Hp-pavilion KJ381AA-ABA m9260f

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 4%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 42%
Speed boat
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a below average single core score, this CPU can handle email, web browsing and audio/video playback but it will struggle to handle modern 3D games or workstation tasks such as video editing. Finally, with a gaming score of 44.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics2.12% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot Drive58.6% 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 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 11 months old. This system should be upgraded to Windows 10 which is generally faster and has an improved set of core utilities including better versions of explorer and task manager.
Sub-optimal background CPU (14%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHp-pavilion KJ381AA-ABA m9260f  (all builds)
MotherboardPEGATRON Benicia
Memory3.5 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20090910
Uptime0.2 Days
Run DateNov 15 '19 at 00:01
Run Duration152 Seconds
Run User USA-User
Background CPU 14%

 PC Performing as expected (42nd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core2 Quad Q6700-$44
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.65 GHz
Performing as expected (59th percentile)
44.9% Average
Memory 71.3
1-Core 30.9
2-Core 61.7
38% 54.6 Pts
4-Core 109
8-Core 116
15% 113 Pts
64-Core 120
7% 120 Pts
Poor: 35%
This bench: 44.9%
Great: 50%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GeForce 8600 GT
Asus(1043 8243) 512MB
Ram: 512MB, Driver: 342.1
Performing above expectations (75th percentile)
2.12% Terrible
Lighting 2.23
Reflection 4.38
Parallax 0.78
2% 2.47 fps
MRender 4.9
Gravity 1.57
Splatting 3.48
3% 3.32 fps
Poor: 1%
This bench: 2.12%
Great: 2%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 860 Evo 500GB-$80
297GB free (System drive)
Firmware: RVT0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 219 225 220 227 236 234 MB/s
Performing below potential (1st percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable
58.6% Above average
Read 250
Write 236
Mixed 226
SusWrite 227
53% 235 MB/s
4K Read 21.6
4K Write 38.6
4K Mixed 28
89% 29.4 MB/s
DQ Read 184
DQ Write 119
DQ Mixed 145
110% 150 MB/s
Poor: 74%
This bench: 58.6%
Great: 129%
Seagate ST3500630AS 500GB-$102
301GB free
Firmware: 3.CH
SusWrite @10s intervals: 71 71 71 71 71 71 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
40.2% Average
Read 68.8
Write 43
Mixed 46.5
SusWrite 71
42% 57.3 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.6
129% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 22%
This bench: 40.2%
Great: 43%
ST350063 0AS 500GB
121GB free, PID 0567
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 26 26 26 26 26 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (10th percentile)
14.4% Very poor
Read 30
Write 16
Mixed 23.3
SusWrite 25.9
31% 23.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.4
4K Mixed 0.8
77% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 14.4%
Great: 33%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 4x2GB
4 of 4 slots used
8GB DIMM DDR2
Performing below potential (23rd percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
17% Very poor
MC Read 6.6
MC Write 4.5
MC Mixed 4.6
15% 5.23 GB/s
SC Read 4.8
SC Write 4.4
SC Mixed 4.6
13% 4.6 GB/s
Latency 98.3
41% 98.3 ns
Poor: 14%
This bench: 17%
Great: 45%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketers operate thousands of reddit accounts. Our benchmarks expose their spiel so they attack our reputation.
Why don’t PC brands endorse UserBenchmark?
Brands make boatloads on flagships like the 4090 and 14900KS. We help users get similar real-world performance for less money.
Why don’t youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't pay youtubers, so they don't praise us. Moreover, our data obstructs youtubers who promote overpriced or inferior products.
Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?
The 200+ trustpilot reviews are mostly written by virgin marketing accounts. Real users don't give a monkey's about big brands.
Why is UserBenchmark popular with users?
Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users.
The Best
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160Nvidia RTX 4060 $290WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110Nvidia RTX 4070 $520Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $363
Today's hottest deals
If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback