Mecer Xtreme

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 41%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (46th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 54 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 41.3%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.71% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive52.8% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 11 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 (75%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemMecer Xtreme  (all builds)
MotherboardIntel DQ35MP
Memory1.6 GB free of 4 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20101209
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 30 '16 at 16:59
Run Duration315 Seconds
Run User ZAF-User
Background CPU 75%

 PC Performing as expected (46th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Duo E7300-$28
CPU1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.65 GHz
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
41.3% Average
Memory 72.3
1-Core 37.3
2-Core 53.7
39% 54.4 Pts
4-Core 62.8
8-Core 66
8% 64.4 Pts
64-Core 71.5
4% 71.5 Pts
Poor: 26%
This bench: 41.3%
Great: 45%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI Radeon HD 4670
Sapphire(174B E920) 512MB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.970.100.1100
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
2.71% Terrible
Lighting 3.53
Reflection 5.73
Parallax 2.88
3% 4.05 fps
MRender 1.62
Gravity 2.5
Splatting 4.09
2% 2.74 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 2.71%
Great: 5%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Intel SSDSC2BW080A4 80GB
44GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DC32 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s
Performing below potential (23rd percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
52.8% Above average
Read 261
Write 115
Mixed 158
39% 178 MB/s
4K Read 28.3
4K Write 63.2
4K Mixed 18.7
100% 36.7 MB/s
DQ Read 159
DQ Write 103
DQ Mixed 29.4
49% 97.3 MB/s
Poor: 46%
This bench: 52.8%
Great: 72%
Seagate ST380815AS 80GB-$48
41GB free
Firmware: 4.AAB Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
34.7% Below average
Read 59.8
Write 61
Mixed 59
45% 59.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.65
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.34
93% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 34.7%
Great: 42%
WD Elements 1TB
69GB free, PID 1042
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
15.3% Very poor
Read 29.4
Write 27.9
Mixed 27.5
36% 28.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.33
4K Write 1.58
4K Mixed 0.18
61% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 15.3%
Great: 43%
TDK LoR TF10 4GB
3GB free, PID 070d
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Performing way above expectations (85th percentile)
6.44% Terrible
Read 19.6
Write 10.6
Mixed 6.52
14% 12.2 MB/s
4K Read 5.39
4K Write 0.005
4K Mixed 0.007
20% 1.8 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 6.44%
Great: 6%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4GB
null MHz
1024, 2048, 1024 MB
Performing below potential (27th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
16.8% Very poor
MC Read 5.4
MC Write 5
MC Mixed 4.6
14% 5 GB/s
SC Read 5.2
SC Write 5.3
SC Mixed 4.6
14% 5.03 GB/s
Latency 96.2
42% 96.2 ns
Poor: 11%
This bench: 16.8%
Great: 46%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $363
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback