ADD TO PC
BUILD

Asus P4C800-E

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing CPU, SSD, RAM
Gaming 0% Incomplete	Desktop 0% Incomplete	Workstation 0% Incomplete


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Graphics	2.89% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	The 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.
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OS Version	Windows XP is considerably out of date. This system has enough RAM (4GB) and should be upgraded to Windows 10.

Motherboard	Asus P4C800-E (all builds)
Memory	1.6 GB free of 4 GB @ 0 GHz
Display	1024 x 768 - 32 Bit kolorÃ³w
OS	Windows XP
BIOS Date	20050804
Uptime	0.1 Days
Run Date	Jul 15 '15 at 12:37
Run Duration	129 Seconds
Run User	POL-User
Background CPU	0%

PC Performing as expected (42^nd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Pentium 4 3.40GHz 1,108 User benchmarks, average bench 31% CPU 1, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads Base clock 3.4 GHz Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete		1-Core 38.4 2-Core 52.6 22% 45.5 Pts	4-Core 52.7 8-Core 52.5 7% 52.6 Pts	64-Core 49.8 3% 49.8 Pts
Poor: 14% Great: 38%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
ATI Radeon HD 3800 3,400 User benchmarks, average bench 5% AMD(1002 9505) 512MB Driver: ati2dvag.dll Ver. 6.14.10.7267 Relative performance (0^th percentile)	2.89% Terrible	Lighting 5.37 Reflection 1.12 Parallax 1.97 4% 2.82 fps
Poor: 4% ↑ This bench: 2.89% Great: 6%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
WD WD30EFRX-68EUZN0 802GB 72 User benchmarks, average bench 69% 565GB free Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way below expectations (7^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 196 171 5175 (04) Start/Stop count 99 99 1386 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 92 92 5960 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 99 99 1357 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 211 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 200 200 1174 (C2) HDA temperature 113 102 37 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 253 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 100 253 0	48.8% Average	Read 89 Write 80.7 Mixed 87 65% 85.6 MB/s	4K Read 0.87 4K Write 2.57 4K Mixed 0.23 110% 1.22 MB/s
Poor: 49% ↑ This bench: 48.8% Great: 82%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB-$80 31,610 User benchmarks, average bench 34% 53GB free (System drive) Max speed: SATA 1.0 150 MB/s Performing above expectations (78^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 111 86 33097277 (03) Spinup time 96 95 0 (04) Start/Stop count 96 96 4286 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 87 60 598929185 (09) Power-on hours count 63 63 32978 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 96 96 4448 (BB) vendor-specific 62 62 38 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 57 44 723320875 (C2) HDA temperature 43 56 42949673003 (C3) Hardware ECC recovered 76 55 194673307 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 100 253 0 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 100 253 0	38.9% Below average	Read 70 Write 65.3 Mixed 22.1 38% 52.5 MB/s	4K Read 0.54 4K Write 1.12 4K Mixed 0.31 77% 0.66 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 38.9% Great: 43%

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

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

Typical P4C800-E Builds (Compare 4 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 0%

Incomplete

Desktop

Desktop 0%

Incomplete

Workstation

Workstation 0%

Incomplete

Motherboard: Asus P4C800-E

CPU
Pentium 4 3.40GHzIntelBench 31%, 1,108 samples	2x
Pentium 4 3.20GHzIntelBench 30%, 3,160 samples	2x

GPU
Radeon HD 3800ATIBench 5%, 3,400 samples	2x
Radeon X1650AMDBench 1%, 725 samples	1x
GeForce 6600NvidiaBench 0%, 968 samples	1x

RAM
4x1GBUnknownBench 18%, 54,972 samples	2x
3GBUnknownBench 14%, 81,553 samples	1x
4x0.5GBUnknownBench 13%, 2,291 samples	1x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.

Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?

PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.

Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?

We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.

Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?

Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands...

Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?

Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.

The Best.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170	Nvidia RTX 4060 $280	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback