HP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU, SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (80th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 20 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 73.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 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.
Run History
SystemHP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 3396
Memory8 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20120507
Uptime21.4 Days
Run DateDec 05 '18 at 19:59
Run Duration127 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU6%

 PC Performing above expectations (80th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-3470-$59
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.2 GHz
Performing way above expectations (99th percentile)
73.8% Very good
Memory 83.4
1-Core 95.6
2-Core 190
71% 123 Pts
4-Core 372
8-Core 371
50% 372 Pts
64-Core 364
22% 364 Pts
Poor: 50%
This bench: 73.8%
Great: 71%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia Quadro 4000
HP(103C 0780) 2GB
CLim: 475 MHz, MLim: 702 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 377.83
Relative performance n/a - atypical extreme
Poor: 7% Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
250GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HP73
SusWrite @10s intervals: 103 96 110 116 113 114 MB/s
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
61.7% Good
Read 106
Write 95.3
Mixed 56.8
SusWrite 109
67% 91.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.7
130% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 61.7%
Great: 88%
USB Flash Disk 8GB
7GB free, PID 1000
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 9.9 10 11 10 11 11 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (90th percentile)
8.14% Terrible
Read 20.8
Write 10.5
Mixed 16.8
SusWrite 10.4
19% 14.6 MB/s
4K Read 4.3
4K Write 0.6
4K Mixed 1.1
74% 2 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 8.14%
Great: 9%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M378B5273CH0-CH9 M378B5273CH0-CH9 M378B5273CH0-CH9 Micron 16JTF51264AZ-1G6M1 16GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Performing above expectations (71st percentile)
49.6% Average
MC Read 18.5
MC Write 18.8
MC Mixed 15.9
51% 17.7 GB/s
SC Read 9
SC Write 15.8
SC Mixed 10.8
34% 11.9 GB/s
Latency 74.5
54% 74.5 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 49.6%
Great: 51%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Compaq Elite 8300 CMT Builds (Compare 2,770 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 64% - Good Total price: $325
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. Additionally, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair 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