HP Compaq 8200 Elite CMT PC

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (6th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 94 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 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 59.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics22.8% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory20GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 20GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (40%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP Compaq 8200 Elite CMT PC  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 1494
Memory12.6 GB free of 20 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1680 x 1050 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150324
Uptime3.1 Days
Run DateJul 20 '23 at 18:22
Run Duration257 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 40%

 PC Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2600-$147
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.45 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (11th percentile)
59.1% Above average
Memory 77.2
1-Core 70.8
2-Core 124
56% 90.7 Pts
4-Core 222
8-Core 336
35% 279 Pts
64-Core 353
22% 353 Pts
Poor: 54%
This bench: 59.1%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 1050-$101
CLim: 1961 MHz, MLim: 1752 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 457.51
Performing below potential (2nd percentile) - GPU OC Guide
22.8% Poor
Lighting 32.1
Reflection 33.8
Parallax 32
26% 32.6 fps
MRender 0.3
Gravity 33.4
Splatting 23
16% 18.9 fps
Poor: 24%
This bench: 22.8%
Great: 28%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WDC WDS100T2B0A-00SM50 1TB
556GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 401000WD
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 305
Write 219
Mixed 150
50% 225 MB/s
4K Read 15.5
4K Write 9.1
4K Mixed 12.1
44% 12.2 MB/s
DQ Read 170
DQ Write 41.4
DQ Mixed 71
61% 94.1 MB/s
Poor: 65% Great: 117%
Seagate Desktop SSHD 2TB-$90
648GB free
Firmware: CC41
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 133
Write 105
Mixed 27.3
64% 88.5 MB/s
4K Read 1
4K Write 4.9
4K Mixed 1.8
332% 2.57 MB/s
Poor: 43% Great: 108%
Toshiba MK6475GSX 640GB-$59
47GB free
Firmware: GT001M
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 76.8
Write 82.2
Mixed 18.9
43% 59.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.5
104% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 11% Great: 45%
Asmt 2115 240GB
94GB free
Firmware: 0
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 56.7
Write 21.2
Mixed 22.8
25% 33.6 MB/s
4K Read 11.3
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 5.3
1,060% 5.53 MB/s
Poor: 10% Great: 22%
Generic USB SD Reader 8GB
7GB free, PID 6362
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 18.2
Write 12.5
Mixed 8.3
15% 13 MB/s
4K Read 3.8
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 2
109% 2.2 MB/s
Poor: 2% Great: 11%
Generic USB CF Reader 1GB
1GB free, PID 6362
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 6.3
Write 5.7
Mixed 5.7
8% 5.9 MB/s
4K Read 2.9
4K Write 0.2
4K Mixed 0.3
28% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 1% Great: 6%
PHD 3.0 Silicon-Power 1TB
35GB free, PID 55aa
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 31.5
Write 22.2
Mixed 23.8
32% 25.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 0.8
4K Mixed 0.6
50% 0.63 MB/s
Poor: 12% Great: 49%
Seagate Expansion Desk 2TB
366GB free, PID 3320
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 108
Write 10.9
Mixed 21.4
41% 46.7 MB/s
4K Read 8.1
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.8
57% 2.97 MB/s
Poor: 13% Great: 74%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown GU512303EP0202 Kingston KHX1866C10D3/8G GU512303EP0202 Kingston KHX1866C10D3/8G 20GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
2048, 8192, 2048, 8192 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
42.5% Average
MC Read 14.4
MC Write 15.9
MC Mixed 13.7
42% 14.7 GB/s
SC Read 10.9
SC Write 13.7
SC Mixed 13
36% 12.5 GB/s
Latency 85.8
47% 85.8 ns
Poor: 43%
This bench: 42.5%
Great: 50%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
0% 0% 0 66 53 60 21.5" 1680 1050 GSM58BF E2242
Typical Compaq 8200 Elite CMT PC Builds (Compare 1,785 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 57%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq 8200 Elite CMT PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 58% - Above average Total price: $278
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 $162Nvidia RTX 4060 $289WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $249Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $380
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