Toshiba SATELLITE C55-A-1EK

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 56%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (52nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 48 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 59.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.26% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive88.3% 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.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (30%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemToshiba SATELLITE C55-A-1EK  (all builds)
MotherboardIntel PT10F
Memory1.9 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colores
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140422
Uptime2.6 Days
Run DateJul 21 '18 at 15:16
Run Duration133 Seconds
Run User ESP-User
Background CPU 30%

 PC Performing as expected (52nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-3110M-$70
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 2.4 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
59.3% Above average
Memory 92.1
1-Core 54.5
2-Core 90.7
53% 79.1 Pts
4-Core 155
8-Core 163
21% 159 Pts
64-Core 170
10% 170 Pts
Poor: 32%
This bench: 59.3%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4000 (Mobile 1.25 GHz)
Toshiba(1179 FA31) 2GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4885
Performing as expected (57th percentile)
3.26% Terrible
Lighting 3.67
Reflection 4.77
Parallax 2.5
3% 3.65 fps
MRender 4
Gravity 2.03
Splatting 6.96
4% 4.33 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.26%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$76
300GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 389 311 315 315 316 316 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
88.3% Excellent
Read 471
Write 446
Mixed 407
SusWrite 327
93% 413 MB/s
4K Read 26.6
4K Write 50.2
4K Mixed 35.3
112% 37.4 MB/s
DQ Read 388
DQ Write 258
DQ Mixed 318
239% 321 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 88.3%
Great: 129%
ST2000DM 006-2DM164 2TB
2TB free, PID 0539
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 41 41 42 42 42 42 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
20.7% Poor
Read 40.6
Write 35.7
Mixed 32.9
SusWrite 41.6
51% 37.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.9
95% 1.17 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 20.7%
Great: 61%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5273EB0-YK0 1x4GB
1 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
32.1% Below average
MC Read 11
MC Write 9.9
MC Mixed 9.4
29% 10.1 GB/s
SC Read 9.9
SC Write 9.9
SC Mixed 9.3
28% 9.7 GB/s
Latency 63.8
63% 63.8 ns
Poor: 13%
This bench: 32.1%
Great: 34%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. Additionally, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia 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