To Be Filled By O.E.M.

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (20th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 80 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 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 31.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Boot Drive	32% is low SSD score. With a better SSD this system will boot faster, make applications more responsive and reduce IO wait times.
Memory	4GB 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 Version	Although 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.

High background CPU (25%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

Motherboard	To Be Filled By O.E.M. (all builds)
Memory	1.9 GB free of 4 GB @ 0 GHz
Display	1440 x 900 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 7
BIOS Date	20160714
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Jul 29 '22 at 19:38
Run Duration	187 Seconds
Run User	IND-User
Background CPU	25%

PC Performing below expectations (20^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core2 Duo E8400-$89 68,540 User benchmarks, average bench 40% CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads Base clock 2.4 GHz Performing way below expectations (12^th percentile)	31.6% Below average	Memory 52 1-Core 33.7 2-Core 54.8 31% 46.8 Pts	4-Core 67.9 8-Core 64 9% 65.9 Pts	64-Core 72.1 4% 72.1 Pts
Poor: 24% ↑ This bench: 31.6% Great: 47%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Kingston SQ500S37240G 240GB 1,214 User benchmarks, average bench 74% 181GB free (System drive) Firmware: S3E00101 SusWrite @10s intervals: 148 181 181 149 117 98 MB/s Performing below potential (2^nd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable	32% Below average	Read 133 Write 129 Mixed 159 SusWrite 146 32% 142 MB/s	4K Read 17.9 4K Write 15.7 4K Mixed 12.3 51% 15.3 MB/s	DQ Read 29.5 DQ Write 73.9 DQ Mixed 13 21% 38.8 MB/s
Poor: 38% ↑ This bench: 32% Great: 103%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1TB-$70 337,642 User benchmarks, average bench 54% 366GB free Firmware: JC45 SusWrite @10s intervals: 87 102 103 101 88 90 MB/s Performing as expected (54^th percentile)	56.1% Above average	Read 100 Write 99.4 Mixed 59.8 SusWrite 95.2 65% 88.7 MB/s	4K Read 0.8 4K Write 1.6 4K Mixed 0.9 163% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 34% ↑ This bench: 56.1% Great: 68%
Seagate Expansion 2TB 1,450 User benchmarks, average bench 32% 758GB free, PID 231a Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 15 16 16 16 15 14 MB/s Performing way below expectations (7^th percentile)	10.8% Very poor	Read 13.5 Write 14.4 Mixed 19.1 SusWrite 15.3 22% 15.6 MB/s	4K Read 1 4K Write 1.7 4K Mixed 0.5 78% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 11% ↑ This bench: 10.8% Great: 49%
Seagate BUP Portable 5TB 50 User benchmarks, average bench 39% 2.5TB free, PID ac35 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 15 16 16 16 15 14 MB/s Performing way below expectations (5^th percentile)	12.3% Very poor	Read 18.6 Write 20 Mixed 15.3 SusWrite 15.3 23% 17.3 MB/s	4K Read 0.4 4K Write 2 4K Mixed 0.5 86% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 12% ↑ This bench: 12.3% Great: 55%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown 2x2GB 446,702 User benchmarks, average bench 20% 2 of 4 slots used 4GB DIMM SDRAM Performing as expected (42^nd percentile)	15.9% Very poor	MC Read 5.8 MC Write 5.1 MC Mixed 5 15% 5.3 GB/s	SC Read 3.7 SC Write 4.1 SC Mixed 4.6 12% 4.13 GB/s	Latency 153 26% 153 ns
Poor: 10% ↑ This bench: 15.9% Great: 44%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

MBD

Typical Be Filled By O.E.M. Builds (Compare 5,584 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming 2%

Tree trunk

Desktop 58%

Gunboat

Workstation 2%

Tree trunk

Motherboard: To Be Filled By O.E.M.

CPU
Core i5-3470Intel $59Bench 63%, 223,595 samples	714x
Core i5-2400Intel $250Bench 61%, 166,255 samples	280x
Core i7-3770Intel $297Bench 69%, 278,207 samples	264x

GPU
HD 2500 (Desktop 1.05 GHz)IntelBench 1%, 146,665 samples	617x
HD 2000 (Desktop 1.1 GHz)IntelBench 1%, 150,891 samples	461x
G41 Express ChipsetIntelBench 0%, 33,874 samples	361x

SSD
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	137x
256GB 256GBSSDBench 77%, 9,229 samples	103x
128GB 128GBSSDBench 65%, 7,332 samples	90x

RAM
2x2GBUnknownBench 20%, 446,702 samples	500x
2x8GBUnknownBench 64%, 236,291 samples	302x
2x4GBUnknownBench 39%, 424,126 samples	227x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Value: 73% - Very good

Total price: $87

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163	Nvidia RTX 4070 $539	Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16