The Intel Compute Stick (Core m3-6Y30) Review
by Ganesh T S on June 27, 2016 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
- Intel
- Core M
- Skylake
- HDMI Stick
- Compute Stick
Miscellaneous Aspects and Concluding Remarks
Intel has also been putting some effort on the software side for the Compute Stick platform. One of the main problems with the platform is the limited availability of USB ports. This is somewhat alleviated in the Core M version, thanks to the two USB 3.0 ports in the power adapter. In certain situations (such as the 'entertainment' use-case), the consumer often has a second screen available (either a tablet or a smartphone). Intel has a free Android / iOS app - the Intel Remote Keyboard - to take advantage of the second screen.
The host application comes pre-installed on the Compute Stick and is active at startup as a service. Therefore, one can use it to even enter credentials for system login. It allows the second screen keyboard to act as the primary keyboard for the Compute Stick and the screen itself to act as a trackpad for the mouse pointer on the Compute Stick's display. In our evaluation, the app worked well. Our only wish is for the in-built keyboard in the app to have a 'Tab' key, and the keyboard to work properly when using a Powershell or Command Prompt window.
Moving on to the business end of the review, we complained in our previous Compute Stick reviews that 32GB of primary storage does not cut it on any computing device other than a tablet or smartphone. Fortunately, the Core m3-6Y30 Compute Stick solves that problem. The two USB 3.0 ports on the power adapter are very welcome. The Wi-Fi solution (2x2 AC8260 802.11ac PCIe WLAN) is also top-notch. The system is also able to bitstream HD audio for HTPC applications. BIOS options t have fine-grained control over the fans is also a nice aspect. Performance-wise, it is hard to find faults when keeping the form factor in mind.
The only complaint we have is the $390 price point. Even though that price includes the OS license, we find it difficult to recommend it in the home PC market - the Cherry Trail Compute Stick and the other sub-$150 Compute Sticks look to be a better option.
However, the SMB / enterprise market might find the Core M Compute Sticks more to their liking. Price is not such a huge deterrent in that market. The availability of vPro features (in the Core m5 model) and TPM (trusted platform module) shows that Intel intends these systems to be primarily adopted in that market segment.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
105 Comments
View All Comments
damianrobertjones - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
A combination of a very slow SSD and 2Gb is never a good thing no matter what CPU.Arbie - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
I use Process Lasso on low-end machines like this and it helps a lot. Even a 2010 netbook became reasonably useable with Office etc. Try the free version.mkozakewich - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
2 GB was generally enough. Even when there was plenty of free RAM, though, the Atom processor was barely able to load heavy web pages. Chrome in particular seemed to run sluggish (especially on infinitely scrolling pages, like Tumblr).BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, June 28, 2016 - link
Chrome is burdened more than other web browsers because the system is not only busy logging and reporting user activity to Microsoft, but also doing the same with browser activity to Google plus the site you're surfing is usually keeping an eye on your usage too. The double/triple data mining penalty is pretty hard on a low-power chip like the Atom. Firefox with a noscript (as long as you don't mind breaking a lot of website functionality and then having to pick through individual blocked script sources to find the right ones to restore those functions) usually will vastly improve web performance on an Atom CPU.silverblue - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
We're using a few of the Cherry Trail sticks (STK1AW32SC) for simple slideshow-style screens at work; their footprint is miniscule compared to the laptops we used to have, meaning we can hide them away. The m3 would be overkill in this case, plus I can get three of the Atom models for the same price which work just fine.Pissedoffyouth - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
How is the Linux support for these sticks?nfriedly - Tuesday, June 28, 2016 - link
Excellent in my experience. Ubuntu 16.04 works perfectly out of the box, and 14.04 mostly works (no wifi drivers, though).Intel sells a m5 version with no OS, although it's more expensive honestly not much faster than the m3 version with windows.
Pissedoffyouth - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link
CheersCaedenV - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
I am pretty excited that these are getting better... but who are these supposed to be marketed to exactly? The specs aren't quite there for an office or school machine (but close! just ditch the fan and give a bit more onboard storage). For the HTPC market (is that really a market outside of a few video enthusiasts?) it is just about right on specs, but for the price there are far better options if you don't mind a slightly larger form factor.If intel wants to sell gobs and gobs of computers then they really need to do the following:
Quad Core CPU (or dual with HT), m series is actuially fine, but an i3 would be better
8GB of RAM
128GB solid state storage (SSD or even eMMC)
GPU (and ports) capable of 2 1080p displays, and hardware acceleration for newest video codecs (HEVC and VP9/AV1)
Fanless
Headphone jack (seriously, have a bunch of NUCs without a jack... such a pain!)
Secure-able (so they don't walk off when plugged into the back of a monitor)
Win10 Pro preloaded
Compute Stick or NUC form factor
3 year warranty
$400 or less
Schools and businesses would buy these up in droves! NUCs are almost there, but they tend to have fans, and system builders typically exceed the $400 price point once configured with RAM and SSD; business could build it themselves for less, but they are in the business of doing business instead of building their own custom PCs. Maybe another year or two and we will see this happen?
tipoo - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link
In Core Ms ~5W power envelope, I suspect most people would be better on a dual, even if they think they want a quad.In such low power spaces a quad just means each core is running at a significantly reduced clock over a dual. It's the same reason why there was that 28W quad which no manufacturer picked, as the dual cores were faster 90% of the time. Especially for, you know, most people getting a 28W CPU, let alone those getting a 5W one.