HP Z800 Workstation

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 53%
Yacht
Desktop
Desktop 69%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 46%
Yacht
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (49th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 51 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. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 68.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics78.5% is a very good 3D score, it's the business. This GPU can handle recent 3D games at high resolutions and ultra detail levels.
Memory24GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's far more than any current game requires. 24GB will also allow for large file and system caches, virtual machine hosting, software development, video editing and batch multimedia processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (15%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP Z800 Workstation  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 0AECh
Memory16.2 GB free of 24.002 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display3840 x 2160 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20091204
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateMay 28 '23 at 20:50
Run Duration260 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 15%
Watch Gameplay: 2060 + 9600K How to compare your gameplay

 PC Performing as expected (49th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
1st CPU: Intel Xeon X5560
CPU0 PROCESSOR, 2 CPU, 8 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz, turbo 3.05 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (55th percentile)
68.9% Good
Memory 81.6
1-Core 72
2-Core 155
61% 103 Pts
4-Core 304
8-Core 574
52% 439 Pts
64-Core 578
36% 578 Pts
Poor: 53%
This bench: 68.9%
Great: 75%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia RTX 2060-$288
EVGA(3842 2063) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 2145 MHz, MLim: 3500 MHz, Ram: 6GB, Driver: 531.41
Performing below potential (5th percentile) - GPU OC Guide
78.5% Very good
Lighting 92.8
Reflection 133
Parallax 82.1
76% 103 fps
MRender 132
Gravity 101
Splatting 84.2
84% 106 fps
Poor: 80%
This bench: 78.5%
Great: 97%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB
62GB free (System drive)
Firmware: DXT09B0Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 110 138 87 49 119 134 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - drive id incomplete or inconclusive
Read 192
Write 61.1
Mixed 88.6
SusWrite 106
25% 112 MB/s
4K Read 13.8
4K Write 35.9
4K Mixed 14.7
59% 21.5 MB/s
DQ Read 178
DQ Write 66.3
DQ Mixed 48.9
56% 97.9 MB/s
Poor: 75% Great: 123%
Samsung 840 Series 1TB
304GB free
Firmware: RVT01B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 668 258 263 261 260 MB/s
Relative performance n/a - drive id incomplete or inconclusive
Read 2,695
Write 2,376
Mixed 2,388
SusWrite 332
435% 1,948 MB/s
4K Read 165
4K Write 99.7
4K Mixed 92.8
422% 119 MB/s
DQ Read 606
DQ Write 395
DQ Mixed 501
374% 501 MB/s
Poor: 39% Great: 122%
WD WD20EURX 2TB-$39
851GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
SusWrite @10s intervals: 108 104 111 108 109 109 MB/s
Performing as expected (49th percentile)
66.6% Good
Read 124
Write 118
Mixed 61.7
SusWrite 108
75% 103 MB/s
4K Read 0.8
4K Write 2.1
4K Mixed 0.9
172% 1.27 MB/s
Poor: 39%
This bench: 66.6%
Great: 86%
WD Black 1TB (2010)-$39
607GB free
Firmware: 05.00K05
SusWrite @10s intervals: 75 78 80 78 80 78 MB/s
Performing below expectations (33rd percentile)
51.2% Above average
Read 99.8
Write 95.3
Mixed 57.7
SusWrite 78.1
61% 82.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 2.5
4K Mixed 0.9
176% 1.37 MB/s
Poor: 35%
This bench: 51.2%
Great: 76%
WD Elements 1TB
144GB free, PID 1042
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 51 52 52 52 52 52 MB/s
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
22.6% Poor
Read 56.2
Write 45.8
Mixed 39.4
SusWrite 51.8
64% 48.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1
4K Mixed 0.5
53% 0.67 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 22.6%
Great: 43%
Seagate Portable 4TB
3.5TB free, PID 2344
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 115 121 139 135 133 138 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (100th percentile)
57.7% Above average
Read 111
Write 111
Mixed 70.1
SusWrite 130
144% 106 MB/s
4K Read 1.2
4K Write 4.2
4K Mixed 0.7
171% 2.03 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 57.7%
Great: 57%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown ID:80 2C 18JSF25672AZ-1G4F1 ID:02 FE EBJ21EE8BDFA-DJ-F ID:80 2C 18JSF25672AZ-1G4F1 ID:02 FE EBJ21EE8BDFA-DJ-F ID:80 2C 18JSF25672AZ-1G4F1 ID:02 FE EBJ21EE8BDFA-DJ-F ID:80 2C 18JSF25672AZ-1G4F1... 58GB
1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333, 1333 MHz
2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 2048, 34816 MB
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
53.6% Above average
MC Read 22.3
MC Write 19
MC Mixed 19.5
58% 20.3 GB/s
SC Read 10.9
SC Write 6.6
SC Mixed 8.4
25% 8.63 GB/s
Latency 77.7
52% 77.7 ns
Poor: 54%
This bench: 53.6%
Great: 55%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical Z800 Workstation Builds (Compare 1,950 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 60%
Destroyer
Workstation
Workstation 10%
Tree trunk

System: HP Z800 Workstation

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar 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 make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, 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 that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial 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