HP h9-1110t

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 10%
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 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 69.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics8.93% 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 Drive83.3% is a very good SSD score. This drive is suitable for moderate workstation use, it will facilitate fast boots, responsive applications and ensure minimum 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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (49%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP h9-1110t  (all builds)
MotherboardPEGATRON 2AB5
Memory8.9 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20111012
Uptime2.6 Days
Run DateFeb 25 '21 at 17:11
Run Duration177 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 49%

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-2600-$200
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.4 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg)
Performing above expectations (64th percentile)
69.1% Good
Memory 85.5
1-Core 88.1
2-Core 156
66% 110 Pts
4-Core 286
8-Core 436
45% 361 Pts
64-Core 447
28% 447 Pts
Poor: 54%
This bench: 69.1%
Great: 74%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 550-Ti-$250
Device(1B0A 90A2) 1GB
CLim: 900 MHz, MLim: 1026 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 391.35
Performing above expectations (76th percentile)
8.93% Terrible
Lighting 10.2
Reflection 14.8
Parallax 10.6
8% 11.9 fps
MRender 15.6
Gravity 11.5
Splatting 10.8
10% 12.6 fps
Poor: 7%
This bench: 8.93%
Great: 9%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB-$94
120GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EMT03B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 409 329 253 240 240 241 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (7th percentile)
83.3% Excellent
Read 463
Write 437
Mixed 382
SusWrite 285
88% 392 MB/s
4K Read 27
4K Write 49.4
4K Mixed 33.7
110% 36.7 MB/s
DQ Read 346
DQ Write 234
DQ Mixed 275
209% 285 MB/s
Poor: 80%
This bench: 83.3%
Great: 134%
Hitachi HDS721010CLA632 1TB-$105
68GB free
Firmware: JP4OA41A
SusWrite @10s intervals: 86 88 89 89 88 88 MB/s
Performing as expected (49th percentile)
59% Above average
Read 118
Write 102
Mixed 64.4
SusWrite 87.8
68% 92.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 1.5
4K Mixed 0.8
150% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 30%
This bench: 59%
Great: 76%
WD WD25EZRS-00J99B0 2.5TB
1.5TB free
Firmware: 0401
SusWrite @10s intervals: 91 90 90 91 91 90 MB/s
Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)
57% Above average
Read 108
Write 102
Mixed 58.7
SusWrite 90.4
66% 89.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.2
4K Mixed 0.7
152% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 31%
This bench: 57%
Great: 68%
WD Elements 25A1 4TB
1.5TB free, PID 25a1
Operating at USB 3.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 75 73 74 73 73 74 MB/s
Performing below expectations (39th percentile)
40.7% Average
Read 107
Write 87.9
Mixed 54.4
SusWrite 73.6
104% 80.7 MB/s
4K Read 1.1
4K Write 2.9
4K Mixed 0.8
130% 1.6 MB/s
Poor: 20%
This bench: 40.7%
Great: 61%
WD Elements 2620 5TB
2.5TB free, PID 2620
Operating at USB 3.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 70 79 73 73 72 75 MB/s
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
52.1% Above average
Read 125
Write 105
Mixed 59.9
SusWrite 73.6
117% 91 MB/s
4K Read 1.5
4K Write 5.7
4K Mixed 0.8
227% 2.67 MB/s
Poor: 17%
This bench: 52.1%
Great: 65%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 16JTF51264AZ-1G4A1 Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 16JTF51264AZ-1G4A1 Samsung M378B5273DH0-CH9 16GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
46.9% Average
MC Read 16.1
MC Write 16.8
MC Mixed 14.7
45% 15.9 GB/s
SC Read 12.7
SC Write 15.4
SC Mixed 15.9
42% 14.7 GB/s
Latency 71.6
56% 71.6 ns
Poor: 47%
This bench: 46.9%
Great: 47%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical h9-1110t Builds (Compare 4 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 67%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk

System: HP h9-1110t

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 47% - Average Total price: $406
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 endorse 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 so they keep returning.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $156Nvidia 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 $549Samsung 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