HP 500-419

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 3%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 44%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 3%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (53rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 47 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 44.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics6.58% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
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.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (18%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemHP 500-419  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 2B17
Memory13.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1680 x 1050 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20140624
Uptime0 Days
Run DateSep 21 '18 at 02:30
Run Duration127 Seconds
Run User CAN-User
Background CPU 18%

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD FX-770K (2014 D.Ka)
P0, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.65 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (52nd percentile)
44.8% Average
Memory 59.3
1-Core 62.5
2-Core 106
46% 75.8 Pts
4-Core 177
8-Core 176
24% 177 Pts
64-Core 185
12% 185 Pts
Poor: 32%
This bench: 44.8%
Great: 51%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD R7 240
Device(1B0A 90D3) 2GB
CLim: 780 MHz, MLim: 900 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 16.6
Performing way above expectations (98th percentile)
6.58% Terrible
Lighting 8.13
Reflection 8.96
Parallax 10.3
7% 9.13 fps
MRender 7.9
Gravity 7.5
Splatting 8.26
6% 7.89 fps
Poor: 4%
This bench: 6.58%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$28
686GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 01.01A01
SusWrite @10s intervals: 55 82 101 144 117 146 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)
67.2% Good
Read 126
Write 116
Mixed 19.9
SusWrite 108
67% 92.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.3
4K Mixed 0.9
176% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 67.2%
Great: 109%
WD My Book 1230 2TB
1.5TB free, PID 1230
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 115 132 126 133 111 115 MB/s
Performing above expectations (77th percentile)
52.7% Above average
Read 132
Write 132
Mixed 71.8
SusWrite 122
153% 115 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 1
112% 1.33 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 52.7%
Great: 59%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown PSD38G16002 Hynix HMT41GU6AFR8A-PB 16GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 8192 MB
Performing below potential (19th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
22.4% Poor
MC Read 8.7
MC Write 7.4
MC Mixed 7.3
22% 7.8 GB/s
SC Read 5.2
SC Write 5.3
SC Mixed 5.5
15% 5.33 GB/s
Latency 130
31% 130 ns
Poor: 21%
This bench: 22.4%
Great: 57%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 500-419 Builds (Compare 1 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete

System: HP 500-419

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing spiel so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit greatly from flagship hardware like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Moreover, brands pay youtubers extra to promote inferior products but UserBenchmark’s data exposes them.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated online reviews. It's obvious that the 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't interested in promoting billon-dollar brands.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of pursuing lucrative sponsorships with billion-dollar PC brands, we have dedicated 13 years to publishing accurate real-world data. As a result, our users save millions every year and they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $361Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $44
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $28Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.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