Asus 1001PXD

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (40th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 60 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.
ProcessorWith an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 17.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is terrible.
Boot DriveThe 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.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 8 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.
High background CPU (30%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemAsus 1001PXD  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK 1001PXD
Memory0.8 GB free of 2 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1024 x 600 - 32 Bit colori,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20110218
Uptime0 Days
Run DateNov 03 '19 at 20:14
Run Duration159 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU 30%

 PC Performing below expectations (40th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Atom N455
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.65 GHz
Performing below expectations (35th percentile)
17.7% Very poor
Memory 34.4
1-Core 4.6
2-Core 7.2
13% 15.4 Pts
4-Core 7.8
8-Core 8.4
1% 8.1 Pts
64-Core 8.9
1% 8.9 Pts
Poor: 9%
This bench: 17.7%
Great: 33%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Hitachi HTS543225A7A384 250GB
120GB free (System drive)
Firmware: ESBO
SusWrite @10s intervals: 67 81 80 80 80 78 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
44.9% Average
Read 78.8
Write 80
Mixed 17.5
SusWrite 77.9
46% 63.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.5
88% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 44.9%
Great: 41%
General USB Flash Disk 8GB
7GB free, PID 1000
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 3.6 4.7 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.1 MB/s
Performing below expectations (23rd percentile)
3.17% Terrible
Read 12
Write 5.8
Mixed 2.8
SusWrite 4.3
7% 6.22 MB/s
4K Read 2.1
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
8% 0.7 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.17%
Great: 8%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x2GB
1 of 2 slots used
2GB DIMM DDR2 667 MHz
Performing below potential (3rd percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
7.74% Terrible
MC Read 2.6
MC Write 2.8
MC Mixed 2.2
7% 2.53 GB/s
SC Read 1.4
SC Write 2.2
SC Mixed 1
4% 1.53 GB/s
Latency 230
17% 230 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 7.74%
Great: 26%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $182Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $30Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback