Alaska A_M_I_

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 34%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (44th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 56 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 31.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics3.55% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive40.4% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 VersionWindows 11 is the most recent version of Windows.
SystemAlaska A_M_I_  (all builds)
Motherboard
Memory0.5 GB free of 8 GB
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 11
BIOS Date20230727
Uptime1.1 Days
Run DateMay 12 '24 at 00:10
Run Duration119 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing as expected (44th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel N95
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.7 GHz, turbo 2.7 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
31.7% Below average
Memory 33.7
1-Core 58.3
2-Core 118
38% 69.9 Pts
4-Core 167
8-Core 194
24% 180 Pts
64-Core 202
12% 202 Pts
Poor: 32%
This bench: 31.7%
Great: 59%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel UHD Graphics
Intel(8086 7270) 128MB
Driver: <> Ver. 31.0.101.5186
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
3.55% Terrible
Lighting 3.6
Reflection 6.2
Parallax 3.9
3% 4.57 fps
MRender 6.5
Gravity 5
Splatting 5.9
5% 5.8 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.55%
Great: 4%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
SSD 256GB
83GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HAFEB2.1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 261 269 247 211 211 195 MB/s
Performing below potential (7th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
40.4% Average
Read 212
Write 112
Mixed 147
SusWrite 232
40% 176 MB/s
4K Read 15.1
4K Write 24.2
4K Mixed 13
52% 17.4 MB/s
DQ Read 40.3
DQ Write 41.4
DQ Mixed 35.6
28% 39.1 MB/s
Poor: 38%
This bench: 40.4%
Great: 108%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung 4x2GB
4 of 8 slots used
8GB Row of chips 23h 6400 MHz clocked @ 3200 MHz
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
30.6% Below average
MC Read 10.4
MC Write 13.8
MC Mixed 11.3
34% 11.8 GB/s
SC Read 4.3
SC Write 7.4
SC Mixed 6.8
18% 6.17 GB/s
Latency 284
14% 284 ns
Poor: 15%
This bench: 30.6%
Great: 67%

 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 68 56 60 26" 1280 720 HSI0001 LED-TV
Typical A_M_I_ Builds (Compare 593 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 35%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk

System: Alaska A_M_I_

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial 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) $39Corsair 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