HP 620

Performance Results

Benchmarks - excluding GPU, SSD
Gaming 0%
Desktop 0%
Workstation 0%
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (52nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 48 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a relatively low single core score, this CPU can handle email, light web browsing and basic audio/video playback, but it will struggle to handle CPU intensive tasks. Finally, with a gaming score of 18.4%, this CPUs suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
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.
Memory2GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows however a minimum of 4GB is recommended for gaming or any other RAM intensive tasks such as photo/video editing. This system will also be a little more responsive with 4GB of RAM.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 7 is still a viable option, it's now 9 years and 4 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.
High background CPU (28%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. Find active processes with Windows task manager (CTRL+SHIFT+ESC).
SystemHP 620  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 1526
Memory0.5 GB free of 2 GB @ 0.8 GHz
Display1366 x 768 - 32 Bit colors,
OSWindows 7
BIOS Date20100906
Uptime0 Days
Run DateJan 11 '18 at 12:24
Run Duration170 Seconds
Run User HUN-User
Background CPU 28%

 PC Performing as expected (52nd percentile)

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

Processor Bench Single core Quad core Multi core
Intel Core2 Duo T6670
Intel(R) Genuine processor, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 2 threads
Base clock 2.2 GHz
Performing above expectations (67th percentile)
18.4% Very poor
SC Int 52.5
SC Float 28.9
SC Mixed 38.4
32% 39.9 Pts
QC Int 105
QC Float 61.7
QC Mixed 74.8
18% 80.5 Pts
MC Int 103
MC Float 61.9
MC Mixed 77
12% 80.7 Pts
Poor: 9%
This bench: 18.4%
Great: 19%
Drives Bench Sequential Random 4k Deep queue 4k
Hitachi HTS545032B9A300 320GB-$121
59GB free (System drive)
Firmware: PB3OCA1G Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s
Performing above expectations (83rd percentile)
35.7% Below average
Read 62.4
Write 62.2
Mixed 14.6
34% 46.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.12
4K Write 0.07
4K Mixed 0.07
14% 0.09 MB/s
Poor: 8%
This bench: 35.7%
Great: 42%
SanDisk Ultra Fit USB 3.0 16GB-$8
0GB free, PID 5583
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
9.66% Terrible
Read 25.1
Write 8.33
Mixed 10.8
16% 14.8 MB/s
4K Read 2.81
4K Write 1.15
4K Mixed 0.63
71% 1.53 MB/s
Poor: 10%
This bench: 9.66%
Great: 30%
Memory Kit Bench Multi core Single core Latency
Unknown 1x2GB
1 of 2 slots used
Performing as expected (51st percentile)
13.7% Very poor
MC Read 4.9
MC Write 3.9
MC Mixed 4
12% 4.27 GB/s
SC Read 4.4
SC Write 3.7
SC Mixed 0.1
8% 2.73 GB/s
Latency 108
37% 108 ns
Poor: 8%
This bench: 13.7%
Great: 28%
Take a copy of your results

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical 620 Builds (Compare 291 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming 11%
Tree trunk
Desktop 25%
Workstation 13%
Tree trunk

System: HP 620

The Best.
Intel Core i7-8700K $370Nvidia GTX 1070 $332Samsung 850 Evo 250GB $63
AMD Ryzen 5 1600 $150Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB $230Samsung 850 Evo 500GB $98
Intel Core i5-8600K $243Nvidia GTX 1080-Ti $808Samsung 850 Pro 256GB $163
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $125SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $85G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $830SanDisk Extreme 32GB $48
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $130SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $12
Today's hottest deals
User Guide  •  About  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback