Acer AO533

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (17th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 83 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 17.3%, 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.
Sub-optimal background CPU (16%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemAcer AO533  (all builds)
MotherboardAcer AO533
Memory1.1 GB free of 2 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display1024 x 600 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20110519
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJul 11 '21 at 20:49
Run Duration160 Seconds
Run User RUS-User
Background CPU 16%

 PC Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Atom N455
CPU, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.65 GHz
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
17.3% Very poor
Memory 33.1
1-Core 6.1
2-Core 10.7
14% 16.6 Pts
4-Core 11.2
8-Core 9.9
2% 10.5 Pts
64-Core 11.5
1% 11.5 Pts
Poor: 9%
This bench: 17.3%
Great: 33%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 2.5" 250GB (2009)-$30
142GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 17 27 21 21 33 35 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
10.6% Very poor
Read 11
Write 33.8
Mixed 12.7
SusWrite 25.7
15% 20.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.1
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.2
41% 0.37 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 10.6%
Great: 41%
JetFlash Transcend 2GB
1GB free, PID 6387
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 5.3 5.6 6 5.9 5.4 5.1 MB/s
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
4.48% Terrible
Read 17.4
Write 5.8
Mixed 4.7
SusWrite 5.5
9% 8.35 MB/s
4K Read 3.2
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
12% 1.07 MB/s
Poor: 4%
This bench: 4.48%
Great: 6%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x2GB
1 of 1 slots used
2GB SODIMM DDR3 667 MHz
Performing way below expectations (3rd percentile)
8.41% Terrible
MC Read 3.1
MC Write 2.9
MC Mixed 2.4
8% 2.8 GB/s
SC Read 1
SC Write 2.5
SC Mixed 1.8
5% 1.77 GB/s
Latency 237
17% 237 ns
Poor: 7%
This bench: 8.41%
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 $134Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184Nvidia 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) $35Corsair 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