ADD TO PC
BUILD

HP EliteBook 820 G1

Performance Results


Gaming 7% Tree trunk	Desktop 51% Yacht	Workstation 6% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing way above expectations (88th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 12 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components. This PC is likely operated by a technical master!
Processor	With 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 53.1%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is average.
Graphics	3.29% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive	42.7% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.

System	HP EliteBook 820 G1 (all builds)
Motherboard	Hewlett-Packard 1991
Memory	5.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display	1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 10
BIOS Date	20140903
Uptime	0 Days
Run Date	Feb 05 '16 at 00:22
Run Duration	95 Seconds
Run User	SWE-User
Background CPU	3%

PC Performing way above expectations (88^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i5-4210U 82,966 User benchmarks, average bench 41% U3E1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads Base clock 2.4 GHz, turbo 1.7 GHz (avg) Performing way above expectations (96^th percentile)	53.1% Above average	Memory 83.7 1-Core 47.9 2-Core 87.5 49% 73 Pts	4-Core 134 8-Core 134 18% 134 Pts	64-Core 134 8% 134 Pts
Poor: 20% ↑ This bench: 53.1% Great: 53%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Intel HD 4400 (Mobile 1.0/1.1 GHz) 275,372 User benchmarks, average bench 2% HP(103C 1991) 1GB Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.4300 Performing way above expectations (86^th percentile)	3.29% Terrible	Lighting 3.23 Reflection 5.42 Parallax 5.87 3% 4.84 fps	MRender 6.76 Gravity 2.03 Splatting 7.3 4% 5.37 fps
Poor: 2% ↑ This bench: 3.29% Great: 3%

Drive	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
CHA-M2B8-M128 128GB 21 User benchmarks, average bench 34% 100GB free (System drive) Firmware: 1.095.06 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing way above expectations (95^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 100 100 0 (03) Spinup time 100 100 0 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 100 100 13 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 32 (A7) Unknown 100 100 0 (A8) Unknown 100 100 3 (A9) Unknown 100 100 0 (AA) Unknown 100 100 0 (AB) Unknown 0 0 0 (AC) Unknown 0 0 0 (AD) Unknown 199 199 4295098369 (AF) Unknown 100 100 0 (B4) Unknown 100 100 69 (BB) vendor-specific 0 0 0 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 8 (C2) HDA temperature 75 75 257700003865 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (E7) Temperature 100 100 0 (F0) Head flying hours 100 100 0 (F1) Unknown 100 100 68949821 (F2) Unknown 100 100 31236270	42.7% Average	Read 414 Write 126 Mixed 185 53% 242 MB/s	4K Read 16.7 4K Write 57.6 4K Mixed 1.65 58% 25.3 MB/s	DQ Read 34.1 DQ Write 87.8 DQ Mixed 1.67 18% 41.2 MB/s
Poor: 22% ↑ This bench: 42.7% Great: 43%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Ramaxel RMT3170MN68F9F1600 Samsung M471B5173DB0-YK0 8GB 50 User benchmarks, average bench 46% 1600, 1600 MHz 4096, 4096 MB Performing above expectations (74^th percentile)	51% Above average	MC Read 17.1 MC Write 20.9 MC Mixed 16.5 52% 18.2 GB/s	SC Read 11.1 SC Write 11.9 SC Mixed 15 36% 12.7 GB/s	Latency 73.9 54% 73.9 ns
Poor: 28% ↑ This bench: 51% Great: 55%

Take a copy of your results How to check your in-game FPS

System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Custom PC Builder (Explore upgrades for this PC) Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

CPU

GPU

SSD

HDD

RAM

Typical EliteBook 820 G1 Builds (Compare 83 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings

Gaming

Gaming 2%

Tree trunk

Desktop

Desktop 44%

Speed boat

Workstation

Workstation 2%

Tree trunk

System: HP EliteBook 820 G1

CPU
Core i5-4300UIntelBench 44%, 36,631 samples	36x
Core i7-4600UIntelBench 49%, 26,548 samples	23x
Core i5-4200UIntel $281Bench 43%, 64,450 samples	10x

GPU
HD 4400 (Mobile 1.0/1.1 GHz)IntelBench 2%, 275,372 samples	83x

SSD
MZ7PD256HCGM-000H7 256GBSamsungBench 84%, 5,922 samples	5x
SSD Pro 1500 Series 180GBIntel $209Bench 69%, 7,834 samples	4x
A400 240GBKingston $28Bench 66%, 424,288 samples	3x

RAM
M471B5173QH0-YK0 1x4GBSamsungBench 25%, 38,580 samples	5x
M471B1G73QH0-YK0 1x8GBSamsungBench 28%, 40,451 samples	5x
M471B5173QH0-YK0 Micron 8KTF51264HZ-1G6E1 8GBSamsungBench 47%, 658 samples	4x

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 lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales: 4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc. We help 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. Additionally, 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.

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159	Nvidia RTX 4060 $280	Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4070 $550	Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback