HP h9-1410ee

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming 22% Surfboard	Desktop 69% Battle cruiser	Workstation 17% Surfboard


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (24th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 76 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.
Processor	With a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Despite its good single core score this processor isn't appropriate for workstation use due to its relatively weak multi-core performance. Finally, with a gaming score of 65.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics	31.9% is a below average 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can handle older games but it will struggle to render recent games at resolutions greater than 1080p. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory	16GB 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 Version	Although Windows 8.1 is a recent version of Windows, it's worth upgrading to Windows 10 which has had several improvements made to the user interface including a better homescreen.

Very high background CPU (31%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.

System	HP h9-1410ee (all builds)
Motherboard	PEGATRON 2AD5
Memory	8.2 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display	1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 8.1
BIOS Date	20130206
Uptime	1.5 Days
Run Date	Apr 19 '19 at 10:45
Run Duration	171 Seconds
Run User	QAT-User
Background CPU	31%

PC Performing below expectations (24^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core i7-3770K-$175 165,979 User benchmarks, average bench 72% , 1 CPU, 4 cores, 7 threads Base clock 3.5 GHz, turbo 3.5 GHz (avg) Performing way below expectations (15^th percentile)	65.5% Good	Memory 84.2 1-Core 72.4 2-Core 160 63% 106 Pts	4-Core 274 8-Core 266 36% 270 Pts	64-Core 395 24% 395 Pts
Poor: 59% ↑ This bench: 65.5% Great: 83%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 680-$360 38,995 User benchmarks, average bench 32% Nvidia(10DE 100C) 2GB CLim: 1202 MHz, MLim: 1502 MHz, Ram: 2GB, Driver: 388.13 Performing below potential (71^st percentile) - GPU OC Guide	31.9% Below average	Lighting 38.2 Reflection 36.4 Parallax 48.2 31% 41 fps	MRender 48.4 Gravity 43.7 Splatting 33.8 34% 42 fps
Poor: 29% ↑ This bench: 31.9% Great: 35%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Micron C400 RealSSD 128GB 11,312 User benchmarks, average bench 56% 1GB free (System drive) Firmware: 040H Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete		Read 323 Write 145 Mixed 154 45% 207 MB/s	4K Read 16.2 4K Write 43.5 4K Mixed 10.3 61% 23.3 MB/s	DQ Read 117 DQ Write 41.6 DQ Mixed 29.3 35% 62.5 MB/s
Poor: 42% Great: 70%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 1TB-$28 1,562,409 User benchmarks, average bench 89% 466GB free Firmware: HP33 SusWrite @10s intervals: 145 143 141 147 147 147 MB/s Performing below expectations (26^th percentile)	79.6% Very good	Read 133 Write 172 Mixed 74.3 SusWrite 145 96% 131 MB/s	4K Read 0.9 4K Write 1.3 4K Mixed 0.8 150% 1 MB/s
Poor: 55% ↑ This bench: 79.6% Great: 112%
SanDisk Cruzer Blade 125GB 732 User benchmarks, average bench 7% 114GB free, PID 5567 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 MB/s Performing way below expectations (4^th percentile)	2.2% Terrible	Read 10 Write 4.8 Mixed 6.7 SusWrite 0.3 6% 5.45 MB/s	4K Read 0.3 4K Write 0.2 4K Mixed 0.1 11% 0.2 MB/s
Poor: 4% ↑ This bench: 2.2% Great: 12%
StoreJet Transcend 2TB 4,473 User benchmarks, average bench 31% 1TB free, PID 5106 Operating at USB 2.1 Speed SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 26 25 26 25 26 MB/s Performing way below expectations (6^th percentile)	12.6% Very poor	Read 12 Write 18.8 Mixed 12.8 SusWrite 25.5 25% 17.3 MB/s	4K Read 0.3 4K Write 1.7 4K Mixed 0.9 90% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 13% ↑ This bench: 12.6% Great: 52%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Crucial BLS8G3D1609DS1S00. 2x8GB 48,796 User benchmarks, average bench 55% 2 of 4 slots used 16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz Performing below expectations (24^th percentile)	50.2% Above average	MC Read 18.4 MC Write 17.4 MC Mixed 16.6 50% 17.5 GB/s	SC Read 14.6 SC Write 14.9 SC Mixed 12.8 40% 14.1 GB/s	Latency 73.2 55% 73.2 ns
Poor: 31% ↑ This bench: 50.2% Great: 63%

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

MBD

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $279	Nvidia RTX 4060 $300	Crucial MX500 250GB $40
Intel Core i5-12400F $134	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385	Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $184	Nvidia RTX 4070 $409	Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52

HDD	RAM	USB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40	SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $35	Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $43	SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $51	G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351	SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16

HP h9-1410ee

Performance Results

PC Performing below expectations (24th percentile)

System Memory Latency Ladder

CHOOSE AN UPGRADE:

Feedback

PC Performing below expectations (24^th percentile)