Today's hottest deals

Samsung 300E5EV/300E4EV/270E5EV/270E4EV/2470EV

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 48%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (30th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 70 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.
ProcessorWith an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 47%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.66% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive67.3% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU. CPU throttled at 99% by Windows. Ensure maximum processor state is set to 100% via Settings > System > Power & sleep > Additional power settings > Change plan settings > Change advanced power settings > Processor power management > Maximum processor state.
SystemSamsung 300E5EV/300E4EV/270E5EV/270E4EV/2470EV  (all builds)
MotherboardSAMSUNG NP270E5E-X01HU
Memory2.8 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20130911
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 29 '21 at 17:07
Run Duration334 Seconds
Run User HUN-User
Background CPU 12%
CPU Throttled 99%

 PC Performing below expectations (30th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3230M-$100
CPU Socket - U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 1.85 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
47% Average
Memory 80
1-Core 47.4
2-Core 76.4
46% 67.9 Pts
4-Core 87.1
8-Core 76.3
11% 81.7 Pts
64-Core 83.8
5% 83.8 Pts
Poor: 30%
This bench: 47%
Great: 58%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 710M
Sanyo(144D C709) 2GB
Driver: Ver. 10.18.13.5362
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
2.66% Terrible
Lighting 3.1
Reflection 4.8
Parallax 1.8
2% 3.23 fps
MRender 4.6
Gravity 2.4
Splatting 3.7
3% 3.57 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 2.66%
Great: 4%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 480GB-$35
419GB free (System drive)
Firmware: S3H01103
SusWrite @10s intervals: 321 326 330 313 281 292 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
67.3% Good
Read 360
Write 325
Mixed 329
SusWrite 310
75% 331 MB/s
4K Read 19
4K Write 53.1
4K Mixed 21.1
84% 31.1 MB/s
DQ Read 159
DQ Write 217
DQ Mixed 109
104% 162 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 67.3%
Great: 102%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5273EB0-CK0 2x4GB
2 of 4 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (24th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
49.3% Average
MC Read 16.8
MC Write 18.7
MC Mixed 17.5
50% 17.7 GB/s
SC Read 10.1
SC Write 12.6
SC Mixed 13.8
35% 12.2 GB/s
Latency 80.6
50% 80.6 ns
Poor: 27%
This bench: 49.3%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 300E5EV/300E4EV/270E5EV/270E4EV/2470EV Builds (Compare 124 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 47%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Samsung 300E5EV/300E4EV/270E5EV/270E4EV/2470EV

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 58% - Above average Total price: $95
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark the gold standard for users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $169Nvidia RTX 4060 $295WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $345WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $225Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $340
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback