HP Compaq Pro 6300 MT

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 65%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 5%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (41st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 59 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 71.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics2.04% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive43.6% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 11 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 (13%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP Compaq Pro 6300 MT  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 339A
Memory7.1 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colores,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20121029
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateDec 12 '18 at 19:26
Run Duration164 Seconds
Run User MEX-User
Background CPU 13%

 PC Performing as expected (41st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3570
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz
Performing way above expectations (88th percentile)
71.4% Very good
Memory 88.5
1-Core 101
2-Core 192
74% 127 Pts
4-Core 310
8-Core 348
43% 329 Pts
64-Core 353
22% 353 Pts
Poor: 50%
This bench: 71.4%
Great: 75%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 610
Gigabyte(1458 3623) 2GB
CLim: 810 MHz, MLim: 333 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
2.04% Terrible
Lighting 2.5
Reflection 3.08
Parallax 1.25
2% 2.28 fps
MRender 3.05
Gravity 2.33
Splatting 2.26
2% 2.55 fps
Poor: 2%
This bench: 2.04%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Kingston A400 240GB-$28
72GB free (System drive)
Firmware: SBFK71B1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 94 65 7 33 50 51 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
43.6% Average
Read 312
Write 98.6
Mixed 105
SusWrite 49.9
31% 141 MB/s
4K Read 16.9
4K Write 39
4K Mixed 20
72% 25.3 MB/s
DQ Read 35.7
DQ Write 230
DQ Mixed 62.4
69% 109 MB/s
Poor: 33%
This bench: 43.6%
Great: 100%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$35
523GB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 137 138 139 137 139 137 MB/s
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
78.5% Very good
Read 135
Write 131
Mixed 80.6
SusWrite 138
89% 121 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 2.4
4K Mixed 1.1
225% 1.63 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 78.5%
Great: 109%
WD Se 3TB (2013)-$145
1TB free
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 148 149 149 149 149 146 MB/s
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
85.7% Excellent
Read 150
Write 145
Mixed 83.6
SusWrite 148
96% 132 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 3.5
4K Mixed 1
213% 1.8 MB/s
Poor: 49%
This bench: 85.7%
Great: 99%
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 16GB
4GB free, PID 5567
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 4.4 3.3 4.3 3.8 4.6 3.8 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
7.99% Terrible
Read 31.2
Write 4.8
Mixed 8.5
SusWrite 4
12% 12.1 MB/s
4K Read 3.2
4K Write 0.6
4K Mixed 2.3
110% 2.03 MB/s
Poor: 5%
This bench: 7.99%
Great: 17%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston KHX1866C10D3/8G Samsung M378B5173QH0-CK0 12GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (11th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
32% Below average
MC Read 10.1
MC Write 10.9
MC Mixed 9.1
29% 10 GB/s
SC Read 10.6
SC Write 10.8
SC Mixed 10.4
30% 10.6 GB/s
Latency 69.1
58% 69.1 ns
Poor: 32%
This bench: 32%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Compaq Pro 6300 MT Builds (Compare 1,940 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 58%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq Pro 6300 MT

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 72% - Very good Total price: $87
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $166Nvidia RTX 4060 $293WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $89
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $353
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback