HP 240 G7 Notebook PC

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 7%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 50%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (35th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 65 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 an average single core score, this CPU can handle browsing the web, email, video playback and the majority of general computing tasks including light gaming when coupled with an appropriate GPU. Finally, with a gaming score of 49.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics3.32% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive48.5% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
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 (41%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP 240 G7 Notebook PC  (all builds)
MotherboardHP 855A
Memory1.9 GB free of 8 GB @ 2.4 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20231215
Uptime9.9 Days
Run DateMay 13 '24 at 04:59
Run Duration136 Seconds
Run User IND-User
Background CPU 41%

 PC Performing below expectations (35th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i3-8130U
U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.2 GHz, turbo 1.95 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
49.4% Average
Memory 82.1
1-Core 56.6
2-Core 77
49% 71.9 Pts
4-Core 99.7
8-Core 106
14% 103 Pts
64-Core 102
6% 102 Pts
Poor: 21%
This bench: 49.4%
Great: 64%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel UHD Graphics 620 (Mobile Kaby Lake R)
HP(103C 855A) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 27.20.100.8853
Performing way below expectations (12th percentile)
3.32% Terrible
Lighting 3.3
Reflection 2.9
Parallax 3.3
3% 3.17 fps
MRender 8.9
Gravity 3.3
Splatting 4.9
4% 5.7 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.32%
Great: 6%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Consistent M.2 S6 256GB
178GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V1027A0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 288 290 170 11 49 52 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (17th percentile)
48.5% Average
Read 366
Write 289
Mixed 304
SusWrite 143
62% 276 MB/s
4K Read 12
4K Write 54.8
4K Mixed 10.6
61% 25.8 MB/s
DQ Read 138
DQ Write 194
DQ Mixed 40.5
66% 124 MB/s
Poor: 40%
This bench: 48.5%
Great: 82%
Toshiba MQ04ABF100 1TB
929GB free
Firmware: JU007C
SusWrite @10s intervals: 126 124 124 117 125 125 MB/s
Performing above expectations (82nd percentile)
74.6% Very good
Read 135
Write 123
Mixed 55.2
SusWrite 123
80% 109 MB/s
4K Read 1.3
4K Write 5.3
4K Mixed 0.5
208% 2.37 MB/s
Poor: 27%
This bench: 74.6%
Great: 79%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Samsung M471A5244CB0-CTD 2x4GB
2 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR4 clocked @ 2400 MHz
Performing below potential (14th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
50.9% Above average
MC Read 14
MC Write 21.4
MC Mixed 17.2
50% 17.5 GB/s
SC Read 11.8
SC Write 20.8
SC Mixed 16.8
47% 16.5 GB/s
Latency 83.5
48% 83.5 ns
Poor: 27%
This bench: 50.9%
Great: 74%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

 SkillBench Score 0: 0P 0R 0G 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
0% 0% 0 41 11 60 13.9" 1280 720 BOE0697
Typical 240 G7 Notebook PC Builds (Compare 871 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 2%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 28%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 2%
Tree trunk

System: HP 240 G7 Notebook PC

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER
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 $170Nvidia RTX 4060 $293Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $122Nvidia 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) $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