Updated: AOpen MiniPC – Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery
by Jarred Walton on March 3, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
Benchmark Information
There really aren't a lot of meaningful performance benchmarks to run on such systems. Winstones Business and Content Creation are a good place to start, providing an overview of typical home office capability. Futuremark's PCMark covers a similar area, and even 3DMark03/05 were able to complete, though not with impressive scores. (Let's not even worry about 3DMark06.) AutoGK provides a look at encoding benchmarks, which could be important for those looking for a diminutive HTPC. Noise, heat, and power requirements will be checked as well.
We didn't bother with network performance, since GbE connections on all the tested PCs are generally more than fast enough for home and office use. File transfer rates topped out at around 25-30 MB/s on the MiniPC, which is roughly the sustained transfer rate of the 2.5" hard drive (and burst speeds were higher but less important). If you're using GbE, you will find the integrated NIC to be more than fast enough; if you're only using 100Mb Ethernet or the optional WiFi adapter, network throughput will be substantially slower.
Finally, before we get to the actual numbers, let me just say this: while the Pentium M platform powering the MiniPC is, in most instances, slower than the competitors, I did do a fair amount of web surfing, office tasks, etc. using the system. I also wrote a decent portion of this article on the system. Anyone who has performed such tasks should already realize that a 1.73 GHz Pentium M is more than sufficient for office use, and anything faster often goes unnoticed. For the intended market, the performance is definitely acceptable.
Now, let's move on to the benchmark numbers. The AOpen MiniPC is highlighted in green, and the Sempron 3100+ system is highlighted in red, as it is the only system that is using a discrete graphics card. That will have a major impact on the 3D tests, but elsewhere, it won't matter much.
There really aren't a lot of meaningful performance benchmarks to run on such systems. Winstones Business and Content Creation are a good place to start, providing an overview of typical home office capability. Futuremark's PCMark covers a similar area, and even 3DMark03/05 were able to complete, though not with impressive scores. (Let's not even worry about 3DMark06.) AutoGK provides a look at encoding benchmarks, which could be important for those looking for a diminutive HTPC. Noise, heat, and power requirements will be checked as well.
We didn't bother with network performance, since GbE connections on all the tested PCs are generally more than fast enough for home and office use. File transfer rates topped out at around 25-30 MB/s on the MiniPC, which is roughly the sustained transfer rate of the 2.5" hard drive (and burst speeds were higher but less important). If you're using GbE, you will find the integrated NIC to be more than fast enough; if you're only using 100Mb Ethernet or the optional WiFi adapter, network throughput will be substantially slower.
Finally, before we get to the actual numbers, let me just say this: while the Pentium M platform powering the MiniPC is, in most instances, slower than the competitors, I did do a fair amount of web surfing, office tasks, etc. using the system. I also wrote a decent portion of this article on the system. Anyone who has performed such tasks should already realize that a 1.73 GHz Pentium M is more than sufficient for office use, and anything faster often goes unnoticed. For the intended market, the performance is definitely acceptable.
Now, let's move on to the benchmark numbers. The AOpen MiniPC is highlighted in green, and the Sempron 3100+ system is highlighted in red, as it is the only system that is using a discrete graphics card. That will have a major impact on the 3D tests, but elsewhere, it won't matter much.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
54 Comments
View All Comments
davecason - Friday, March 17, 2006 - link
Just an FYI for the reviewer: use tweezers. The plastic inner shell is designed for tweezers with an angled grip point. There are both cut-outs and spaceous slotting to accomodate tweezers on every screw installation.Did anyone pick up one of these and have trouble with the IDE PCB? I have two problems: 1) DMA turns itself off and the drive resorts to PIO mode when I attach it through to the PCB. I have tested the drive elsewhere and on the USB bus and it runs at normal speeds but when it is attached internally it slows down to about 1/10 of the speed. Removing the optical drive from the PCB has no affect on the problem.
2) The system hiccups when I boot it. The optical drive goes into a long series of IDE bus restarts and if I remove it, the IDE drive simply takes forever to boot (probably because of some bus error and the speed is being backed down to almost nothing).
Any suggestions for that?
davecason - Tuesday, March 28, 2006 - link
The IDE bus was restarting itself due to a power problem. I had the following plugged into the USB bus:1) USB Keyboard with USB hub with a USB mouse plugged into it.
2) USB bus-powered hub with a self-powered PDA base and a UPS plugged into it.
I removed #2 and the IDE bus began functioning normally. I guess four/six items on the USB bus was too much power draw from the system. If you experience this, get a self-powered USB hub.
Plugers - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
On the next revision.Add a upgradable laptop video card slot. If laptops can get a nice small Nvidia / ATI solution, why not this? Also add the other audio port, or just add a toslink for HTPC use and I think most of the high end PC sound systems have a digital input option anyway.
throw in another sodimm slot while your at it....
bldckstark - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
I am glad to see that for once there are not many whiny posts about the comparison systems. Thanks for the inclusion of the Sempron system.Kishkumen - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
Actually my interest with these Mini PCs whether Aopen or Apple is to use them as a lightweight frontend to a Linux/MythTV HTPC with storage and encoding duties relegated to a master backend and better yet no need to whine about the additional cost of an OS. The mini is small enough that it can be easily attached to the back of a plasma or LCD for a very clean look. That said, Aopen's audio solution is absolutely tragic. I really don't understand how they thought they could skimp in this area even if they were completely unaware of it's potential as a HTPC solution. At the very least a digital optical connector should have been included. Thus I'm inclined to go with the Apple solution on the audio issue alone, but in general it seems like the better hardware and I have no reason to believe I can't run Linux on it just fine. I'll be paying for an OS I don't need but maybe I can just pawn it off on ebay or I'll just keep it around for the halibut. Something to gape at once in a while like a two headed snake in a jar at the circus.JarredWalton - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
Does Linux run on EFI okay? I don't have any idea. It's certainly a lot more likely than XP on EFI. Anyway, the MP945 is supposed to go with at least 5.1 audio I think.mindless1 - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
PLEASE, quite trying to pretend Apple is some kind of leader in form factor. no, it was not the MAC cube that started SFF. This AOPEN is not imitation anything either. Did you really think the entire computer world was NOT moving towards high integration and as-small-as-possible systems?It had absolutely nothing to do with Apple. Apple merely did the same as everyone else, sometimes coming up with a particular niche product sooner than others, and sometimes later than others. The one most noteworthy thing apple did was advertising.
How about the ipod? It wasn't first either. Good grief, why in the world do you have an arbitrary false conclusion that apple was first at much of anything?
That's not to downplay Apple's influence, they did add a certain esthetic appeal, more artistic cases on many products. That's not what was implied in the article though...
JAS - Monday, March 6, 2006 - link
Just a general comment:MAC = Media Access Control, as in a computer's Ethernet address
Mac = shorthand for Macintosh
JarredWalton - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
By your reasoning, Apple was first at nothing, and the only first was probably the ENIAC. After all, we've just been moving to smaller computers for over 60 years now.... Seriously, there is no way you can convince me that the AOpen MiniPC wasn't an attempt at copying the Mac Mini design. Was the Mac Mini completely original? Maybe someone had something like that before, but they're the ones that really put the "Mini" computers on the map.Anyway, how about some comparisons from AOpen - nice pictures, and they clearly show that any resemblance to the Mac Mini is likely more than coincidence.
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/system/sff/aop...">MiniPC vs. Mac Mini #1
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/system/sff/aop...">MiniPC vs. Mac Mini #2
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/system/sff/aop...">MiniPC vs. Mac Mini #3
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/system/sff/aop...">MiniPC vs. Mac Mini #4
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/system/sff/aop...">MiniPC vs. Mac Mini #5
psychobriggsy - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
The Mac Mini looks better, both in terms of looks and design (e.g., the back panel looks so much better). If you're gonna copy a design, at least try and make it look even better if you're not going to compete on price...