Acer Aspire 7745G

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 53%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (34th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 66 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 average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 52.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics6.46% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive46.1% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory20GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 20GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (19%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemAcer Aspire 7745G  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer JV71-CP
Memory13.7 GB free of 20 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1600 x 900 - 32 Bit barev
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20110804
Uptime21 Days
Run DateJun 01 '23 at 12:17
Run Duration206 Seconds
Run User CZE-User
Background CPU 19%

 PC Performing below expectations (34th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7 Q 720-$220
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 1.7 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
52.9% Above average
Memory 81.1
1-Core 58.8
2-Core 96.6
51% 78.8 Pts
4-Core 138
8-Core 185
20% 162 Pts
64-Core 183
11% 183 Pts
Poor: 30%
This bench: 52.9%
Great: 60%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Mobility Radeon HD 5850
Acer(1025 0368) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 8.840.7.4000
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
6.46% Terrible
Lighting 9
Reflection 7.5
Parallax 9.3
7% 8.6 fps
MRender 6.2
Gravity 8.3
Splatting 3.8
5% 6.1 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 6.46%
Great: 9%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Sandisk SD8SN8U-512G-1006 512GB
387GB free (System drive)
Firmware: X4120006
SusWrite @10s intervals: 216 216 210 188 209 213 MB/s
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
46.1% Average
Read 215
Write 202
Mixed 184
SusWrite 209
46% 203 MB/s
4K Read 13.7
4K Write 25.8
4K Mixed 16.2
55% 18.6 MB/s
DQ Read 177
DQ Write 166
DQ Mixed 169
128% 171 MB/s
Poor: 54%
This bench: 46.1%
Great: 97%
Seagate ST2000LM003 HN-M201RAD 2TB
2TB free
Firmware: 2BC10001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 116 121 119 124 122 122 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
67.8% Good
Read 115
Write 89.6
Mixed 63.6
SusWrite 120
71% 97.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 4.1
4K Mixed 1.1
223% 1.93 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 67.8%
Great: 70%
WD 10EADS External 1TB
194GB free, PID 1003
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 13 13 13 13 13 13 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
11.7% Very poor
Read 57.2
Write 19.9
Mixed 19.7
SusWrite 13.3
31% 27.5 MB/s
4K Read 2
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.6
28% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 11.7%
Great: 21%
WDC WD10 EAVS-00D7B1 1TB
653GB free, PID 0216
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 13 13 13 13 14 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
11.6% Very poor
Read 57.6
Write 19.2
Mixed 20.3
SusWrite 13.5
31% 27.7 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.5
22% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 11.6%
Great: 20%
WDC WD60 EFRX-68L0BN1 6TB
5.5TB free, PID 2338
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 13 13 14 13 13 14 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
12.6% Very poor
Read 57.3
Write 20
Mixed 21.5
SusWrite 13.4
32% 28.1 MB/s
4K Read 5.8
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.9
52% 2.23 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 12.6%
Great: 23%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown EBJ40UG8BBU0-GN-F 02FE EBJ40UG8BBU0-GN-F 02FE EBJ40UG8BBU0-GN-F 02FE EBJ40UG8BBU0-GN-F 20GB
800, 800, 800, 800 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
32.2% Below average
MC Read 12.1
MC Write 10.1
MC Mixed 10
31% 10.7 GB/s
SC Read 8.4
SC Write 8.5
SC Mixed 9.8
25% 8.9 GB/s
Latency 78.5
51% 78.5 ns

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Aspire 7745G Builds (Compare 61 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 40%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: Acer Aspire 7745G

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 20% - Poor Total price: $40
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.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $29Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.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