% 223 MB/s
Poor: 54%
This bench: 62.5%
Great: 83%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata AD4U240038G17-BHYA 2x8GB
2 of 2 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
45.4% Average
MC Read 18.8
MC Write 18.1
MC Mixed 13.8
48% 16.9 GB/s
SC Read 7.8
SC Write 11.2
SC Mixed 10.8
28% 9.93 GB/s
Latency 116
34% 116 ns
Poor: 63%
This bench: 45.4%
Great: 80%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 39 20 60 23.8" 1280 720 DELD0DA DELL P2419H
Typical Aspire XC-780 Builds (Compare 419 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 63%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: Acer Aspire XC-780

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 65% - Good Total price: $158
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