HP mt42 Mobile Thin Client

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 31%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (26th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 74 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 relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 30.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is poor.
Graphics2.37% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive64.4% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system IO wait times.
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 VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (50%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemHP mt42 Mobile Thin Client  (all builds)
MotherboardHP 815A
Memory3.1 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20160728
Uptime0.9 Days
Run DateAug 31 '21 at 17:38
Run Duration224 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 50%

 PC Performing below expectations (26th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD PRO A8-8600B R6, 10 Compute Cores 4C+6G
U4500, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 1.6 GHz, turbo 1.2 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (34th percentile)
30.9% Below average
Memory 50.6
1-Core 21.8
2-Core 39
26% 37.1 Pts
4-Core 66.9
8-Core 70.2
9% 68.6 Pts
64-Core 69.3
4% 69.3 Pts
Poor: 18%
This bench: 30.9%
Great: 44%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon R6 Graphics
HP(103C 815A) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 20.Q3
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
2.37% Terrible
Lighting 2.6
Reflection 4.7
Parallax 3.4
2% 3.57 fps
MRender 4
Gravity 2.4
Splatting 3.9
3% 3.43 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 2.37%
Great: 4%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Liteon L8H-256V2G-HP 256GB
206GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 2803
SusWrite @10s intervals: 262 266 270 261 273 276 MB/s
Performing below expectations (29th percentile)
64.4% Good
Read 434
Write 275
Mixed 266
SusWrite 268
69% 311 MB/s
4K Read 17.8
4K Write 40.5
4K Mixed 23
78% 27.1 MB/s
DQ Read 157
DQ Write 132
DQ Mixed 136
104% 142 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 64.4%
Great: 93%
WD WD5000LPLX-00ZNTT0 500GB
466GB free
Firmware: 02.01A02
Relative performance n/a - benchmarks incomplete
Read 121
Mixed 62.1
69% 91.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.9
168% 1.23 MB/s
Poor: 32% Great: 82%
SanDisk Ultra 64GB
3GB free, PID 558a
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 20 16 4.9 7.9 14 MB/s
Performing below expectations (30th percentile)
13% Very poor
Read 31.2
Write 20.2
Mixed 23.6
SusWrite 12.2
28% 21.8 MB/s
4K Read 3.7
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 2.4
150% 2.57 MB/s
Poor: 7%
This bench: 13%
Great: 32%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471B5173EB0-YK0 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing below potential (8th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
19.4% Very poor
MC Read 8
MC Write 5.1
MC Mixed 7.3
20% 6.8 GB/s
SC Read 3.3
SC Write 4.8
SC Mixed 5.4
13% 4.5 GB/s
Latency 158
25% 158 ns
Poor: 18%
This bench: 19.4%
Great: 58%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 8: 1R 1G 0B (High Scores)

Measures user input accuracy relative to the given hardware

Score Hit Rate Shots EFps 0.1% Low Refresh Rate Screen Resolution Monitor
8% 6% 32 49 38 60 13.9" 1280 720 AUO123D
History: Score 2: 0R 0G 2B | Score 8: 1R 1G 0B
Typical mt42 Mobile Thin Client Builds (Compare 22 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 35%
Jet ski
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: HP mt42 Mobile Thin Client

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate a lot of reddit accounts. UserBenchmark exposes their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot on flagships like the 4090, 14900KS, and 7950X3D. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data exposes youtubers that promote overpriced/inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ reviews on trustpilot are written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users aren't incentivized to back brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of chasing sponsorship with billion-dollar brands, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data which saves our users millions.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $174Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 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