Performance Results


Gaming 2% Tree trunk	Desktop 12% Tree trunk	Workstation 2% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (32nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 68 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 7.64%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Graphics	1.61% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	29.9% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory	6GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 6GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very 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.

System	Toshiba SATELLITE C55D-A-14M (all builds)
Motherboard	AMD PT10AN
Memory	2.3 GB free of 6 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display	1366 x 768 - 32 Bit renk
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20130830
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Apr 10 '21 at 18:09
Run Duration	185 Seconds
Run User	TUR-User
Background CPU	100%

PC Performing below expectations (32^nd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
AMD E1-2100 APU 4,569 User benchmarks, average bench 17% Socket FT1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads Base clock 1 GHz, turbo 1 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (12^th percentile)	7.64% Terrible	Memory 12.6 1-Core 10.4 2-Core 14.6 8% 12.5 Pts	4-Core 15.5 8-Core 20.5 2% 18 Pts	64-Core 28.7 2% 28.7 Pts
Poor: 6% ↑ This bench: 7.64% Great: 26%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
AMD HD 8210 4,832 User benchmarks, average bench 1% Toshiba(1179 FA33) 512MB Ram: 512MB, Driver: 20.10.35.02 Performing way above expectations (98^th percentile)	1.61% Terrible	Lighting 2.2 Reflection 2.3 Parallax 1.5 2% 2 fps	MRender 1.9 Gravity 0.5 Splatting 2 1% 1.47 fps
Poor: 1% ↑ This bench: 1.61% Great: 1%

Drive	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Longline SSD 240GB 350 User benchmarks, average bench 58% 184GB free (System drive) Firmware: T0929A0 SusWrite @10s intervals: 101 172 90 155 108 146 MB/s Performing way below expectations (8^th percentile)	29.9% Poor	Read 300 Write 271 Mixed 16.7 SusWrite 128 40% 179 MB/s	4K Read 3.4 4K Write 10.7 4K Mixed 10.7 25% 8.27 MB/s	DQ Read 47.7 DQ Write 35.3 DQ Mixed 28.9 25% 37.3 MB/s
Poor: 28% ↑ This bench: 29.9% Great: 90%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Samsung M471B5673FH0-CF8 M471B5173BH0-YK0 6GB 5 User benchmarks, average bench 24% 1066, 1333 MHz 2048, 4096 MB Performing way below expectations (10^th percentile)	8.06% Terrible	MC Read 3.2 MC Write 2.9 MC Mixed 2.4 8% 2.83 GB/s	SC Read 0.9 SC Write 2 SC Mixed 2.7 5% 1.87 GB/s	Latency 380 10% 380 ns
Poor: 8% ↑ This bench: 8.06% Great: 32%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 4%

Tree trunk

Desktop 20%

Surfboard

Workstation 4%

Tree trunk

CPU
E1-2100 APUAMDBench 17%, 4,569 samples	1x

GPU
HD 8210AMDBench 1%, 4,832 samples	1x

SSD
128GB 128GBSSDBench 65%, 7,332 samples	1x

RAM
99U5469-046.A00LF Samsung M471B5273CM0-CH9 8GBKingstonBench 37%, 14 samples	1x

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16