Today's hottest deals

HP EliteBook 8560w

Performance Results

 
Gaming
Gaming 5%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 28%
Raft
Workstation
Workstation 4%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing below expectations (25th percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 75 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.
ProcessorWith an extremely low single core score, this CPU can barely handle email and light web browsing. Finally, with a gaming score of 21.5%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is very poor.
Graphics5.87% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot Drive52.1% 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 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
Very high background CPU (58%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP EliteBook 8560w  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 1631
Memory2.7 GB free of 8 GB @ 1.3 GHz
Display2560 x 1440 - 32 Bit colors
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20150312
Uptime0.6 Days
Run DateJan 15 '20 at 22:02
Run Duration215 Seconds
Run User HUN-User
Background CPU 58%

 PC Performing below expectations (25th percentile)

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

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i5-2540M-$315
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 2 cores, 4 threads
Base clock 2.6 GHz, turbo 3.1 GHz (avg)
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
21.5% Poor
Memory 29.4
1-Core 52.1
2-Core 38.4
26% 40 Pts
4-Core 74.4
8-Core 129
12% 102 Pts
64-Core 166
10% 166 Pts
Poor: 34%
This bench: 21.5%
Great: 62%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
AMD FirePro M5950
HP(103C 1631) 1GB
Driver: aticfx64.dll Ver. 15.201.2401.0
Performing above expectations (70th percentile)
5.87% Terrible
Lighting 7.37
Reflection 8
Parallax 6.38
6% 7.25 fps
MRender 7.14
Gravity 5.63
Splatting 7.57
6% 6.78 fps
Poor: 3%
This bench: 5.87%
Great: 7%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB-$215
40GB free (System drive)
Firmware: EXM02B6Q
SusWrite @10s intervals: 133 104 93 97 90 99 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
52.1% Above average
Read 384
Write 232
Mixed 172
SusWrite 103
49% 223 MB/s
4K Read 16.6
4K Write 45.3
4K Mixed 24.5
80% 28.8 MB/s
DQ Read 25.4
DQ Write 208
DQ Mixed 192
126% 142 MB/s
Poor: 71%
This bench: 52.1%
Great: 124%
Adata HV620S 4TB
189GB free
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 14 15 16 15 15 16 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (6th percentile)
11.8% Very poor
Read 25.5
Write 25.3
Mixed 23.5
SusWrite 15.2
17% 22.4 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.6
4K Mixed 0.4
99% 0.87 MB/s
Poor: 12%
This bench: 11.8%
Great: 65%
Asmt 2105 2TB
289GB free
Firmware: 0
SusWrite @10s intervals: 76 82 82 84 84 84 MB/s
Performing below expectations (36th percentile)
45.9% Average
Read 77.8
Write 75.8
Mixed 43.5
SusWrite 82
51% 69.8 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
151% 1.13 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 45.9%
Great: 103%
Generic Flash Disk 8GB
7GB free, PID 6387
Operating at USB 2.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.4 8.7 7.2 8.9 8.1 9 MB/s
Performing above expectations (76th percentile)
4.62% Terrible
Read 16.8
Write 3
Mixed 6.8
SusWrite 8.2
10% 8.7 MB/s
4K Read 1.7
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
6% 0.57 MB/s
Poor: 2%
This bench: 4.62%
Great: 7%
Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 124GB
35GB free, PID 1666
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 8.8 7.5 7.4 8.1 8.2 7.3 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (2nd percentile)
5.69% Terrible
Read 26.7
Write 20.1
Mixed 7.8
SusWrite 7.9
19% 15.6 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
2% 0.13 MB/s
Poor: 11%
This bench: 5.69%
Great: 55%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Unknown 1x8GB
1 of 2 slots used
8GB SODIMM DDR3
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
18% Very poor
MC Read 6.4
MC Write 6.5
MC Mixed 6.7
19% 6.53 GB/s
SC Read 5.4
SC Write 2.7
SC Mixed 5.5
13% 4.53 GB/s
Latency 258
16% 258 ns
Poor: 18%
This bench: 18%
Great: 67%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

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

Typical EliteBook 8560w Builds (Compare 487 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 6%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 55%
Yacht
Workstation
Workstation 6%
Tree trunk

System: HP EliteBook 8560w

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 58% - Above average Total price: $255
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 $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $299WD Black SN850X M.2 2TB $150
Intel Core i5-12400F $112Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $375WD Black SN850X M.2 1TB $75
Intel Core i7-14700K $355Nvidia 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