HP Pavilion dm1 Notebook PC

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 16%
Surfboard
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (32nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 68 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 an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 24.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.55% 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.
Memory3GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 3GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
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.
Very high background CPU (66%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP Pavilion dm1 Notebook PC  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 1611
Memory0.8 GB free of 3 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20110707
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateJun 04 '19 at 12:30
Run Duration131 Seconds
Run User ARE-User
Background CPU 66%

 PC Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD E-350
Socket FT1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.6 GHz
Performing as expected (45th percentile)
24.8% Poor
Memory 44.4
1-Core 15.9
2-Core 32.5
22% 30.9 Pts
4-Core 33.1
8-Core 31.7
4% 32.4 Pts
64-Core 36.2
2% 36.2 Pts
Poor: 13%
This bench: 24.8%
Great: 36%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 6310
HP(103C 1611) 384MB
Driver: aticfx32.dll Ver. 8.861.1.4000
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
0.55% Terrible
Lighting 0.6
Reflection 0.92
Parallax 0.78
0% 0.77 fps
MRender 0.9
Gravity 0.53
Splatting 1
1% 0.81 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.55%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate ST9320423AS 320GB-$40
157GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 0006HPM1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 41 37 41 50 41 44 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (14th percentile)
21.4% Poor
Read 32
Write 54.9
Mixed 35.7
SusWrite 42.3
30% 41.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.4
78% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 9%
This bench: 21.4%
Great: 51%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Micron 4JSF12864HZ-1G4D1 Samsung M471B5773CHS-CH9 3GB
1066, 1066 MHz
1024, 2048 MB
Performing below potential (10th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
10.1% Very poor
MC Read 3.3
MC Write 2.8
MC Mixed 3.9
10% 3.33 GB/s
SC Read 1.7
SC Write 1.9
SC Mixed 2.7
6% 2.1 GB/s
Latency 183
22% 183 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 10.1%
Great: 40%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Pavilion dm1 Notebook PC Builds (Compare 53 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 27%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: HP Pavilion dm1 Notebook PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 21% - Poor Total price: $28
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