HP Compaq CQ58 Notebook PC

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 28%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 28.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics0.83% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive54.3% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory4GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and although it's sufficient for most games, some will benefit from up to 8GB of RAM. 4GB is also enough for modest file and system caches which allow for a responsive system.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 10 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Run History
SystemHP Compaq CQ58 Notebook PC  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 1885
Memory2.8 GB free of 4 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20130521
Uptime0 Days
Run DateMar 08 '22 at 13:33
Run Duration150 Seconds
Run User POL-User
Background CPU5%

 PC Performing below expectations (38th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD E1-1200 APU
Socket FT1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 1.4 GHz
Performing way above expectations (86th percentile)
28.1% Poor
Memory 51.1
1-Core 16.3
2-Core 32.3
24% 33.2 Pts
4-Core 32.5
8-Core 32.6
4% 32.5 Pts
64-Core 32.5
2% 32.5 Pts
Poor: 10%
This bench: 28.1%
Great: 39%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD Radeon HD 7310
HP(103C 1885) 384MB
Driver: aticfx32.dll Ver. 8.982.10.5000
Performing as expected (60th percentile)
0.83% Terrible
Lighting 0.9
Reflection 1.5
Parallax 1.4
1% 1.27 fps
MRender 1.4
Gravity 1.3
Splatting 1.1
1% 1.27 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.83%
Great: 1%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 840 Pro 128GB-$150
101GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXM0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 302 304 324 328 314 328 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
54.3% Above average
Read 351
Write 320
Mixed 239
SusWrite 317
69% 307 MB/s
4K Read 13.6
4K Write 20.2
4K Mixed 15.7
51% 16.5 MB/s
DQ Read 112
DQ Write 106
DQ Mixed 113
84% 110 MB/s
Poor: 62%
This bench: 54.3%
Great: 110%
Kingston DataTraveler 2.0 1GB
0GB free, PID 2038
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 MB/s
Performing below expectations (28th percentile)
2.78% Terrible
Read 10.5
Write 2
Mixed 2.8
SusWrite 2.1
4% 4.35 MB/s
4K Read 2.1
4K Write 0.1
4K Mixed 0
11% 0.73 MB/s
Poor: 3%
This bench: 2.78%
Great: 4%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Adata AM1U16BC4P2-B19H 1x4GB
1 of 2 slots used
4GB SODIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1066 MHz
Performing below potential (13th percentile) - ensure that an XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
12.4% Very poor
MC Read 4.2
MC Write 3.2
MC Mixed 4.6
11% 4 GB/s
SC Read 2.8
SC Write 2.9
SC Mixed 3.4
9% 3.03 GB/s
Latency 157
26% 157 ns
Poor: 10%
This bench: 12.4%
Great: 33%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Compaq CQ58 Notebook PC Builds (Compare 168 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq CQ58 Notebook PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 32% - Below average Total price: $38
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 support 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 and 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 $45SanDisk 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