PCBenchmark/Results/Intel Processor N200 + Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile browser benchmark
PC SCORE5OUT OF 100
SYSTEM GRADEE
Limited quality run 29 September 2026 · 23:48 EEST

Intel Processor N200+Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile

A completed baseline run. Review quality and raw metrics before comparing it.

SUITEFULL SYSTEM MODESTANDARD GPU APIWebGPU ENGINE1.2.1 SCORE SCALEPROVISIONAL R4 DURATION01:01
Run same suite
01 / WORKLOAD BREAKDOWN

Performance by workload.

CPU and GPU use the current adaptive scale for the same workload, mode and graphics backend. When a faster validated device becomes the reference, older comparable scores are projected onto the new scale without changing their raw measurements. VRAM remains a pass/fail diagnostic.

CPU7

Processor throughput

Single thread
151.34 Mops/s
Multi thread
272.62 Mops/s
Compression proxy
94.6 MB/s
GPU1

Graphics throughput

Estimated shader work
134.4 G shader ops/s
Render throughput
11.0 FPS
Frame time p95
566.10 ms
MEMORY9

System memory

Effective bandwidth
3.69 GB/s
Latency proxy
191.9 ns
Browser RAM class
4 GB class
VRAMPASS

GPU-memory diagnostic

Transfer bandwidth
0.71 GB/s
Tested allocation
384 MB
Validation errors
0 errors
02 / RELATIVE PERFORMANCE

What sits above and below this hardware.

Each ladder uses one consistent source. Validated PCBenchmark medians take priority when the matching workload cohort has enough approved runs; until then, the report shows a clearly marked catalog estimate.

CPU POSITION

Intel Processor N200 comparison ladder

ESTIMATE

Specification-based estimateApproximate browser CPU capacity derived from official core, thread and clock specifications for Alder Lake-N desktop processors. It is not a measured benchmark.

  1. Intel Core i3-N300Alder Lake-N · 8 cores / 8 threads · 2023
    +35.5%higher estimate
  2. Intel Processor N200Alder Lake-N · 4 cores / 4 threads · 2023
    BASECATALOG REFERENCE
  3. Intel Processor N100Alder Lake-N · 4 cores / 4 threads · 2023
    −8.1%lower estimate
GPU POSITION

Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile comparison ladder

ESTIMATE

Theoretical FP32 estimatePercentages compare theoretical FP32 compute within the desktop GPU catalog; they are not measured PCBenchmark or gaming performance.

  1. Intel Arc B570Battlemage(Arc 5) · 10 GB VRAM · 2025
    +2,931.6%higher estimate
  2. Intel Arc Pro B50Battlemage(Pro Series) · 16 GB VRAM · 2025
    +2,702.6%higher estimate
  3. Intel Arc Pro A60Alchemist(Pro Series) · 12 GB VRAM · 2023
    +2,110.5%higher estimate
  4. Intel Graphics 24EU MobileHD Graphics-T(Twin Lake) · 2025
    BASECATALOG REFERENCE

No slower peer is available in this comparison set.

03 / STABILITY20.6%

Sustained-load signal

This signal summarizes frame delivery during the timed graphics phase. It can reveal an inconsistent run, but it is not a temperature sensor.

COMPLETEDNO SAMPLE WINDOW61 SEC DROPPED FRAMES79.44%
04 / ENVIRONMENTRUN CONTEXT

What the browser disclosed

Selected suite
Full system
Platform family
Windows
Logical processors
4
Browser RAM class
4 GB · rounded/capped
Graphics API
WebGPU
Run quality
Limited · 40/100
Score fingerprint
adaptive-v2.0 / 1.2.1
Current adaptive scale
Provisional revision 4 / 28 August 2026
i
BROWSER BENCHMARK, NOT HARDWARE ATTESTATION

Read this result in its proper context.

It measures this browser’s execution path under the conditions of this run. Cooling, power mode, drivers, background processes and browser updates can change the outcome. CPU/GPU names may be supplied manually or matched to the catalog from a browser hint. Compare only matching suite, mode, engine version and graphics backend. NOT RUN categories were not measured and are not zero-performance results.

Read methodology & limitations ↗
05 / RAW RESULT DATAInspect JSON +
{
    "test_suite": "all",
    "test_mode": "standard",
    "duration_ms": 60575,
    "system": {
        "cpu_name": "Intel Processor N200",
        "gpu_name": "Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile",
        "logical_cores": 4,
        "memory_gb": 4,
        "platform": "windows",
        "gpu_api": "webgpu",
        "processor_id": 2380,
        "graphics_card_id": 2849
    },
    "metrics": {
        "stability": {
            "duration_seconds": 61,
            "completed": false,
            "dropped_frames_percent": 79.442
        },
        "cpu": {
            "single_core_ops_per_second": 151340327.047,
            "multi_core_ops_per_second": 272621606.327,
            "compression_mb_per_second": 94.611
        },
        "memory": {
            "bandwidth_gbps": 3.692,
            "latency_ns": 191.947
        },
        "gpu": {
            "frames_per_second": 11.034,
            "compute_gflops": 134.372,
            "frame_time_p95_ms": 566.1
        },
        "vram": {
            "tested_mb": 384,
            "bandwidth_gbps": 0.709,
            "errors": 0
        }
    },
    "raw_points": {
        "cpu": 3.19203062,
        "gpu": 0.11197667
    },
    "original_scores": {
        "cpu": 7,
        "gpu": 1,
        "memory": 9,
        "vram": 0,
        "overall": 5,
        "grade": "E"
    },
    "current_scores": {
        "cpu": 7,
        "gpu": 1,
        "memory": 9,
        "vram": 0,
        "overall": 5,
        "grade": "E",
        "snapshot_revision": 4
    },
    "runner_version": "1.2.1",
    "workload_signature": "browser-1.2",
    "scoring_version": "adaptive-v2.0"
}
SAME SUITE, FRESH CONDITIONS

Think this system can do better?

Close heavy apps, connect power, keep the tab visible and run the same Full system suite and Standard mode again.

Run it again