Today's hottest deals

HP 500-120ea

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 0%
Incomplete
Desktop
Desktop 0%
Incomplete
Workstation
Workstation 0%
Incomplete
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (53rd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 47 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith 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 68.9%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is above average.
Graphics3.43% is too low to play 3D games or use CAD packages. (Note: general computing tasks don't require 3D graphics)
Memory12GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 12GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Sub-optimal background CPU (18%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
Run History
4 years ago, 4 years ago.
SystemHP 500-120ea  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 2AF7
Memory6.1 GB free of 12 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1200 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150813
Uptime0.6 Days
Run DateFeb 17 '20 at 09:10
Run Duration149 Seconds
Run User GBR-User
Background CPU 18%

 PC Performing as expected (53rd percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-4440-$185
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 3.1 GHz, turbo 3.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way above expectations (93rd percentile)
68.9% Good
Memory 80.4
1-Core 91.4
2-Core 181
68% 118 Pts
4-Core 332
8-Core 336
45% 334 Pts
64-Core 336
21% 336 Pts
Poor: 45%
This bench: 68.9%
Great: 70%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Intel HD 4600 (Desktop 1.25 GHz)-$15
HP(103C 2AF7) 1GB
Driver: igdumdim64.dll Ver. 20.19.15.5058
Performing as expected (53rd percentile)
3.43% Terrible
Lighting 3.57
Reflection 6.15
Parallax 5.78
3% 5.17 fps
MRender 6.48
Gravity 2.2
Splatting 7.09
4% 5.25 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 3.43%
Great: 3%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
V Series SATA SSD 240GB
134GB free (System drive)
Firmware: V2.7
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 3,494
Write 34.8
Mixed 60.3
248% 1,196 MB/s
4K Read 476
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 3.5
727% 160 MB/s
Poor: 43% Great: 91%
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$34
838GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 3,557
Write 33.5
Mixed 64
873% 1,218 MB/s
4K Read 525
4K Write 1.2
4K Mixed 3
22,214% 176 MB/s
Poor: 52% Great: 109%
WD Green 1TB (2010)-$139
144GB free
Firmware: 80.00A80
Relative performance n/a - sequential test incomplete
Read 3370
Write 21.3
Mixed 53.5
822% 1,148 MB/s
4K Read 523
4K Write 0.6
4K Mixed 1.1
21,925% 175 MB/s
Poor: 29% Great: 59%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown CT102464BA160B.M16 Samsung M378B5173QH0-CK0 12GB
1600, 1600 MHz
8192, 4096 MB
Performing below potential (13th percentile) - ensure that a dual+ channel XMP BIOS profile is enabled: How to enable XMP
36.5% Below average
MC Read 11.9
MC Write 13
MC Mixed 11.1
34% 12 GB/s
SC Read 10.6
SC Write 13.3
SC Mixed 12.2
34% 12 GB/s
Latency 79.7
50% 79.7 ns
Poor: 37%
This bench: 36.5%
Great: 53%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 500-120ea Builds (Compare 10 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 8%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 7%
Tree trunk

System: HP 500-120ea

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 64% - Good Total price: $207
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 the gold standard for 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 $169Nvidia RTX 4060 $295WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $135
Intel Core i5-12400F $111Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $345WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $225Nvidia RTX 4070 $500Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $350
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