Acer AO521

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 11%
Tree trunk
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall 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.
ProcessorWith an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 25.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.37% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 8 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (11%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemAcer AO521  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer JV01-NL
Memory0.8 GB free of 2 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1024 x 600 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20100415
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateDec 04 '19 at 19:37
Run Duration183 Seconds
Run User DEU-User
Background CPU 11%

 PC Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD V105
Socket S1G4, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 1 threads
Base clock 1.2 GHz
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
25.6% Poor
Memory 48.6
1-Core 18
2-Core 14.4
22% 27 Pts
4-Core 17.6
8-Core 17
2% 17.3 Pts
64-Core 17.3
1% 17.3 Pts
Poor: 20%
This bench: 25.6%
Great: 37%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4225
Acer(1025 043D) 336MB
Driver: atiu9pag.dll Ver. 8.713.1.0
Performing as expected (46th percentile)
0.37% Terrible
Lighting 0.33
Reflection 1
Parallax 0.28
0% 0.54 fps
MRender 0.76
Gravity 0.2
Splatting 1
0% 0.65 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.37%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 2.5" 250GB (2009)-$30
163GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 32 33 32 15 29 28 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
13.2% Very poor
Read 17.4
Write 31.5
Mixed 15.4
SusWrite 28.3
17% 23.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.1
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.2
43% 0.4 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 13.2%
Great: 41%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 99U5428-075.A00LF 1x2GB
1 of 1 slots used
2GB DIMM DDR3 667 MHz
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
9.91% Terrible
MC Read 3.4
MC Write 3.1
MC Mixed 3
9% 3.17 GB/s
SC Read 0.4
SC Write 3
SC Mixed 2.7
6% 2.03 GB/s
Latency 166
24% 166 ns

 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 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $186Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair 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