Memory kit performing at 4 percent of expectations?

[matt1870]

Hello, I just got a new HP Pavilion laptop and decided to run an user benchmark test. I am pleased with the results (not going for a supercomputer here), but I have a couple of issues

1) My memory kit is performing way below expectations (4th percentile among all PCs with the exact same component). What could be possible reasons for this?

2) I have an AMD APU with an additional dedicated graphics card (radeon 535 dx). User benchmark is "unable to locate attached display" for the dedicated graphics card. Is there a setting I need to confirm? AMD Radeon settings claims it has "AMD Dual Graphics" enabled.

Benchmark run can be found here: http/www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/4816946

btw - no idea why processor is operating at the 100th percentile. It is not overclocked.

If anyone has any suggestions/explanations, I would be very grateful.

Thanks in advance.

 

[rgd1101]

MERGED QUESTION
Question from matt1870 : "User Benchmark. Memory Kit: performing well below expectations. Graphics: Unable to Locate attached display (radeon 535 dx)"

Hello, I just got a new HP Pavilion laptop and decided to run an user benchmark test. I am pleased with the results (not going for a supercomputer here), but I have a couple of issues

1) My memory kit is performing way below expectations (4th percentile among all PCs with the exact same component). What could be possible reasons for this?

2) I have an AMD APU with an additional dedicated graphics card (radeon 535 dx). User benchmark is "unable to locate attached display" for the dedicated graphics card. Is there a setting I need to confirm? AMD Radeon settings claims it has "AMD Dual Graphics" enabled.

Benchmark run can be found here: http/www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/4816946

btw - no idea why processor is operating at the 100th percentile. It is not overclocked.

If anyone has any suggestions/explanations, I would be very grateful.

Thanks in advance.