HP Compaq 8100 Elite CMT PC

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 1%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 31%
Sail boat
Workstation
Workstation 1%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (37th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 63 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.
Graphics1.29% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 16GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
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.
High background CPU (22%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
SystemHP Compaq 8100 Elite CMT PC  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 304Bh
Memory9.6 GB free of 16.0039 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20101019
Uptime14.9 Days
Run DateMay 15 '22 at 18:13
Run Duration196 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 22%

 PC Performing below expectations (37th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5 650-$70
XU1 PROCESSOR, 1 CPU, 1 cores, 1 threads
Base clock 3.35 GHz
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
30.9% Below average
Memory 50.9
1-Core 61.6
2-Core 50.5
37% 54.3 Pts
4-Core 64.6
8-Core 70.3
9% 67.4 Pts
64-Core 68.7
4% 68.7 Pts
Poor: 33%
This bench: 30.9%
Great: 53%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia NVS 315
HP(103C 102F) 1GB
CLim: 523 MHz, MLim: 437 MHz, Ram: 1GB, Driver: 377.48
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
1.29% Terrible
Lighting 1.5
Reflection 2.4
Parallax 0.1
1% 1.33 fps
MRender 2.3
Gravity 1.5
Splatting 1.5
1% 1.77 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 1.29%
Great: 1%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Crucial MX300 525GB-$150
12GB free
Firmware: M0CR040
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
Read 232
Write 219
Mixed 226
50% 226 MB/s
4K Read 21.6
4K Write 55.8
4K Mixed 30.4
101% 35.9 MB/s
DQ Read 178
DQ Write 131
DQ Mixed 146
112% 152 MB/s
Poor: 65% Great: 99%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 1TB-$70
319GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HP63
SusWrite @10s intervals: 25 41 37 25 34 46 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
14.4% Very poor
Read 15
Write 45.5
Mixed 22.5
SusWrite 34.8
22% 29.5 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.4
78% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 34%
This bench: 14.4%
Great: 68%
Hitachi HDS721025CLA382 250GB-$20
151GB free
Firmware: JP1OA3GH
SusWrite @10s intervals: 89 91 83 62 94 94 MB/s
Performing above expectations (65th percentile)
60.2% Good
Read 124
Write 123
Mixed 60.6
SusWrite 85.4
72% 98.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.8
144% 1 MB/s
Poor: 19%
This bench: 60.2%
Great: 75%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 500GB-$23
16GB free
Firmware: KC45
SusWrite @10s intervals: 107 109 73 58 103 98 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (16th percentile)
42.7% Average
Read 57.5
Write 91.3
Mixed 47.7
SusWrite 91.2
53% 71.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.1
4K Mixed 0.7
123% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 42.7%
Great: 88%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown ID:02 9E CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 ID:80 CE M378B5273DH0-CK0 ID:02 9E CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9 ID:80 CE M378B5273DH0-CH9 52GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 0 MHz
4096, 4096, 4096, 4096, 36864 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
18.1% Very poor
MC Read 6.8
MC Write 5.6
MC Mixed 6.4
18% 6.27 GB/s
SC Read 3.4
SC Write 5.2
SC Mixed 4.7
13% 4.43 GB/s
Latency 157
25% 157 ns

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Compaq 8100 Elite CMT PC Builds (Compare 657 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 46%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk

System: HP Compaq 8100 Elite CMT PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 54% - Above average Total price: $98
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. Because UserBenchmark’s data often contradicts their marketing spiel, they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a lot of money on flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help consumers get comparable real-world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to praise us. Additionally, brands spend more on marketing weaker products which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community. 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 the last 13 years to providing comprehensive and accurate data to our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again and collectively save millions every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $170Nvidia 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 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair 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