HP EliteBook Folio 9470m

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing GPU
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing above expectations (73rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 27 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 58.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Boot Drive58.5% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory8GB 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 VersionWindows 10 is the most recent version of Windows, and the best to date in our opinion.
Run History
1 month ago, 1 month ago.
SystemHP EliteBook Folio 9470m  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 18DF
Memory1.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20190412
Uptime4.1 Days
Run DateJun 21 '21 at 06:54
Run Duration271 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU0%

 PC Performing above expectations (73rd percentile)

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

Processor Bench Normal Heavy Server
Intel Core i7-3667U
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.5 GHz, turbo 3 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (91st percentile)
58.1% Above average
Memory 83.8
1-Core 84.6
2-Core 139
64% 103 Pts
4-Core 187
8-Core 210
27% 198 Pts
64-Core 199
13% 199 Pts
Poor: 31%
This bench: 58.1%
Great: 60%
Drive Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Samsung MZMPC256HBGJ-000H1 256GB
129GB free (System drive)
Firmware: CXM1
SusWrite @10s intervals: 234 228 236 236 226 225 MB/s
Performing above expectations (62nd percentile)
58.5% Above average
Read 390
Write 254
Mixed 215
SusWrite 231
61% 272 MB/s
4K Read 16.7
4K Write 36.7
4K Mixed 19.2
69% 24.2 MB/s
DQ Read 255
DQ Write 80.3
DQ Mixed 117
100% 151 MB/s
Poor: 44%
This bench: 58.5%
Great: 70%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Hynix HMT41GS6AFR8A-PB 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 1600 MHz
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
30.3% Below average
MC Read 10.5
MC Write 9.6
MC Mixed 9.1
28% 9.73 GB/s
SC Read 8.8
SC Write 7.6
SC Mixed 10.8
26% 9.07 GB/s
Latency 73.8
54% 73.8 ns
Poor: 17%
This bench: 30.3%
Great: 32%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 7: 0R 2G 1B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware.

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
7% 2% 140 18 13 40 0" 1366 768
History: Score 1: 0R 0G 1B | Score 0: 0R 0G 0B | Score 4: 0R 1G 1B | Score 7: 0R 2G 1B
Typical EliteBook Folio 9470m Builds (Compare 1,566 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 49%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: HP EliteBook Folio 9470m

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 4% - Terrible Total price: $209
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-11400F $260Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti $400Crucial MX500 250GB $45
Intel Core i5-11600K $270Nvidia RTX 3070 $500Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
Intel Core i7-10700K $320Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $79SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $34Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $95SanDisk 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