$750!!! haha. Pass it over here, man. May as well just buy a surface pro. Its not like this is a real i7 anyway. It is just an underclocked desktop i3 that occasionally runs at near stock clocks. And for that they charge $750!!!!
To get an equivalent processor in a Surface Pro 3 it would cost you $1,599.00, so I don't know what you're thinking of there.
This is the same story as it always is with small form factor systems. You're paying for the size. The NUC form factor is small enough to attach to a VESA bracket. To get to that size they need to use Ultrabook components. If you want cheap pick up an AMD AM1 chip and mini-itx board or one of the little Baytrail Celeron-based mini-itx boards.
You don't need ultrabook components for a vesa mountable pc. A number of mITX cases have them. And they use full sized components like ram and hardisks. The problem with todays mITX standard is that there is no appropriate small psu standard to match. SFX is till too big and pico psus require (always?) external bricks.
I love small ff pcs, but the mac mini is available for 599 with 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 (Turbo Boost up to 3.1GHz) with 3MB L3 cache, or 799 with 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 (Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz) with 6MB L3 cache -- 35w cpus in a close size.
Mac Mini is considerably larger/heavier and can't be VESA mounted without dropping $50+ on an adapter. It certainly is a very capable machine for its size and the more powerful CPU options blow past the NUC-class devices but NUC, BRIX, and similar devices do a good job filling a niche for super-small "powerful-enough" x86 devices. I have the i5 Haswell NUC for a media center box and it's great for everything from media playback to some casual 1080p couch gaming and it's hardly bigger than my Raspberry Pi.
Also, despite the raw performance of the Mac Mini compared to dual core NUC-like devices, the Mac Mini uses IVB CPUs and come with 5400 RPM HDDs standard. I can see the former being an obstacle to some of the HTPC crowd. For the latter... I simply demand SSDs in any computer I spend any time using.
Yes true. I am a Mac Mini enthusiast but it is really annoying that Apple sometimes is right at the edge of new CPUs and other times is years behind. I bought the Sandy Bridge Mac Mini, the last one with the discrete GPU, when they released it about four months after Sandy Bridge became available. Interestingly, it was also one of the first computers available thunderbolt. The next year they upgraded to IVB almost immediately, but drop the discrete GPU, and this year there has been an update at all… So yes that sucks. I won't upgrading again until they get updated processors. However, one thing Apple loves is big increases in efficiency, so I would be surprised if they don't release a Broadwell Mac Mini, hopefully with an Iris pro Intel chip.
And yes, the first thing I did was bust open my Mac Mini and put in a Samsung 840 pro SSD in there. But it wasn't the easiest upgrade of ever done.
Actually if you have a good electric drill you can easily VESA mount a Mac Mini; it's base is only plastic, you just drill the four holes in a 100mm square's corners, screw it into the back of the monitor/TV, place the Mac Mini onto the cover and twist it into position. With proper cable management the mini won't move at all once you've bound the power and video cables together plus, the power button is pressed in the locked direction, so there's no risk there.
Of course, Apple won't repair your mini for you if there are holes in the cover, but you can get a spare for $25 or so if you need one. I've done this for a Mac Mini that's used quite a lot; it runs no hotter than when it just sitting on a desk. If Apple gets around to updating the Mac Mini with newer, more efficient processor options then it would be even better.
I'm currently building my own VESA mountable machine (or will be, if the processor ever arrives) with an Akasa Euler case and an i7-4790T (quad core, hyper threaded, 2.7ghz with 3.9ghz turbo boost and HD 4600 graphics). It ought to be pretty sweet; admittedly it touches £750 but that's with a 500gb mSATA SSD, 16gb RAM and that processor is overkill for most use-cases, so I could easily drop it into the $750 range with more modest components, while still trouncing the system in this article.
I do agree the mobile i7 is a waste of money. It always has been. It's super shady how Intel promotes their ultramobile i5 and i7; they're nothing like their desktop equivalent.
It's funny that Baytrail is the only true quad-core (physical) ultramobile CPU Intel has.
I assume there are a number of factors involved. In no particular order:
1. Power measurements are at the wall so we're accounting for PSU efficiency as well 2. With Intel's Turbo, as long as the thermals aren't out of control, the CPU can exceed its TDP 3. The CPU isn't the only component that can draw more power when the system is under heavy load. The obvious component that comes to mind is the system fan. In a system with power consumption this low, fan power draw becomes relevant.
I meant to explicitly state that I did not intend for my 3 bullet points to be taken as an exhaustive list...
Mentally ballparking the numbers, these factors seemed to add up well enough to account for the extra 15W over TDP. My thought process basically stopped there.
You're right there are other aspects besides the CPU but eg. the D542050WYKH also has a CPU with a claimed 15W TDP and it also has a fan, memory, turbo, power supply inefficiencies etc, and yet it manages to use 10W less. So how do you explain the difference?
Maybe I missed it but there was no mention of fan noise or bios fan control options? I have a 2nd generation i5 brix and would never buy one again due to the non-existent bios fan controls. I have to use speedfan under windows or fancontrol under linux to keep this thing within reasonable audible limits just for running xbmc. My nuc systems handle all of that just fine in the bios.
I´m afraid it won´t happen, it´s much easier and cheaper to put a brick in the box, as long as there are multitudes of different voltages from the wall around the world.
It is reviews like this that point out Apple isn't over priced. This thing is 750 dollars? No it's not! Are you telling your readers to steal the operating system? You need to be including that in the final price unless you expect your readers to be thieves.
I love the idea of a miniaturized computer, but the premium intel charges for those parts is too much, and for significantly less performance no less. It's one of those rare times when a Civic costs more than a Cadillac!
And to make matters worse, your build doesn't even include AC networking. And networking is going to be important to a machine that doesn't have much local storage. Intel integrated graphics, so this won't be good for more than a general purpose computer.
Use the more reasonable cost and performing laptop parts, make the computer 50 percent taller to accommodate a slow spinning fan, and price it according to the less expensive parts and you'd have a winner. If you can make a 500 dollar laptop with screen, a hard drive, and memory; you can make a 250 dollar bare bone small computer.
Even at twice the size, it could be a much more compelling product. At what these things cost, a Mac mini is better deal, after you add a SSD.
Great idea making a small computer, carried too far.
I got myself a Zotac ZBOX-CI520NANO with Core i3 (Haswell), CRUCIAL 256GB SSD and 4 GB RAM. This a fanless unit with 802.11ac built in. Connectivity options are plenty. All this for around $450. This is a solid performer. Although Gigabyte UCFF PCs get good reviews, they don't seem to compare favorably to the latest Zotac units with respect to bang-for-the-buck. $490 just for the barebones is pretty steep.
imagine this box twice in size(still smaller then mini/micro atx systems) with some decent proper desktop CPU(not necessary the latest, the greatest), 970m Maxwell, 8-16gb ram, 256 gb SSD, build in PSU. All that for $1000(including OS). Is it doable?
It would not replace heavy workstations but it might be enough for most content creators and it would also play any 1080p games with ease if needed.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
27 Comments
Back to Article
Shadowmaster625 - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
$750!!! haha. Pass it over here, man. May as well just buy a surface pro. Its not like this is a real i7 anyway. It is just an underclocked desktop i3 that occasionally runs at near stock clocks. And for that they charge $750!!!!Flunk - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
To get an equivalent processor in a Surface Pro 3 it would cost you $1,599.00, so I don't know what you're thinking of there.This is the same story as it always is with small form factor systems. You're paying for the size. The NUC form factor is small enough to attach to a VESA bracket. To get to that size they need to use Ultrabook components. If you want cheap pick up an AMD AM1 chip and mini-itx board or one of the little Baytrail Celeron-based mini-itx boards.
