Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming 3% Tree trunk	Desktop 57% Gunboat	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 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 60.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics	3.76% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory	16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

Very high background CPU (33%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

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
Intel Xeon E5-1620 0-$345 17,464 User benchmarks, average bench 70% CPU0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.65 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (7^th percentile)	60.6% Good	Memory 82.3 1-Core 91.7 2-Core 174 68% 116 Pts	4-Core 211 8-Core 401 36% 306 Pts	64-Core 434 27% 434 Pts
Poor: 61% ↑ This bench: 60.6% Great: 77%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia Quadro 4000 8,609 User benchmarks, average bench 7% HP(103C 0780) 2GB CLim: 475 MHz, MLim: 702 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 377.55 Relative performance (0^th percentile)	3.76% Terrible	Lighting 1.7 Reflection 15.9 Parallax 9.1 1% 8.9 fps	MRender 15.2 Gravity 6.3 Splatting 9.7 8% 10.4 fps
Poor: 7% ↑ This bench: 3.76% Great: 7%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k
Samsung MZ7TD256HAFV-000L7 256GB 6,630 User benchmarks, average bench 61% 194GB free (System drive) Firmware: DXT02L5Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 103 116 115 100 120 117 MB/s Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 44% Great: 80%
Seagate ST91000640NS 1TB 1,135 User benchmarks, average bench 53% 931GB free Firmware: CC02 SusWrite @10s intervals: 113 113 114 115 113 113 MB/s Performing above expectations (77^th percentile)	59.7% Above average	Read 94.5 Write 115 Mixed 63.6 SusWrite 113 71% 96.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.9 4K Write 2 4K Mixed 1.1 197% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 35% ↑ This bench: 59.7% Great: 64%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Micron 36JSZF1G72PZ-1G4D 2x8GB 28 User benchmarks, average bench 44% 2 of 8 slots used 16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1333 MHz Performing way below expectations (11^th percentile)	24.1% Poor	MC Read 7.8 MC Write 7.6 MC Mixed 7.5 22% 7.63 GB/s	SC Read 5.7 SC Write 9 SC Mixed 4.3 18% 6.33 GB/s	Latency 76.4 52% 76.4 ns
Poor: 24% ↑ This bench: 24.1% Great: 52%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 12%

Tree trunk

Desktop 67%

Battle cruiser

Workstation 11%

Tree trunk

GPU
Quadro K2000NvidiaBench 7%, 13,526 samples	499x
Quadro K4000NvidiaBench 13%, 11,114 samples	309x
GTX 1050-TiNvidia $59Bench 29%, 946,701 samples	263x

SSD
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	185x
C400 RealSSD 256GBMicronBench 55%, 11,652 samples	129x
860 Evo 500GBSamsung $80Bench 105%, 762,998 samples	113x

RAM
M391B5273DH0-CK0 4x4GBSamsungBench 72%, 618 samples	65x
M391B5273DH0-CK0 8x4GBSamsungBench 89%, 244 samples	58x
HMT41GU7AFR8C-RD 4x8GBHynixBench 89%, 207 samples	56x

Value: 62% - Good

Total price: $373