Hp-pavilion GN632AV-ABA a6200t

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 17%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (51st percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 49 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 36.6%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics4.53% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHp-pavilion GN632AV-ABA a6200t  (all builds)
MotherboardASUSTeK Lancaster8
Memory0.4 GB free of 2 GB @ 0.5 GHz
Display1280 x 1024 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20071001
Uptime0 Days
Run DateAug 11 '17 at 02:52
Run Duration142 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 15%

 PC Performing as expected (51st percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Pentium Dual E2160-$47
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.8 GHz, turbo 1.8 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (87th percentile)
36.6% Below average
Memory 67.3
1-Core 19.3
2-Core 38.7
31% 41.8 Pts
4-Core 37.8
8-Core 39.2
5% 38.5 Pts
64-Core 36.8
2% 36.8 Pts
Poor: 18%
This bench: 36.6%
Great: 39%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia Quadro FX 3700
Nvidia(10DE 055F) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 342.1
Performing above expectations (68th percentile)
4.53% Terrible
Lighting 6.37
Reflection 6.23
Parallax 2.38
5% 4.99 fps
MRender 2.86
Gravity 5.3
Splatting 3.74
3% 3.97 fps
Poor: 5%
This bench: 4.53%
Great: 5%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD WD3200AAJB-00J3A0 320GB
252GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.03E01 Max speed: UDMA 133 133 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
16.1% Very poor
Read 27.7
Write 28.6
Mixed 26.8
21% 27.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.08
4K Write 0.35
4K Mixed 0.08
18% 0.17 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 16.1%
Great: 46%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 2x1GB
2 of 2 slots used
2GB DIMM DDR2
Performing below potential (35th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
10.6% Very poor
MC Read 4
MC Write 3.1
MC Mixed 1.7
8% 2.93 GB/s
SC Read 3.6
SC Write 2.8
SC Mixed 1.2
7% 2.53 GB/s
Latency 108
37% 108 ns
Poor: 6%
This bench: 10.6%
Great: 20%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184Nvidia RTX 4070 $409Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback