Performance Metrics - I

The BXi5G-760 was evaluated using our standard test suite for low power desktops / industrial PCs. We revamped our benchmark suite earlier this year after the publication of the Intel D54250WYK NUC review) We reran some of the new benchmarks on the older PCs also, but some of them couldn't be run on loaner samples. Therefore, the list of PCs in each graph might not be the same.

Futuremark PCMark 8

PCMark 8 provides various usage scenarios (home, creative and work) and offers ways to benchmark both baseline (CPU-only) as well as OpenCL accelerated (CPU + GPU) performance. We  benchmarked select PCs for the OpenCL accelerated performance in all three usage scenarios. These scores are heavily influenced by the CPU in the system. The i5-4200H is not as powerful as, say, the i7-4770R in the BRIX Pro or the ZBOX EI750.

Futuremark PCMark 8

Futuremark PCMark 8

Futuremark PCMark 8

Miscellaneous Futuremark Benchmarks

Futuremark PCMark 7

Futuremark 3DMark 11

The 3D Mark 2013 results below may appear anomalous, but they are probably well served by the eDRAM in the Iris Pro parts. As we will see later, things get back into the expected mode when benchmarking actual games

Futuremark 3DMark 2013

Futuremark 3DMark 2013

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

We have moved on from R11.5 to R15 for 3D rendering evaluation. CINEBENCH R15 provides three benchmark modes - OpenGL, single threaded and multi-threaded. Evaluation of select PCs in all three modes provided us the following results.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

The surprising aspect here is that the single-threaded performance of the Core i5-4200H in the BXi5G-760 seems to lag the Core i5-4200M in the VisionX 420D.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

In the OpenGL mode, the GPU kicks in and comfortably puts the BXi5G-760 ahead of the pack

Introduction and Setup Impressions Performance Metrics - II
POST A COMMENT

35 Comments

View All Comments

  • kgh00007 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link

    Nice review, I hope you guys get in the Alienware Alpha for review. I think that's going to make a really nice HTPC depending on what GPU is announced for it! Reply
  • WatcherCK - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link

    Or as another possibility for a heating solution would be to hack on an external radiator ala R295x2, you will loose some of the convenience of the form factor with the addition of an external cooler but given the thermal load of the components it would be more than adequate for cooling this wee box :) Reply
  • SuperVeloce - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link

    6GB gddr5 ? are they for real? Reply
  • hojnikb - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    They are probobly targeting novice users that dont know better.
    And 6GB of graphics memory sound real nice.
    Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link

    With the heat and throttling problems this BRIX has, how long until it BRIX itself (ba dum tiss).
    Seriously though, why not use a slightly bigger enclosure along with a geforce 860m? that would have been cheaper, cooler, and quieter.
    Reply
  • Laststop311 - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    Rather build a micro atx tower with a MSI gaming twin frozr cooler GTX 770 and i5-4690k tower 70 + psu 60 + 150 mobo + 100 ram + gtx 770 320 + i5-4690k 250 + 120GB crucial m500 70 + Noctua u14s heatsink +75 + 3x noctua fans to replace case fans 60 = 1135 so for the measly sum of 160 extra dollars you can build a MUCH more powerful PC that is much quieter. The msi gpu is one of the quietest twin frozr is excellent the u14s noctua heatsink is actually quieter than water cooling and even surpasses the 120mm close loops and is about equal to the 240mm closed loops in performance. Since all the case fans are noctua and there is no hard drive the only noise you are going to hear is power supply noise and gpu noise and the power supply fan only kicks on when under heavy load, Such performance such silence. Sure the size is bigger but a micro atx tower isn't THAT bad and I'm not hurting for space. Reply
  • Laststop311 - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    1155 it equals forgot to update that value Reply
  • Bob Todd - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    1) In general I agree. I'd just build something much more powerful that was larger.

    2) Tiny builds have always had a significantly worse power/price ratio, so the "I'd just build X that is Y times the size" could be a template response to any of these SFF machines.

    There is at least some back of the napkin math that shows these companies that there is enough of a market for these types of machines at these types of price points that they will be beneficial to their bottom line. Personally I think a cheap NUC form factor box with an A10-7800 @ 45W would be more interesting. Sure it could only do 720p gaming with low settings, but it could be comparatively cheap. But if I'm going to spend "desktop money" on one of these machines, I'd rather do a nice mITX build in a case with enough room for a full size graphics card. I guess that was a long winded way to say that your post was so obvious it doesn't add value...but that I agree.
    Reply
  • SirPerro - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    "Small gaming PC" concept is stupid

    People looking for a gaming PC are not Apple fans willing to pay more for something stilish

    Make this thing twice the size and it will be simply better.
    Reply
  • dmacfour - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    I completely disagree.

    People looking for gaming PC's range from home builders to noobs that'll pay for a pre-built computers with flashy LED lights, windows, sparkly paint, and unnecessary aftermarket coolers.

    They'll absolutely pay more for style. It's just a different kind of style.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now