johnny_boy - Thursday, October 16, 2014 - link
You don't need ultrabook components for a vesa mountable pc. A number of mITX cases have them. And they use full sized components like ram and hardisks. The problem with todays mITX standard is that there is no appropriate small psu standard to match. SFX is till too big and pico psus require (always?) external bricks.dakishimesan - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
I love small ff pcs, but the mac mini is available for 599 with 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 (Turbo Boost up to 3.1GHz) with 3MB L3 cache, or 799 with 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 (Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz) with 6MB L3 cache -- 35w cpus in a close size.WithoutWeakness - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Mac Mini is considerably larger/heavier and can't be VESA mounted without dropping $50+ on an adapter. It certainly is a very capable machine for its size and the more powerful CPU options blow past the NUC-class devices but NUC, BRIX, and similar devices do a good job filling a niche for super-small "powerful-enough" x86 devices. I have the i5 Haswell NUC for a media center box and it's great for everything from media playback to some casual 1080p couch gaming and it's hardly bigger than my Raspberry Pi.MrCommunistGen - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Also, despite the raw performance of the Mac Mini compared to dual core NUC-like devices, the Mac Mini uses IVB CPUs and come with 5400 RPM HDDs standard. I can see the former being an obstacle to some of the HTPC crowd. For the latter... I simply demand SSDs in any computer I spend any time using.dakishimesan - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Yes true. I am a Mac Mini enthusiast but it is really annoying that Apple sometimes is right at the edge of new CPUs and other times is years behind. I bought the Sandy Bridge Mac Mini, the last one with the discrete GPU, when they released it about four months after Sandy Bridge became available. Interestingly, it was also one of the first computers available thunderbolt. The next year they upgraded to IVB almost immediately, but drop the discrete GPU, and this year there has been an update at all… So yes that sucks. I won't upgrading again until they get updated processors. However, one thing Apple loves is big increases in efficiency, so I would be surprised if they don't release a Broadwell Mac Mini, hopefully with an Iris pro Intel chip.And yes, the first thing I did was bust open my Mac Mini and put in a Samsung 840 pro SSD in there. But it wasn't the easiest upgrade of ever done.
Haravikk - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Actually if you have a good electric drill you can easily VESA mount a Mac Mini; it's base is only plastic, you just drill the four holes in a 100mm square's corners, screw it into the back of the monitor/TV, place the Mac Mini onto the cover and twist it into position. With proper cable management the mini won't move at all once you've bound the power and video cables together plus, the power button is pressed in the locked direction, so there's no risk there.Of course, Apple won't repair your mini for you if there are holes in the cover, but you can get a spare for $25 or so if you need one. I've done this for a Mac Mini that's used quite a lot; it runs no hotter than when it just sitting on a desk. If Apple gets around to updating the Mac Mini with newer, more efficient processor options then it would be even better.
I'm currently building my own VESA mountable machine (or will be, if the processor ever arrives) with an Akasa Euler case and an i7-4790T (quad core, hyper threaded, 2.7ghz with 3.9ghz turbo boost and HD 4600 graphics). It ought to be pretty sweet; admittedly it touches £750 but that's with a 500gb mSATA SSD, 16gb RAM and that processor is overkill for most use-cases, so I could easily drop it into the $750 range with more modest components, while still trouncing the system in this article.
dakishimesan - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
That's a really interesting case, thanks for the heads up.Pugwash - Saturday, December 20, 2014 - link
Nice setup. What motherboard did you use?dakishimesan - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
One other thing – even though the Mac Mini is 7.5 in.² as opposed to the 4.5 in.² of this computer, the Mac Mini has an integrated power supply.Samus - Friday, October 10, 2014 - link
I do agree the mobile i7 is a waste of money. It always has been. It's super shady how Intel promotes their ultramobile i5 and i7; they're nothing like their desktop equivalent.It's funny that Baytrail is the only true quad-core (physical) ultramobile CPU Intel has.
dakishimesan - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Over the last couple of years, the ultra-compact form factor (UCFF) has emerged as one of the bright spots in the troubled PC marker.dgingeri - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Most importantly: can it run WoW and STO at a decent framerate?Wilco1 - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
So how is it possible for a CPU with a claimed 15W TDP to use 30W extra from idle to full load???MrCommunistGen - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
I assume there are a number of factors involved. In no particular order:1. Power measurements are at the wall so we're accounting for PSU efficiency as well
2. With Intel's Turbo, as long as the thermals aren't out of control, the CPU can exceed its TDP
3. The CPU isn't the only component that can draw more power when the system is under heavy load. The obvious component that comes to mind is the system fan. In a system with power consumption this low, fan power draw becomes relevant.
MrCommunistGen - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
I meant to explicitly state that I did not intend for my 3 bullet points to be taken as an exhaustive list...Mentally ballparking the numbers, these factors seemed to add up well enough to account for the extra 15W over TDP. My thought process basically stopped there.
Wilco1 - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
You're right there are other aspects besides the CPU but eg. the D542050WYKH also has a CPU with a claimed 15W TDP and it also has a fan, memory, turbo, power supply inefficiencies etc, and yet it manages to use 10W less. So how do you explain the difference?mmaenpaa - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
It would be nice to see review of GB-BXA8-5545 with the same components. I believe the barebones version (no memory & no SSD) is about 250$.http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx...
Markku
bleomycin - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
Maybe I missed it but there was no mention of fan noise or bios fan control options? I have a 2nd generation i5 brix and would never buy one again due to the non-existent bios fan controls. I have to use speedfan under windows or fancontrol under linux to keep this thing within reasonable audible limits just for running xbmc. My nuc systems handle all of that just fine in the bios.torp - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
That's a nice power brick over there, as long as the case :)When will they learn and integrate the PSU?
kevith - Friday, October 10, 2014 - link
I´m afraid it won´t happen, it´s much easier and cheaper to put a brick in the box, as long as there are multitudes of different voltages from the wall around the world.Would be nice, tho´.
Shiitaki - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
It is reviews like this that point out Apple isn't over priced. This thing is 750 dollars? No it's not! Are you telling your readers to steal the operating system? You need to be including that in the final price unless you expect your readers to be thieves.I love the idea of a miniaturized computer, but the premium intel charges for those parts is too much, and for significantly less performance no less. It's one of those rare times when a Civic costs more than a Cadillac!
And to make matters worse, your build doesn't even include AC networking. And networking is going to be important to a machine that doesn't have much local storage. Intel integrated graphics, so this won't be good for more than a general purpose computer.
Use the more reasonable cost and performing laptop parts, make the computer 50 percent taller to accommodate a slow spinning fan, and price it according to the less expensive parts and you'd have a winner. If you can make a 500 dollar laptop with screen, a hard drive, and memory; you can make a 250 dollar bare bone small computer.
Even at twice the size, it could be a much more compelling product. At what these things cost, a Mac mini is better deal, after you add a SSD.
Great idea making a small computer, carried too far.
stunta - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
I got myself a Zotac ZBOX-CI520NANO with Core i3 (Haswell), CRUCIAL 256GB SSD and 4 GB RAM. This a fanless unit with 802.11ac built in. Connectivity options are plenty. All this for around $450. This is a solid performer. Although Gigabyte UCFF PCs get good reviews, they don't seem to compare favorably to the latest Zotac units with respect to bang-for-the-buck. $490 just for the barebones is pretty steep.D. Lister - Friday, October 10, 2014 - link
I wonder if it is really good marketing to call an electronic device "Brix".milkod2001 - Monday, October 13, 2014 - link
imagine this box twice in size(still smaller then mini/micro atx systems) with some decent proper desktop CPU(not necessary the latest, the greatest), 970m Maxwell, 8-16gb ram, 256 gb SSD, build in PSU. All that for $1000(including OS). Is it doable?It would not replace heavy workstations but it might be enough for most content creators and it would also play any 1080p games with ease if needed.
speculatrix - Monday, November 24, 2014 - link
I'd avoid the Intel AC 7260 WiFI card listed for the NUC, I've had one and it was very troublesome.