ECS MCP61M-M3

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (27th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 73 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 56.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics1.19% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive26.6% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait 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 VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 9 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Very high background CPU (87%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
MotherboardECS MCP61M-M3  (all builds)
Memory0.1 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20101103
Uptime4.7 Days
Run DateJan 30 '16 at 18:54
Run Duration1340 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 87%

 PC Performing below expectations (27th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X3 455-$90
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 3 cores, 3 threads
Base clock 3.3 GHz
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
56.1% Above average
Memory 95.5
1-Core 38.3
2-Core 68.3
48% 67.4 Pts
4-Core 104
8-Core 94.1
13% 98.8 Pts
64-Core 111
7% 111 Pts
Poor: 34%
This bench: 56.1%
Great: 54%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 210
EVGA(3842 1312) 1GB
Driver: nvd3dum.dll Ver. 9.18.13.3489
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
1.19% Terrible
Lighting 1.17
Reflection 2.35
Parallax 0.25
1% 1.25 fps
MRender 3
Gravity 1.53
Splatting 1.7
2% 2.08 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.19%
Great: 1%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial BX100 500GB-$49
356GB free
Firmware: MU02 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
19.6% Very poor
Read 96.6
Write 39
Mixed 55.6
14% 63.7 MB/s
4K Read 14.9
4K Write 13.8
4K Mixed 8.43
41% 12.4 MB/s
DQ Read 25.5
DQ Write 32.5
DQ Mixed 18.9
17% 25.6 MB/s
Poor: 67%
This bench: 19.6%
Great: 108%
Samsung 840 Evo 120GB-$85
99GB free
Firmware: EXT0
Performing below potential (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
22.9% Poor
Read 126
Write 74
Mixed 82.4
21% 94.2 MB/s
4K Read 12.5
4K Write 13.4
4K Mixed 9.49
38% 11.8 MB/s
DQ Read 37.2
DQ Write 41.2
DQ Mixed 17.9
19% 32.1 MB/s
Poor: 63%
This bench: 22.9%
Great: 108%
Kingston HyperX 3K 120GB-$100
11GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 506A
Relative performance (0th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
26.6% Poor
Read 212
Write 125
Mixed 93
32% 143 MB/s
4K Read 9.15
4K Write 27.7
4K Mixed 1.82
31% 12.9 MB/s
DQ Read 16.1
DQ Write 71.7
DQ Mixed 11.8
18% 33.2 MB/s
Poor: 57%
This bench: 26.6%
Great: 87%
Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB-$59
1.5TB free
Firmware: MX4O
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
66.8% Good
Read 127
Write 105
Mixed 114
87% 116 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.22
92% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 66.8%
Great: 108%
WDC WD20 02FAEX-007BA0 2TB
2TB free, PID 0551
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
9.74% Terrible
Read 11.1
Write 11
Mixed 10.3
14% 10.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.96
4K Write 1.79
4K Mixed 0.42
79% 1.06 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 9.74%
Great: 51%
25GB free, PID 5200
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
1.32% Terrible
Read 0.99
Write 0.92
Mixed 0.95
1% 0.95 MB/s
4K Read 0.59
4K Write 0.27
4K Mixed 0.21
19% 0.36 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 1.32%
Great: 30%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1333 C9 1x4GB
1 of 4 slots used
4GB DIMM 667 MHz
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
19% Very poor
MC Read 6.8
MC Write 5.4
MC Mixed 5.8
17% 6 GB/s
SC Read 0.2
SC Write 0.3
SC Mixed 0.1
1% 0.2 GB/s
Latency 55.7
72% 55.7 ns
Poor: 17%
This bench: 19%
Great: 30%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical MCP61M-M3 Builds (Compare 67 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

Motherboard: ECS MCP61M-M3

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 22% - Poor Total price: $28
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254Nvidia RTX 4060 $290Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $31Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback