Performance Results


Gaming 2% Tree trunk	Desktop 22% Surfboard	Workstation 2% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (26th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 74 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.
Processor	With an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 22%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics	0.93% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	39.8% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory	4GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Very high background CPU (100%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

PC Performing below expectations (26^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Atom D2550 408 User benchmarks, average bench 25% CPUSocket, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 1.85 GHz, turbo 1.85 GHz (avg) Performing below expectations (28^th percentile)	22% Poor	Memory 39.8 1-Core 6.4 2-Core 13.3 16% 19.8 Pts	4-Core 26.4 8-Core 26 4% 26.2 Pts	64-Core 26.8 2% 26.8 Pts
Poor: 16% ↑ This bench: 22% Great: 29%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
ATI Radeon HD 5400 10,400 User benchmarks, average bench 1% PwrHis(1787 3000) 512MB Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.200.1062.1004 Performing as expected (50^th percentile)	0.93% Terrible	Lighting 1.2 Reflection 1.12 Parallax 1.5 1% 1.27 fps	MRender 1.1 Gravity 0.87 Splatting 1.09 1% 1.02 fps
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 0.93% Great: 1%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$75 762,998 User benchmarks, average bench 105% 450GB free (System drive) Firmware: RVT01B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 159 155 165 170 170 175 MB/s Relative performance (0^th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable	39.8% Below average	Read 216 Write 148 Mixed 197 SusWrite 166 41% 181 MB/s	4K Read 15.6 4K Write 17.9 4K Mixed 16.9 55% 16.8 MB/s	DQ Read 99.6 DQ Write 78.3 DQ Mixed 84.5 64% 87.5 MB/s
Poor: 74% ↑ This bench: 39.8% Great: 129%
LaCie Rugged Key 32GB 8 User benchmarks, average bench 29% 26GB free, PID 1078 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 21 21 21 22 21 MB/s Performing way below expectations (13^th percentile)	9.91% Terrible	Read 23.6 Write 21 Mixed 9.9 SusWrite 21.1 25% 18.9 MB/s	4K Read 2.8 4K Write 0.4 4K Mixed 1 58% 1.4 MB/s
Poor: 10% ↑ This bench: 9.91% Great: 50%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Samsung M471B5673EH1-CF8 2x2GB 2,358 User benchmarks, average bench 25% 2 of 2 slots used 4GB SODIMM DDR3 1066 MHz Performing way below expectations (13^th percentile)	13.1% Very poor	MC Read 5.3 MC Write 4.4 MC Mixed 3.8 13% 4.5 GB/s	SC Read 2.5 SC Write 3.2 SC Mixed 3.6 9% 3.1 GB/s	Latency 203 20% 203 ns
Poor: 11% ↑ This bench: 13.1% Great: 42%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $79	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16