HP SG3-250es

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 10%
Tree trunk
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Tree trunk
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 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 44.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics0.42% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
MemoryThe RAM on this system should be upgraded to at least 2GB although on 32bit systems 1GB will suffice as a bare minimum.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 14 years and 9 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 (20%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP SG3-250es  (all builds)
MotherboardFOXCONN 2AAF
Memory0.1 GB free of 1 GB @ 1.1 GHz
Display1360 x 768 - 32 Bit couleurs
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20100423
Uptime0.1 Days
Run DateDec 26 '19 at 20:53
Run Duration367 Seconds
Run User MAR-User
Background CPU 20%

 PC Performing as expected (49th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
AMD Athlon II X2 220
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.8 GHz
Performing way above expectations (94th percentile)
44.8% Average
Memory 76.2
1-Core 40.7
2-Core 79.9
44% 65.6 Pts
4-Core 81.5
8-Core 81.6
11% 81.6 Pts
64-Core 81.3
5% 81.3 Pts
Poor: 29%
This bench: 44.8%
Great: 47%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
ATI Radeon 3000 Graphics
HP(103C 2AA9) 256MB
Driver: atiumdag.dll Ver. 8.632.1.2000
Performing as expected (50th percentile)
0.42% Terrible
Lighting 0.43
Reflection 1.27
Parallax 0.31
0% 0.67 fps
MRender 0.76
Gravity 0.2
Splatting 0.96
0% 0.64 fps
Poor: 0%
This bench: 0.42%
Great: 1%
Drive BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Seagate ST3160316AS 160GB
103GB free (System drive)
Firmware: JC4B
SusWrite @10s intervals: 26 31 33 32 38 39 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (4th percentile)
12.3% Very poor
Read 9
Write 18.5
Mixed 17
SusWrite 33.2
14% 19.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.3
4K Write 1.9
4K Mixed 0.4
92% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 12.3%
Great: 56%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Kingston 9905474-001.A00LF 1x1GB
1 of 2 slots used
1GB DIMM DDR3 1066 MHz
Relative performance n/a - insufficient samples
8.75% Terrible
MC Read 1
MC Write 5.8
MC Mixed 0.3
7% 2.37 GB/s
SC Read 0.1
SC Write 0
SC Mixed 0
0% 0.03 GB/s
Latency 87.9
46% 87.9 ns
Poor: 9%
This bench: 8.75%
Great: 15%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-13600K $254Nvidia RTX 4060 $300Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $133Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-12600K $163Nvidia RTX 4070 $539Samsung 860 Evo 250GB $52
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $37SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $79G.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