Toshiba Satellite C850-D7S

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (75th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 25 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 55.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics3.14% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load 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 VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemToshiba Satellite C850-D7S  (all builds)
MotherboardIntel PLCSF8
Memory2.1 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.3 GHz
DisplayЦвета: 1366 x 768 - 32 Bit
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20120831
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateMar 11 '19 at 21:19
Run Duration110 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 12%

 PC Performing above expectations (75th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
Intel Core i3-2312M
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.1 GHz, turbo 2.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (95th percentile)
55.2% Above average
Memory 87
1-Core 55
2-Core 103
54% 81.6 Pts
4-Core 139
8-Core 140
19% 140 Pts
64-Core 140
9% 140 Pts
Poor: 35%
This bench: 55.2%
Great: 55%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 7500/7600
Toshiba(1179 FB31) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.201.1151.1008
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
3.14% Terrible
Lighting 4.43
Reflection 4.96
Parallax 3.5
4% 4.3 fps
MRender 4.62
Gravity 2.97
Splatting 5.09
3% 4.22 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.14%
Great: 4%
Drive Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Hitachi HTS542516K9SA00 160GB-$296
131GB free (System drive)
Firmware: BBCOC31P
SusWrite @10s intervals: 38 42 46 49 49 47 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (86th percentile)
25.7% Poor
Read 44.3
Write 48.7
Mixed 27.4
SusWrite 45.1
30% 41.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.7
117% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 6%
This bench: 25.7%
Great: 29%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown HMT325S6CFR8C-H9 HMT425S6AFR6A-PB 4GB
1333, 1600 MHz
2048, 2048 MB
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
45.3% Average
MC Read 16.2
MC Write 16.1
MC Mixed 14.9
45% 15.7 GB/s
SC Read 12.1
SC Write 11.2
SC Mixed 12.1
34% 11.8 GB/s
Latency 70.5
57% 70.5 ns
Poor: 4%
This bench: 45.3%
Great: 48%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-11400F $260Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Crucial MX500 250GB $45
Intel Core i5-11600K $270Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
Intel Core i7-10700K $320Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $79SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $94SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $649SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback