ADD TO PC
BUILD

HP 250 G5 Notebook PC

Performance Results


Gaming 11% Tree trunk	Desktop 64% Destroyer	Workstation 10% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing above expectations (75th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 25 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
Processor	With 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 61.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics	5.95% 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 Drive	68.6% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
Memory	8GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's sufficient for the vast majority of games. 8GB is also enough for moderate file and system caches which result in a very responsive system.
OS Version	Although Windows 8.1 is a recent version of Windows, it's worth upgrading to Windows 10 which has had several improvements made to the user interface including a better homescreen.

System	HP 250 G5 Notebook PC (all builds)
Motherboard	HP 81EB
Memory	5.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display	1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 8.1
BIOS Date	20160801
Uptime	0.3 Days
Run Date	Jan 28 '17 at 15:38
Run Duration	278 Seconds
Run User	GRC-User
Background CPU	7%

PC Performing above expectations (75^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i5-6200U 135,462 User benchmarks, average bench 41% U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 2.3 GHz, turbo 2.6 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	61.4% Good	Memory 88.2 1-Core 81.5 2-Core 145 64% 105 Pts	4-Core 202 8-Core 205 27% 204 Pts	64-Core 206 13% 206 Pts
Poor: 17% ↑ This bench: 61.4% Great: 55%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Intel HD 520 (Mobile Skylake) 362,113 User benchmarks, average bench 4% HP(103C 81EB) 1GB Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 21.20.16.4534 Performing way above expectations (100^th percentile)	5.95% Terrible	Lighting 6.27 Reflection 9.23 Parallax 5.84 5% 7.11 fps	MRender 8.52 Gravity 5.43 Splatting 12.6 8% 8.84 fps
Poor: 3% ↑ This bench: 5.95% Great: 5%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Corsair Force LE 120GB 3,209 User benchmarks, average bench 76% 34GB free (System drive) Firmware: SAFC12.2 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (30^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 10 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 10 (A2) Unknown 100 100 185 (AA) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 100 100 1 (AE) Unknown 100 100 1 (B5) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 1 (C2) HDA temperature 98 98 128850984990 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (DA) Unknown 100 100 0 (E7) Temperature 100 100 100 (F1) Unknown 100 100 63 (F2) Unknown 100 100 31	68.6% Good	Read 498 Write 276 Mixed 251 75% 342 MB/s	4K Read 26.8 4K Write 40.5 4K Mixed 9.1 74% 25.5 MB/s	DQ Read 288 DQ Write 206 DQ Mixed 40.3 86% 178 MB/s
Poor: 50% ↑ This bench: 68.6% Great: 92%
Kingston DataTraveler 2.0 16GB 15,750 User benchmarks, average bench 5% 4GB free, PID 6545 Operating at USB 2.0 Speed Performing above expectations (71^st percentile)	4.78% Terrible	Read 21.2 Write 4.25 Mixed 5.98 10% 10.5 MB/s	4K Read 3.24 4K Write 0.004 4K Mixed 0.002 12% 1.08 MB/s
Poor: 3% ↑ This bench: 4.78% Great: 6%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Samsung M471A5143EB0-CPB Corsair CMSO4GX4M1A2133C15 8GB 4 User benchmarks, average bench 52% 2133, 2133 MHz 4096, 4096 MB Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples	71.5% Very good	MC Read 25.2 MC Write 28.3 MC Mixed 22.5 72% 25.3 GB/s	SC Read 15.3 SC Write 27 SC Mixed 21.1 60% 21.1 GB/s	Latency 69.4 58% 69.4 ns
Poor: 21% ↑ This bench: 71.5% Great: 71%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical 250 G5 Notebook PC Builds (Compare 1,065 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 2%

Tree trunk

Desktop

Desktop 39%

Jet ski

Workstation

Workstation 2%

Tree trunk

System: HP 250 G5 Notebook PC

CPU
Core i3-5005UIntelBench 38%, 50,603 samples	388x
Core i5-6200UIntelBench 41%, 135,462 samples	293x
Core i5-7200UIntelBench 45%, 205,332 samples	138x

GPU
HD 5500 (Mobile 0.95 GHz)IntelBench 4%, 231,498 samples	386x
HD 520 (Mobile Skylake)IntelBench 4%, 362,113 samples	370x
HD 620 (Mobile Kaby Lake)IntelBench 5%, 387,149 samples	154x

SSD
SD8SNAT-256G-1006 256GBSandiskBench 66%, 2,836 samples	55x
MZNLN256HMHQ-000H1 256GBSamsungBench 91%, 5,596 samples	52x
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	49x

RAM
M471B5173EB0-YK0 1x4GBSamsungBench 23%, 50,921 samples	131x
M471A1K43CB1-CRC 1x8GBSamsungBench 37%, 122,420 samples	55x
8KTF51264HZ-1G9P1 1x4GBMicronBench 19%, 3,980 samples	47x

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?

Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.

Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?

PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable 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 praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products 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. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.

The Best.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170	Nvidia RTX 4060 $280	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback