Before proceeding to the business end of the review, let us take a look at some power consumption numbers. We measured power drawn at the wall when the unit was idle (with the display still being driven over HDMI and without), one hour after subjecting the unit to Prime95 and Furmark simultaneously and when playing back a 1080p24 Blu-ray movie from the optical drive with HD audio bistreaming. In all cases, the Wi-Fi was active (no wired Ethernet). A wireless keyboard and mouse was also connected to the unit.

ASRock Vision HT 321B Power Consumption
Idle (Display off) 12.66 W
Idle (Display on) 14.3 W
Prime95 + Furmark (Full loading) 58.68 W
1080p24 Blu-ray Playback using CyberLink PowerDVD 12 28.04 W

The thermal solution used in the Vision HT 321B is very similar to the one used in the CoreHT 252B. We have already covered the thermal performance in detail in the previous reviews of ASRock HTPCs, and I found no discernible difference in the actual performance of the units. Full loading produces less than 35 dB of noise, and this is as good as what one can get with an actively cooled system.

The Vision HT 321B is definitely a good upgrade over the CoreHT 252B. By increasing the hard disk capacity, moving to DDR3-1600 for the DRAM and including dual-band Wi-Fi and Bluetooth support, ASRock has put in some thinking before doing an upgrade to the CoreHT lineup. Intel's advancements with Ivy Bridge (particularly, increased GPU capabilities and lower power consumption) also serve ASRock well in the upgrade.

It is almost impossible to avoid a comparison with the Mac mini which comes in with comparable specs for $599 (although it doesn't have a Blu-ray drive and has only a 500 GB HDD). At $680, there is a $80 premium for the ASRock unit, and all said, the PC ecosystem is preferred by more users for HTPC duties compared to the Mac mini. For readers looking to purchase the unit, I would advise a look at the Newegg reviews where there have been reports of internal components getting burnt when power is supplied. Our review unit has had no such issues in the last four months that it has been continuously on. However, such an issue is definitely possible and ASRock indicated that they are looking into it. Quality control and thermal design are aspects that ASRock need to pay more attention to in the future product lines.

HTPC Decoding and Rendering Benchmarks
Comments Locked

40 Comments

View All Comments

  • Guspaz - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    The lack of DisplayPort video output is kind of a big deal... DisplayPort is the only output that the Intel HD 4000 supports high resolution (like 2560x1440 or 2560x1600) over. It will not output these resolutions over HDMI or DVI, as the Intel HD 4000 does not support dual-link DVI.

    As this is a rather severe shortcoming to a user with a 27" or larger monitor, and users may expect support for this resolution since the chip itself does support it, it should be mentioned in the review. Otherwise, a user might buy this computer only to find out that it doesn't support any 27" monitors...

    A better approach would have been for Asrock to include a DisplayPort instead of DVI, and then include a cheap passive DP->DVI adapter in the box. Such adapters are very cheap (under $7 from monoprice), so this would have been an enormously more flexible option.

    As the system stands, with no option for a videocard slot, this system can never support large displays.
  • hughlle - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    The vast majority of users will be using an HTPC with their HDTV, not a "small" high end moniter, so for the majority of users wanting an HTPC, 1920x1080, as in HD resolutions, is what they will be looking for.
  • methudman6 - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    It could've been marketed as a "PC-Mini" too if it had display port. I find it strange that they market it so strongly as an HTPC when it looks like it'd make a very nice small computer for casual use.
  • Guspaz - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    There is nothing about this system that makes it an "HTPC" except the cheap remote they include with it, and that's something you can add to any computer for a few dollars. It's just as well suited as a general SFF computer except for this issue. Previous Asrock systems in this identical form factor (and I've used a few of the ION ones for media playback at a large convention) didn't even have a remote.
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    But it also seems like an oversight for Intel to not have DVI 2560 output. What did they gain by that omission?
  • Guspaz - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    Pin count, perhaps? Take a look at the respective pin counts, and I'll exclude hotplug, power, shield, ground, reserved, analog (except on VGA), or optional pins, since none of those would have to be routed to the CPU AFAIK.:

    DVI: 10 pins
    DisplayPort: 10 pins
    HDMI: 11 pins
    VGA: 12 pins
    DVI Dual-Link: 16 pins

    I may be excluding some pins that do in fact have to be routed to the CPU, but my basic point is that adding dual-link DVI support would have required adding more pins/traces to the processor, socket, motherboard, etc. That's a non-trivial thing, and from Intel's perspective you can use an adapter to get dual-link DVI anyhow (although at $69 from monoprice, the adapter isn't cheap like the $8 single-link DVI adapter is)
  • deadlockedworld - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    Apple should sue!! (seriously though, the shape is almost exactly the same as the previous generation mini)
  • Guspaz - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - link

    The Asrock machines are waaay bigger than the Mini, and the Mini wasn't the first to use that form factor (mini ITX boxes predate it). It was the thinnest of them, to be sure, but not the first.
  • IlllI - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    wonder what ever happened to those. looks like they dont sell them anymore
  • Grok42 - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link

    I cut the cord/dish 6 years ago. My kids have all grown up not having access to normal television programming. I have a WD-Live x2, Roku x3, iPodses, iPads and iPhones all which can basically access the same media including a 6TB NAS drive. I rip all the kids movies to the NAS drive as soon as we buy them which is 90% of what is on the NAS drive other than home movies and photos. I watch movies from NetFlix, Hulu or rent them on Amazon. I love browsing YouTube from the WD-Live for most of the misc stuff.

    What else does a HTPC bring to the table that the ~$99 WD-Live doesn't do better and for less? The WD-Live is tiny, has no fans and is Velcroed to the back of my entertainment system. It is plugged into a Wireless N router and can stream 1080P movies with ease. The only thing I can think of is that I can't play PC games or Surf; is there something else?

    Not a troll, I sort of feel like I'm making this huge mistake not having an HTPC given my setup but I can never figure out why I would want one.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now