ADD TO PC
BUILD

Hp-pavilion FR443AA-ABU m9451uk

Performance Results


Gaming 10% Tree trunk	Desktop 52% Yacht	Workstation 8% Tree trunk


PC Status	Overall this PC is performing below expectations (38th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 62 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 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 45.4%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is below average.
Graphics	16.9% 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)
Boot Drive	51.4% is a reasonable SSD score. This drive enables fast boots and responsive applications.
Memory	8GB 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 Version	Although 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.

System	Hp-pavilion FR443AA-ABU m9451uk (all builds)
Motherboard	PEGATRON Benicia
Memory	5.4 GB free of 8 GB @ 0.7 GHz
Display	1920 x 1200 - 32 Bit colors
OS	Windows 7
BIOS Date	20090910
Uptime	0.2 Days
Run Date	Sep 20 '16 at 18:39
Run Duration	231 Seconds
Run User	GBR-User
Background CPU	0%

PC Performing below expectations (38^th percentile)

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

Processor	Bench	Normal	Heavy	Server
Intel Core2 Quad Q8200-$49 19,990 User benchmarks, average bench 43% CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 4 threads Base clock 2.35 GHz Performing above expectations (62^nd percentile)	45.4% Average	Memory 69.1 1-Core 32.9 2-Core 66.7 38% 56.2 Pts	4-Core 130 8-Core 121 17% 126 Pts	64-Core 127 8% 127 Pts
Poor: 32% ↑ This bench: 45.4% Great: 50%

Graphics Card	Bench	3D DX9	3D DX10	3D DX11
Nvidia GTX 750-Ti-$92 309,423 User benchmarks, average bench 17% Palit(1569 1380) 2GB Driver: nvd3dumx.dll Ver. 21.21.13.7270 Performing as expected (58^th percentile)	16.9% Very poor	Lighting 20 Reflection 15.8 Parallax 17.8 16% 17.9 fps	MRender 26.3 Gravity 24.1 Splatting 17.9 18% 22.8 fps
Poor: 16% ↑ This bench: 16.9% Great: 19%

