Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

ADD TO PC
BUILD

Medion Erazer X5302 F/B531

Performance Results


Gaming 21% Surfboard	Desktop 50% Yacht	Workstation 16% Surfboard


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (22nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 78 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 38.2%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics	45% is a reasonable 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle the majority of recent games but it will struggle with resolutions greater than 1080p at ultra detail levels. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	71.4% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory	32GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 32GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

System	Medion Erazer X5302 F/B531 (all builds)
Motherboard	MSI Z97 GAMING 7 (MS-7916)
Memory	29.2 GB free of 32 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben, 1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit Farben
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20141125
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Apr 16 '18 at 09:49
Run Duration	127 Seconds
Run User	CHE-User
Background CPU	4%

PC Performing below expectations (22^nd percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-4790K-$348 455,746 User benchmarks, average bench 79% SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 0.8 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (1^st percentile)	38.2% Below average	Memory 62 1-Core 24.2 2-Core 48.3 32% 44.8 Pts	4-Core 80.7 8-Core 125 13% 103 Pts	64-Core 127 8% 127 Pts
Poor: 67% ↑ This bench: 38.2% Great: 87%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 980-$500 167,107 User benchmarks, average bench 59% Nvidia(10DE 1116) ≥ 4GB CLim: 1392 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 388.13 Performing below potential (1^st percentile) - GPU OC Guide	45% Average	Lighting 47.3 Reflection 66.2 Parallax 78.6 38% 64 fps	MRender 79.2 Gravity 70.4 Splatting 64.3 58% 71.3 fps
Poor: 53% ↑ This bench: 45% Great: 66%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Crucial MX100 512GB-$200 31,545 User benchmarks, average bench 88% 446GB free (System drive) Firmware: MU01 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way below expectations (14^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 2561 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 639 (AB) Unknown 100 100 0 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 98 98 79 (AE) Unknown 100 100 126 (B4) Unknown 0 0 4403 (B7) Unknown 100 100 0 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (C2) HDA temperature 66 51 210454577186 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 100 100 0 (CA) Data Address Mark errors 98 98 2 (CE) Flying height 100 100 0 (D2) Unknown 100 100 0 (F6) Unknown 100 100 42305994835 (F7) Unknown 100 100 1332875697 (F8) Unknown 100 100 1328315291	71.4% Very good	Read 493 Write 466 Mixed 463 106% 474 MB/s	4K Read 21.3 4K Write 42.2 4K Mixed 14.5 73% 26 MB/s	DQ Read 21.9 DQ Write 44.4 DQ Mixed 13.9 16% 26.8 MB/s
Poor: 61% ↑ This bench: 71.4% Great: 107%
WD Green 4TB (2013)-$136 31,988 User benchmarks, average bench 66% 3.5TB free Firmware: 80.00A80 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (87^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 1 (03) Spinup time 184 180 7775 (04) Start/Stop count 99 99 1282 (05) Reallocated sector count 200 200 0 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 97 97 2690 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 652 (C0) Power-off retract count 200 200 119 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 181 181 59333 (C2) HDA temperature 120 109 32 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 200 0 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	82.1% Excellent	Read 135 Write 152 Mixed 142 108% 143 MB/s	4K Read 0.82 4K Write 1.54 4K Mixed 0.28 94% 0.88 MB/s
Poor: 39% ↑ This bench: 82.1% Great: 87%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Nanya M2F8G64CB8HD5N-DI 4x8GB 58 User benchmarks, average bench 58% 4 of 4 slots used 32GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz Performing way below expectations (9^th percentile)	43.8% Average	MC Read 17 MC Write 17.4 MC Mixed 16.8 49% 17.1 GB/s	SC Read 6.1 SC Write 4.8 SC Mixed 7.7 18% 6.2 GB/s	Latency 122 33% 122 ns
Poor: 44% ↑ This bench: 43.8% Great: 60%

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

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

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $165	Nvidia RTX 4060 $299	WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $112	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $389	WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $78
Intel Core i5-13600K $226	Nvidia RTX 4070 $500	Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $350

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

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