intel-core-i5-6200u-280ghz

Intel Core i5-6200U testing with a HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS) and Intel HD 520 3072MB on Ubuntu 18.04 via the Phoronix Test Suite.

Compare your own system(s) to this result file with the Phoronix Test Suite by running the command: phoronix-test-suite benchmark 1906148-FO-INTELCORE24
Jump To Table - Results

View

Do Not Show Noisy Results
Do Not Show Results With Incomplete Data
Do Not Show Results With Little Change/Spread
List Notable Results

Limit displaying results to tests within:

Bioinformatics 2 Tests
C/C++ Compiler Tests 3 Tests
CPU Massive 8 Tests
Fortran Tests 2 Tests
HPC - High Performance Computing 4 Tests
Java 2 Tests
MPI Benchmarks 2 Tests
Multi-Core 2 Tests
Scientific Computing 3 Tests
Server CPU Tests 2 Tests
Single-Threaded 2 Tests

Statistics

Show Overall Harmonic Mean(s)
Show Overall Geometric Mean
Show Geometric Means Per-Suite/Category
Show Wins / Losses Counts (Pie Chart)
Normalize Results
Remove Outliers Before Calculating Averages

Graph Settings

Force Line Graphs Where Applicable
Convert To Scalar Where Applicable
Disable Color Branding
Prefer Vertical Bar Graphs

Multi-Way Comparison

Condense Multi-Option Tests Into Single Result Graphs

Table

Show Detailed System Result Table

Run Management

Highlight
Result
Hide
Result
Result
Identifier
View Logs
Performance Per
Dollar
Date
Run
  Test
  Duration
SAMSUNG MZNLN256
June 11 2019
 
Intel Core i5-6200U
June 11 2019
 
Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079
June 11 2019
 
Intel HD 520
June 11 2019
 
Intel Connection I219-V
June 13 2019
 
Invert Hiding All Results Option
 

Only show results where is faster than
Only show results matching title/arguments (delimit multiple options with a comma):
Do not show results matching title/arguments (delimit multiple options with a comma):


