Fujitsu LIFEBOOK E754

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (57th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 43 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith 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 63.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics3.46% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive49.2% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 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 (18%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemFujitsu LIFEBOOK E754  (all builds)
MotherboardFUJITSU FJNB270
Memory4.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20170315
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateJul 06 '18 at 21:27
Run Duration147 Seconds
Run User ZAF-User
Background CPU 18%

 PC Performing as expected (57th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-4300M-$264
Onboard, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.6 GHz
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
63.2% Good
Memory 86.5
1-Core 88.8
2-Core 154
66% 110 Pts
4-Core 236
8-Core 222
31% 229 Pts
64-Core 223
14% 223 Pts
Poor: 27%
This bench: 63.2%
Great: 64%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4600 (Mobile 1.15 GHz)
Fujitsu(10CF 17AA) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.14.4889
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
3.46% Terrible
Lighting 3.53
Reflection 6.27
Parallax 6.06
3% 5.29 fps
MRender 6.9
Gravity 2.1
Splatting 7.26
5% 5.42 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 3.46%
Great: 3%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD WDS240G2G0A-00JH 240GB
173GB free (System drive)
Firmware: UF45
SusWrite @10s intervals: 226 19 2.9 81 92 140 MB/s
Performing above expectations (81st percentile)
49.2% Average
Read 433
Write 345
Mixed 319
SusWrite 93.3
66% 297 MB/s
4K Read 20.5
4K Write 36
4K Mixed 17.4
72% 24.6 MB/s
DQ Read 116
DQ Write 75
DQ Mixed 41.8
46% 77.7 MB/s
Poor: 32%
This bench: 49.2%
Great: 52%
TO Exter nal USB 3.0 1TB
295GB free, PID a001
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 17 18 18 18 20 18 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (9th percentile)
7.41% Terrible
Read 17.2
Write 18.3
Mixed 15.3
SusWrite 18.2
24% 17.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.1
4K Write 0.3
4K Mixed 0.1
14% 0.17 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 7.41%
Great: 223%
TO Exter nal USB 3.0 240GB
61GB free, PID null
SusWrite @10s intervals: 19 48 45 71 69 70 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
80.3% Excellent
Read 168
Write 45.8
Mixed 82.5
SusWrite 53.5
101% 87.4 MB/s
4K Read 9.2
4K Write 13.7
4K Mixed 10.5
857% 11.1 MB/s
DQ Read 15.6
DQ Write 22.1
DQ Mixed 13.2
1,258% 17 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 80.3%
Great: 148%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5173QH0-YK0 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing as expected (41st percentile)
50.4% Above average
MC Read 16.8
MC Write 20.3
MC Mixed 16.4
51% 17.8 GB/s
SC Read 11.5
SC Write 13.2
SC Mixed 13
36% 12.6 GB/s
Latency 70.9
56% 70.9 ns
Poor: 23%
This bench: 50.4%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical LIFEBOOK E754 Builds (Compare 173 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 52%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: Fujitsu LIFEBOOK E754

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 52% - Above average Total price: $264
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 $169Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4070 $549Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $369
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