Drives	Bench	Sequential	Random 4k	Deep queue 4k
Sandis SP256G 256GB 39 User benchmarks, average bench 80% 55GB free (System drive) Firmware: X231 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Relative performance (0^th percentile) - Ensure that this drive is connected to a SATA 3.0 port with a SATA 3.0 cable (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 253 100 5958 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 1979 (A6) Unknown 100 100 1 (A7) Unknown 100 100 26 (A8) Unknown 100 100 225 (A9) Unknown 100 100 365 (AB) Unknown 100 100 0 (AC) Unknown 100 100 0 (AD) Unknown 100 100 114 (AE) Unknown 100 100 393 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (C2) HDA temperature 67 44 188979871777 (D4) Unknown 100 100 2 (E6) GMR head amplitude 100 100 848 (E8) Unknown 100 100 100 (E9) Unknown 100 100 30000 (F1) Unknown 253 253 13153 (F2) Unknown 253 253 21367 (F3) Unknown 100 100 0	51.4% Above average	Read 255 Write 207 Mixed 202 49% 221 MB/s	4K Read 24 4K Write 40.3 4K Mixed 16.2 78% 26.8 MB/s	DQ Read 135 DQ Write 98.7 DQ Mixed 42.5 52% 92.2 MB/s
Poor: 59% ↑ This bench: 51.4% Great: 95%
Seagate Desktop SSHD 2TB-$90 94,145 User benchmarks, average bench 83% 206GB free Firmware: CC43 Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (29^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 117 99 130098288 (03) Spinup time 96 92 0 (04) Start/Stop count 98 98 2819 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 78 60 61092996 (09) Power-on hours count 91 91 8292 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 98 98 2625 (B7) Unknown 86 86 14 (B8) Unknown 100 100 0 (BB) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BC) Unknown 100 59 128850985396 (BD) vendor-specific 100 100 0 (BE) vendor-specific 66 50 589234210 (BF) G-sense error rate 100 100 0 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 816 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 91 91 19842 (C2) HDA temperature 34 50 68719476770 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 199 119 (F0) Head flying hours 100 253 -36528696846296 (F1) Unknown 100 253 28399979251 (F2) Unknown 100 253 43835391174	74.3% Very good	Read 128 Write 130 Mixed 121 95% 126 MB/s	4K Read 0.53 4K Write 5.39 4K Mixed 0.56 184% 2.16 MB/s
Poor: 43% ↑ This bench: 74.3% Great: 108%
WD WD10EACS-00ZJB0 1TB 25 User benchmarks, average bench 36% 101GB free Firmware: 01.0 Max speed: SATA 2.0 300 MB/s Performing way below expectations (6^th percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 200 200 0 (03) Spinup time 188 169 7600 (04) Start/Stop count 93 93 7082 (05) Reallocated sector count 190 190 75 (07) Seek error rate 200 200 0 (09) Power-on hours count 77 77 17421 (0A) Spinup retry count 100 100 0 (0B) Calibration retry count 100 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 96 96 4534 (C0) Power-off retract count 198 198 1893 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 128 128 218131 (C2) HDA temperature 119 99 33 (C4) Reallocation count 200 200 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 200 200 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 200 200 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 190 97 (C8) Write error rate 200 200 0	27.8% Poor	Read 51.1 Write 45.2 Mixed 49 36% 48.4 MB/s	4K Read 0.45 4K Write 2.02 4K Mixed 0.31 91% 0.93 MB/s
Poor: 28% ↑ This bench: 27.8% Great: 46%
Toshib MD04ACA400 4TB 34 User benchmarks, average bench 81% 115GB free Firmware: FP2A Max speed: SATA 3.0 600 MB/s Performing below expectations (32^nd percentile) (ID) Attribute Now Worst Value (01) Raw read error rate 100 100 0 (02) Throughput performance 100 100 0 (03) Spinup time 100 100 6978 (04) Start/Stop count 100 100 1684 (05) Reallocated sector count 100 100 0 (07) Seek error rate 100 100 0 (08) Seek timer performance 100 100 0 (09) Power-on hours count 87 87 5273 (0A) Spinup retry count 133 100 0 (0C) Power cycle count 100 100 1410 (BF) G-sense error rate 100 100 5 (C0) Power-off retract count 100 100 166 (C1) Load/Unload cycle count 100 100 4269 (C2) HDA temperature 100 100 223339479076 (C4) Reallocation count 100 100 0 (C5) Current pending sector count 100 100 0 (C6) Offline scan uncorrectable count 100 100 0 (C7) UDMA CRC error rate 200 253 3 (DC) Disk shift 100 100 0 (DE) Loaded hours 89 89 4648 (DF) Load/unload retry count 100 100 0 (E0) Load friction 100 100 0 (E2) Load-in time 100 100 297 (F0) Head flying hours 100 100 0	78.4% Very good	Read 134 Write 139 Mixed 104 94% 126 MB/s	4K Read 2.05 4K Write 2.14 4K Mixed 0.24 151% 1.48 MB/s
Poor: 66% ↑ This bench: 78.4% Great: 98%

Memory Kit	Bench	Multi core	Single core	Latency
Unknown 4x2GB 183,252 User benchmarks, average bench 25% 4 of 4 slots used 8GB DIMM DDR2 Performing as expected (42^nd percentile)	19.8% Very poor	MC Read 6.2 MC Write 6.7 MC Mixed 5.9 18% 6.27 GB/s	SC Read 5.2 SC Write 6.6 SC Mixed 6 17% 5.93 GB/s	Latency 104 39% 104 ns
Poor: 14% ↑ This bench: 19.8% Great: 45%

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

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

CPU	GPU	SSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $160	Nvidia RTX 4060 $290	WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $160
Intel Core i5-13600K $260	Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $388	WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $79
Intel Core i5-12400F $110	Nvidia RTX 4070 $520	Crucial T700 M.2 4TB $353

Today's hottest

Amazon Ebay

deals

CPU GPU SSD HDD USB RAM MBD

If you buy something via a price link, UserBenchmark may earn a commission

Build

Test

EFps

Can You Run It?

►
YouTube
*NEW*

About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube Feedback