intel-core-i5-6200u-280ghz Intel Core i5-6200U testing with a HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS) and Intel HD 520 3072MB on Ubuntu 18.04 via the Phoronix Test Suite. SAMSUNG MZNLN256: Processor: Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.80GHz (2 Cores / 4 Threads), Motherboard: HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 256GB SAMSUNG MZNLN256, Graphics: Intel HD 520 3072MB (1000MHz), Audio: Conexant CX20724, Network: Intel Connection I219-V + Intel Wireless 8260 OS: Ubuntu 18.04, Kernel: 4.18.0-21-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 3.28.4, Display Driver: modesetting 1.20.1, OpenGL: 4.5 Mesa 18.2.8, Compiler: GCC 7.4.0, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 1920x1080 Intel Core i5-6200U: Processor: Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.80GHz (2 Cores / 4 Threads), Motherboard: HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 256GB SAMSUNG MZNLN256, Graphics: Intel HD 520 3072MB (1000MHz), Audio: Conexant CX20724, Network: Intel Connection I219-V + Intel Wireless 8260 OS: Ubuntu 18.04, Kernel: 4.18.0-21-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 3.28.4, Display Driver: modesetting 1.20.1, OpenGL: 4.5 Mesa 18.2.8, Compiler: GCC 7.4.0, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 1920x1080 Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079: Processor: Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.80GHz (2 Cores / 4 Threads), Motherboard: HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 256GB SAMSUNG MZNLN256, Graphics: Intel HD 520 3072MB (1000MHz), Audio: Conexant CX20724, Network: Intel Connection I219-V + Intel Wireless 8260 OS: Ubuntu 18.04, Kernel: 4.18.0-21-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 3.28.4, Display Driver: modesetting 1.20.1, OpenGL: 4.5 Mesa 18.2.8, Compiler: GCC 7.4.0, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 1920x1080 Intel HD 520: Processor: Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.80GHz (2 Cores / 4 Threads), Motherboard: HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 256GB SAMSUNG MZNLN256, Graphics: Intel HD 520 3072MB (1000MHz), Audio: Conexant CX20724, Network: Intel Connection I219-V + Intel Wireless 8260 OS: Ubuntu 18.04, Kernel: 4.18.0-21-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 3.28.4, Display Driver: modesetting 1.20.1, OpenGL: 4.5 Mesa 18.2.8, Compiler: GCC 7.4.0, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 1920x1080 Intel Connection I219-V: Processor: Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.80GHz (2 Cores / 4 Threads), Motherboard: HP 8079 (N75 Ver. 01.18 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v5/E3-1500, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 256GB SAMSUNG MZNLN256, Graphics: Intel HD 520 3072MB (1000MHz), Audio: Conexant CX20724, Network: Intel Connection I219-V + Intel Wireless 8260 OS: Ubuntu 18.04, Kernel: 4.18.0-21-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 3.28.4, Display Driver: modesetting 1.20.1, OpenGL: 4.5 Mesa 18.2.8, Compiler: GCC 7.4.0, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 1920x1080 JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Texture Paint - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 46929.59 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Bilinear - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 42486.65 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Texture Paint - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 49441.50 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Linear - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 193198.67 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Bilinear - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 46869.12 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Linear - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 205110.25 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Radial Gradient Paint - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 12015.59 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Radial Gradient Paint - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 16951.51 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Linear Gradient Blend - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 16740.94 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Gradient+Temp Texture - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 14172.79 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text Grayscale - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 31971.61 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Radial Gradient Paint - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 17662.90 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Linear Gradient Blend - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 17945.19 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Gradient+Temp Texture - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 15246.71 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text Grayscale - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 53410.09 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text Grayscale - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 82554.46 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text Grayscale - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 110398.30 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Rects Composition - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 17805.89 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Rects Composition - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 35241.23 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text Grayscale - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 154396.17 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Rects Composition - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 45354.17 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Put Composition - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 5392.88 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Put Composition - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 8503.61 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Put Composition - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 11500.01 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text LCD - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 32526.56 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Put Composition - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 15173.87 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text LCD - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 54373.89 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text LCD - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 83352.80 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text LCD - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 111009.44 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: 12pt Text LCD - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 155143.98 |===================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Simple Blit - Size: 32x32 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 279587.55 |===================================================== JuliaGPU 1.2pts1 OpenCL Device: CPU+GPU Samples/sec > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 2210997.73 |============= JuliaGPU 1.2pts1 OpenCL Device: CPU Samples/sec > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 2211179.80 |============= John The Ripper 1.8.0-jumbo-1 Test: MD5 Real C/S > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 80361 |================================================== John The Ripper 1.8.0-jumbo-1 Test: Traditional DES Real C/S > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 9620333 |================================================ John The Ripper 1.8.0-jumbo-1 Test: Blowfish Real C/S > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 2501 |=================================================== Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Jacobi Successive Over-Relaxation Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1011.26 |================================================ Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Dense LU Matrix Factorization Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 4189.24 |================================================ Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Sparse Matrix Multiply Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1587.21 |================================================ Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Fast Fourier Transform Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1070.06 |================================================ Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Monte Carlo Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 684.09 |================================================= Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Composite Mflops > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1708.37 |================================================ Java Gradle Build 1.0 Gradle Build: Reactor Seconds < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 30.76 |================================================== Java 2D Microbenchmark 1.0 Rendering Test: Vector Graphics Rendering Units Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 895154.66 |===================================================== Java 2D Microbenchmark 1.0 Rendering Test: All Rendering Tests Units Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 1042552.33 |==================================================== Java 2D Microbenchmark 1.0 Rendering Test: Image Rendering Units Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 1555369.89 |==================================================== Java 2D Microbenchmark 1.0 Rendering Test: Text Rendering Units Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 11706.17 |====================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 230.88 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 233.79 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 285.38 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 278.01 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 261.09 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 2801.75 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 4076.12 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 7201.02 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 6527.39 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 6208.18 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 279.97 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 271.24 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 255.24 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 285.24 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 264.61 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 254.98 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 3726.18 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 3677.40 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 4Kb - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 3393.89 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 8GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 6987.80 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 4GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 6254.56 |=================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 1MB - File Size: 2GB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 6933.19 |=================================================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Gaming - Background Load: Memload Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 2.80 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Compile Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 127.43 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Video Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 0.20 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: Burn Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 48.20 |================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Gaming - Background Load: X Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 2.10 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: X Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 16.83 |================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Burn Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 246 |==================== High Performance Conjugate Gradient 3.0 GFLOP/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1.09 |=================================================== HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: Max Ping Pong Bandwidth MB/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 7551.60 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: Random Ring Bandwidth GB/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 2.70117 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: Random Ring Latency usecs < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 0.66375 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-Random Access GUP/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 0.00204 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: EP-STREAM Triad GB/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 4.72101 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-Ptrans GB/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 0.31648 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: EP-DGEMM GFLOPS > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 5.22681 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-Ffte GFLOP/s > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 3.21539 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-Ffte GFLOPS > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 3.21539 |================================================ HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-HPL GFLOPS > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 20.15 |================================================== Timed HMMer Search 2.3.2 Pfam Database Search Seconds < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 19.24 |================================================== Hierarchical INTegration 1.0 Test: DOUBLE QUIPs > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 653886506.44 |=========== Hierarchical INTegration 1.0 Test: FLOAT QUIPs > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 281417773.33 |=========== Himeno Benchmark 3.0 Poisson Pressure Solver MFLOPS > Higher Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U . 1840.50 |================================================ hdparm Timed Disk Reads Disk To Read: /dev/sda MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 524.51 |==================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Texture Paint - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 5441.06 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Bilinear - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 4985.11 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Texture Paint - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 9579.63 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Texture Paint - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 18621.36 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Linear - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 69108.10 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Bilinear - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 8860.07 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Bilinear - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 25935.29 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Linear - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 15423.63 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Transformed Blit Linear - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 55114.49 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Radial Gradient Paint - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 2347.42 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Linear Gradient Blend - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 1828.74 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Gradient+Temp Texture - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 2216.68 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Radial Gradient Paint - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 5169.43 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Linear Gradient Blend - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 4036.64 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Linear Gradient Blend - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 10637.60 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Gradient+Temp Texture - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 3209.43 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Gradient+Temp Texture - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 8897.58 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Rects Composition - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 5522.11 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Rects Composition - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 9935.02 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Put Composition - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 3346.52 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Simple Blit - Size: 1024x1024 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 8912.70 |======================================================= JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Simple Blit - Size: 512x512 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 19533.35 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Simple Blit - Size: 256x256 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 95895.51 |====================================================== JXRenderMark 1.0.1 Test: Simple Blit - Size: 128x128 Operations Per Second > Higher Is Better Intel HD 520 . 256952.41 |===================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Write Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 205.94 |==================================================== IOzone 3.465 Record Size: 64Kb - File Size: 512MB - Disk Test: Read Performance MB/s > Higher Is Better SAMSUNG MZNLN256 . 4390.42 |=================================================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Gaming - Background Load: Compile Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 267.97 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: Memload Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 0.38 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: Compile Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 142.68 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Memload Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 0.68 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Gaming - Background Load: Write Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 51.20 |================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: Write Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 122.48 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Gaming - Background Load: Burn Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 100.08 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Write Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 124.02 |================= Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Video - Background Load: Read Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 5.98 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Read Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 0.60 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: Burn Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 4.53 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Memload Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 15 |===================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Compile Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 446 |==================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Write Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 86 |===================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Video Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 34 |===================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: Audio - Background Load: X Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 0.25 |=================== Interbench 0.31 Benchmark: X - Background Load: Read Max Latency ms < Lower Is Better Intel Core i5-6200U - Intel HD 520 3072MB - HP 8079 . 48 |=====================