HP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 62%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing way below expectations (19th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 81 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 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 66%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics0.78% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive73.7% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait 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 VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
Sub-optimal background CPU (12%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 3396
Memory2 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1600 x 900 - 32 Bit Farben
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150915
Uptime12.3 Days
Run DateNov 02 '20 at 17:37
Run Duration291 Seconds
Run User AUT-User
Background CPU 12%

 PC Performing way below expectations (19th percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
Intel Core i5-3570
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.6 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
66% Good
Memory 76.1
1-Core 95
2-Core 199
71% 123 Pts
4-Core 333
8-Core 274
43% 304 Pts
64-Core 338
23% 338 Pts
Poor: 62%
This bench: 66%
Great: 81%
Graphics Card Bench 3D DX9 3D DX10 3D DX11
Intel HD 2500 (Desktop 1.05 GHz)
HP(103C 3396) 2GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 10.18.10.4358
Performing below expectations (25th percentile)
0.78% Terrible
Lighting 1.03
Reflection 1.08
Parallax 0.81
1% 0.97 fps
MRender 2.1
Gravity 0.63
Splatting 2.04
1% 1.59 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 0.78%
Great: 2%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$135
124GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 277 175 154 136 115 103 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
73.7% Very good
Read 460
Write 442
Mixed 368
SusWrite 160
80% 357 MB/s
4K Read 25.2
4K Write 43.7
4K Mixed 33.2
104% 34 MB/s
DQ Read 303
DQ Write 274
DQ Mixed 290
217% 289 MB/s
Poor: 85%
This bench: 73.7%
Great: 134%
Covecube Virtual Disk 644GB
600GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 71 49 48 44 41 48 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
34.9% Below average
Read 168
Write 127
Mixed 150
SusWrite 50.1
28% 124 MB/s
4K Read 15.8
4K Write 23.8
4K Mixed 19.3
61% 19.6 MB/s
DQ Read 121
DQ Write 142
DQ Mixed 118
93% 127 MB/s
Covecube Virtual Disk 1TB
906GB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 78 51 48 43 41 40 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
36.9% Below average
Read 174
Write 143
Mixed 160
SusWrite 50.2
30% 132 MB/s
4K Read 17.7
4K Write 24
4K Mixed 21.3
67% 21 MB/s
DQ Read 132
DQ Write 132
DQ Mixed 127
97% 130 MB/s
WD Green 1.5TB (2010)-$73
916GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 58 58 58 59 53 51 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
29.8% Poor
Read 47.3
Write 51.6
Mixed 45.9
SusWrite 56.3
37% 50.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.5
115% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 26%
This bench: 29.8%
Great: 66%
Covecube Virtual Disk 2TB
5.5TB free
Firmware: 0001
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 25 25 25 26 25 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (18th percentile)
38.5% Below average
Read 107
Write 130
Mixed 87.7
SusWrite 25.2
65% 87.5 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 4.8
4K Mixed 1.3
292% 2.5 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 38.5%
Great: 104%
WD My Book 25EE 8TB
1TB free, PID 25ee
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 98 98 99 96 102 102 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
51.7% Above average
Read 106
Write 121
Mixed 86
SusWrite 99.1
140% 103 MB/s
4K Read 1.4
4K Write 4.7
4K Mixed 1.1
202% 2.4 MB/s
Poor: 25%
This bench: 51.7%
Great: 100%
WD Elements 107C 5TB
1TB free, PID 107c
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 81 82 81 78 85 85 MB/s
Performing as expected (47th percentile)
47.8% Average
Read 143
Write 139
Mixed 77.2
SusWrite 82
143% 110 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.9
4K Mixed 1
137% 1.67 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 47.8%
Great: 66%
WD Ext HDD 1021 3TB
792GB free, PID 1021
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 11 11 11 11 11 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
11.8% Very poor
Read 36.5
Write 28.9
Mixed 27.5
SusWrite 10.9
33% 26 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.6
67% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 11.8%
Great: 22%
WD My Book 25EE 8TB
1TB free, PID 25ee
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 25 25 25 25 26 25 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
39% Below average
Read 124
Write 105
Mixed 57.7
SusWrite 25.2
96% 78.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.9
4K Write 4.9
4K Mixed 1.3
218% 2.7 MB/s
Poor: 25%
This bench: 39%
Great: 100%
WD My Passport 071A 500GB
176GB free, PID 071a
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 10 11 11 11 11 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
12% Very poor
Read 36.3
Write 29.6
Mixed 26.4
SusWrite 10.6
33% 25.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.6
70% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 12%
Great: 18%
WD Elements 500GB
191GB free, PID 1023
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 11 11 11 11 11 11 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
11.8% Very poor
Read 35.1
Write 31.4
Mixed 26.1
SusWrite 10.6
33% 25.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.6
70% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 11.8%
Great: 43%
WD My Book 25EE 8TB
1TB free, PID 25ee
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 95 95 95 93 97 98 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
51.6% Above average
Read 102
Write 113
Mixed 78.8
SusWrite 95.5
132% 97.1 MB/s
4K Read 1.6
4K Write 5.1
4K Mixed 1.2
220% 2.63 MB/s
Poor: 25%
This bench: 51.6%
Great: 100%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 029E CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 16GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Performing below expectations (38th percentile)
48.7% Average
MC Read 17.4
MC Write 18.3
MC Mixed 15.4
49% 17 GB/s
SC Read 13.6
SC Write 13.8
SC Mixed 16.3
42% 14.6 GB/s
Latency 88.1
45% 88.1 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 48.7%
Great: 53%

 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 3,762 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 66%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq Elite 8300 CMT

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 67% - Good Total price: $332
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-11400F $220Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Crucial MX500 250GB $49
Intel Core i5-11600K $259Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-11700K $380Nvidia RTX 3080 $700Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $79SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $94SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $80G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $649SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback