Performance Results

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


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (61st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 39 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 62.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics	3.61% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory	12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

PC Performing above expectations (61^st percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i5-4200M-$39 33,019 User benchmarks, average bench 50% U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 3 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (94^th percentile)	62.5% Good	Memory 84.5 1-Core 90.3 2-Core 165 67% 113 Pts	4-Core 236 8-Core 236 32% 236 Pts	64-Core 234 14% 234 Pts
Poor: 25% ↑ This bench: 62.5% Great: 63%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Intel HD 4600 (Mobile 1.15 GHz) 258,091 User benchmarks, average bench 3% HP(103C 1942) 1GB Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.5107 Performing way above expectations (98^th percentile)	3.61% Terrible	Lighting 3.93 Reflection 6.58 Parallax 6.22 3% 5.58 fps	MRender 5 Gravity 2.33 Splatting 7.78 4% 5.04 fps
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 3.61% Great: 3%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94 695,664 User benchmarks, average bench 112% 214GB free (System drive) Firmware: EMT02B6Q SusWrite @10s intervals: 807 503 498 503 509 503 MB/s Relative performance n/a - RAM cached drive detected
Poor: 80% Great: 134%
UFD USB Flash Drive 32GB 13 User benchmarks, average bench 7% 15GB free, PID a832 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 10 9.5 9.6 11 12 11 MB/s Performing below expectations (21^st percentile)	5.17% Terrible	Read 12.2 Write 4 Mixed 2 SusWrite 10.6 9% 7.2 MB/s	4K Read 4.6 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 17% 1.53 MB/s
Poor: 5% ↑ This bench: 5.17% Great: 8%
USB DISK 3.0 64GB 3,818 User benchmarks, average bench 19% 43GB free, PID 6300 Operating at USB 3.2 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 18 11 18 18 14 18 MB/s Performing below expectations (32^nd percentile)	12.3% Very poor	Read 51.2 Write 25.9 Mixed 0.2 SusWrite 16.3 26% 23.4 MB/s	4K Read 5.7 4K Write 0 4K Mixed 0 21% 1.9 MB/s
Poor: 7% ↑ This bench: 12.3% Great: 35%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Kingston 9905428-417.A00LF Samsung M471B5173DB0-YK0 12GB 43 User benchmarks, average bench 40% 1600, 1600 MHz 8192, 4096 MB Performing above expectations (63^rd percentile)	43.7% Average	MC Read 14.9 MC Write 15.7 MC Mixed 12.9 42% 14.5 GB/s	SC Read 12.6 SC Write 15.8 SC Mixed 14.8 41% 14.4 GB/s	Latency 72.6 55% 72.6 ns
Poor: 21% ↑ This bench: 43.7% Great: 56%

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

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Gaming 2%

Tree trunk

Desktop 50%

Yacht

Workstation 2%

Tree trunk

GPU
HD 4600 (Mobile 1.15 GHz)IntelBench 3%, 258,091 samples	97x
Radeon HD 8600/8700MAMDBench 6%, 1,000 samples	1x
HD Graphics (G4 Pentium/Celeron 1.05/1.15 GHz)IntelBench 2%, 43,454 samples	1x

RAM
M471B5173DB0-YK0 1x4GBSamsungBench 24%, 51,191 samples	6x
HP16D3LS1KFG/8G 1x8GBKingstonBench 27%, 638 samples	4x
HP16D3LS1KBG/4G 1x4GBKingstonBench 24%, 2,690 samples	3x

Value: 85% - Excellent

Total price: $39