HP EliteDesk 800 G2 SFF

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 14%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 79%
Battleship
Workstation
Workstation 13%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (47th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 53 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a brilliant single core score, this CPU is the business: It demolishes everyday tasks such as web browsing, office apps and audio/video playback. Additionally this processor can handle light workstation, and even some light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 77.7%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics6.58% 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 Drive71% is a good SSD score. This drive enables fast boots, responsive applications and ensures minimum system 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.
SystemHP EliteDesk 800 G2 SFF  (all builds)
MotherboardHP 8054
Memory11.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 2.1 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20220913
Uptime3.7 Days
Run DateJan 14 '23 at 21:40
Run Duration268 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU1%

 PC Performing as expected (47th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-6700K-$170
U3E1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4 GHz, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)
Performing below expectations (27th percentile)
77.7% Very good
Memory 85.1
1-Core 119
2-Core 224
81% 143 Pts
4-Core 380
8-Core 584
60% 482 Pts
64-Core 591
37% 591 Pts
Poor: 70%
This bench: 77.7%
Great: 90%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce GT 730
Device(1B0A 90F5) 2GB
CLim: 901 MHz, MLim: 1252 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 474.14
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
6.58% Terrible
Lighting 8.1
Reflection 8.4
Parallax 9.2
7% 8.57 fps
MRender 10.2
Gravity 7.3
Splatting 7
6% 8.17 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 6.58%
Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
SSD 512GB 512GB
323GB free (System drive)
Firmware: HPS2227O
SusWrite @10s intervals: 388 345 314 293 89 16 MB/s
Performing as expected (51st percentile)
71% Very good
Read 472
Write 424
Mixed 358
SusWrite 241
84% 374 MB/s
4K Read 29.8
4K Write 77.1
4K Mixed 11.5
101% 39.5 MB/s
DQ Read 144
DQ Write 255
DQ Mixed 13.7
63% 138 MB/s
Poor: 38%
This bench: 71%
Great: 211%
Samsung MZVLB512HBJQ-000H1 512GB
477GB free
Firmware: HPS0NEXF
SusWrite @10s intervals: 1807 1030 769 792 805 802 MB/s
Performing as expected (48th percentile)
241% Outstanding
Read 2285
Write 2,068
Mixed 1394
SusWrite 1,001
377% 1,687 MB/s
4K Read 49.3
4K Write 91.6
4K Mixed 62.1
203% 67.7 MB/s
DQ Read 666
DQ Write 478
DQ Mixed 644
462% 596 MB/s
Poor: 149%
This bench: 241%
Great: 306%
Kingston SSDNow V300 240GB-$35
90GB free
Firmware: 608ABBF0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 173 170 170 156 135 158 MB/s
Performing above expectations (78th percentile)
74.1% Very good
Read 341
Write 249
Mixed 275
SusWrite 160
57% 256 MB/s
4K Read 27.8
4K Write 74.4
4K Mixed 37.5
130% 46.6 MB/s
DQ Read 218
DQ Write 252
DQ Mixed 205
162% 225 MB/s
Poor: 41%
This bench: 74.1%
Great: 85%
External USB3.0 DISK01 500GB
466GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 76 76 76 76 76 74 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (85th percentile)
39.5% Below average
Read 138
Write 67.3
Mixed 63.8
SusWrite 75.6
106% 86.2 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.9
4K Mixed 0.7
57% 0.77 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 39.5%
Great: 47%
External USB3.0 DISK04 1TB
758GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 MB/s
Performing below expectations (32nd percentile)
25.9% Poor
Read 168
Write 35.8
Mixed 36.9
SusWrite 0
57% 60.2 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.7
42% 0.8 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 25.9%
Great: 67%
External USB3.0 DISK03 500GB
466GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 76 76 76 75 75 74 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (13th percentile)
25.7% Poor
Read 29.4
Write 67.1
Mixed 40.4
SusWrite 75.4
78% 53.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.6
77% 0.9 MB/s
Poor: 23%
This bench: 25.7%
Great: 47%
External USB3.0 DISK00 1TB
823GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.2 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
26.3% Poor
Read 153
Write 66.5
Mixed 72.1
SusWrite 0.1
81% 72.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.3
4K Mixed 0.7
70% 0.83 MB/s
Poor: 16%
This bench: 26.3%
Great: 74%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M378A5143DB0-CPB 4x4GB
4 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2133 MHz
Performing way below expectations (20th percentile)
74.2% Very good
MC Read 26.5
MC Write 28.9
MC Mixed 23.2
75% 26.2 GB/s
SC Read 16.6
SC Write 29.6
SC Mixed 22.9
66% 23 GB/s
Latency 71.9
56% 71.9 ns
Poor: 67%
This bench: 74.2%
Great: 101%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical EliteDesk 800 G2 SFF Builds (Compare 2,998 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 63%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 9%
Tree trunk

System: HP EliteDesk 800 G2 SFF

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 73% - Very good Total price: $88
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate countless reddit accounts. UserBenchmark’s data exposes their marketing charade so they systematically attack our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
PC brands profit a lot from flagships 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 $176Nvidia 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