Lenovo 28762FG

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 34%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 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 a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 35.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics0.3% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive36.9% 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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
SystemLenovo 28762FG  (all builds)
MotherboardLENOVO INVALID
Memory2.4 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit farver
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20100312
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateMar 29 '19 at 19:00
Run Duration151 Seconds
Run User DNK-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon Neo MV-40
S1G1/BGA, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 1 threads
Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 1.6 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (92nd percentile)
35.7% Below average
Memory 68.2
1-Core 21.9
2-Core 22.4
30% 37.5 Pts
4-Core 23
8-Core 23
3% 23 Pts
64-Core 22.1
1% 22.1 Pts
Poor: 11%
This bench: 35.7%
Great: 38%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI Radeon HD 3200
Legend(17AA 21B2) 336MB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.970.100.9001
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
0.3% Terrible
Lighting 0.43
Reflection 0.81
Parallax 0.44
0% 0.56 fps
MRender 0.33
Gravity 0.23
Splatting 0.17
0% 0.25 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.3%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
PNY CS900 120GB-$25
77GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CS900612
SusWrite @10s intervals: 156 103 38 45 41 44 MB/s
Performing below potential (4th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
36.9% Below average
Read 232
Write 185
Mixed 180
SusWrite 71.3
37% 167 MB/s
4K Read 16.9
4K Write 35.5
4K Mixed 17.9
67% 23.4 MB/s
DQ Read 61.6
DQ Write 55
DQ Mixed 57.2
43% 57.9 MB/s
Poor: 42%
This bench: 36.9%
Great: 87%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 2x2GB
2 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM
Performing below potential (28th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
13.9% Very poor
MC Read 4.3
MC Write 4
MC Mixed 3.7
11% 4 GB/s
SC Read 4.6
SC Write 3.8
SC Mixed 4.4
12% 4.27 GB/s
Latency 106
38% 106 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 13.9%
Great: 44%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $273Nvidia RTX 4060 $295Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $179Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $45SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk 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