Miscellaneous Performance Metrics

This section looks at some of the other commonly used benchmarks representative of the performance of specific real-world applications.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

We use CINEBENCH R15 for 3D rendering evaluation. The program provides three benchmark modes - OpenGL, single threaded and multi-threaded. Evaluation of different PC configurations in all three modes provided us the following results.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Single Thread

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Multiple Threads

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - OpenGL

The high turbo frequency allows the NUC8i7BEH to come out on top in the single-threaded cases. However, the TDP limitations and the limited thermals push the system to the middle of the pack in the multi-threaded case. For the OpenGL case, the systems with discrete GPUs provide better results compared to the NUC8i7BEH.

x265 Benchmark

Next up, we have some video encoding benchmarks using x265 v2.8. The appropriate encoder executable is chosen based on the supported CPU features. In the first case, we encode 600 1080p YUV 4:2:0 frames into a 1080p30 HEVC Main-profile compatible video stream at 1 Mbps and record the average number of frames encoded per second.

Video Encoding - x265 - 1080p

Our second test case is 1200 4K YUV 4:2:0 frames getting encoded into a 4Kp60 HEVC Main10-profile video stream at 35 Mbps. The encoding FPS is recorded.

Video Encoding - x265 - 4K 10-bit

TDP limitations prevent the Bean Canyon NUC from performing better than the 45W / 65W TDP-equipped systems in the x265 benchmark passes.

7-Zip

7-Zip is a very effective and efficient compression program, often beating out OpenCL accelerated commercial programs in benchmarks even while using just the CPU power. 7-Zip has a benchmarking program that provides tons of details regarding the underlying CPU's efficiency. In this subsection, we are interested in the compression and decompression rates when utilizing all the available threads for the LZMA algorithm.

7-Zip LZMA Compression Benchmark

7-Zip LZMA Decompression Benchmark

The raw clock rates and core counts pull the Core i7-8700 and the Core i7-8809G ahead of the Core i7-8559U in the 7-Zip benchmarks.

Cryptography Benchmarks

Cryptography has become an indispensable part of our interaction with computing systems. Almost all modern systems have some sort of hardware-acceleration for making cryptographic operations faster and more power efficient. In this sub-section, we look at two different real-world applications that may make use of this acceleration.

BitLocker is a Windows features that encrypts entire disk volumes. While drives that offer encryption capabilities are dealt with using that feature, most legacy systems and external drives have to use the host system implementation. Windows has no direct benchmark for BitLocker. However, we cooked up a BitLocker operation sequence to determine the adeptness of the system at handling BitLocker operations. We start off with a 2.5GB RAM drive in which a 2GB VHD (virtual hard disk) is created. This VHD is then mounted, and BitLocker is enabled on the volume. Once the BitLocker encryption process gets done, BitLocker is disabled. This triggers a decryption process. The times taken to complete the encryption and decryption are recorded. This process is repeated 25 times, and the average of the last 20 iterations is graphed below.

BitLocker Encryption Benchmark

BitLocker Decryption Benchmark

In addition to the clock rate, the performance in this benchmark is also influenced by the DRAM speed. Thanks to the DDR4-3000 SODIMMs, the Bean Canyon NUC manages to get into the top half of the numbers set.

Creation of secure archives is best done through the use of AES-256 as the encryption method while password protecting ZIP files. We re-use the benchmark mode of 7-Zip to determine the AES256-CBC encryption and decryption rates using pure software as well as AES-NI. Note that the 7-Zip benchmark uses a 48KB buffer for this purpose.

7-Zip AES256-CBC Encryption Benchmark

7-Zip AES256-CBC Decryption Benchmark

Removing the DRAM out of the equation results in a slight re-ordering of the results. However, the Bean Canyon NUC still manages to be in the top half.

Yet another cryptography application is secure network communication. OpenSSL can take advantage of the acceleration provided by the host system to make operations faster. It also has a benchmark mode that can use varying buffer sizes. We recorded the processing rate for a 8KB buffer using the hardware-accelerated AES256-CBC-HAC-SHA1 feature.

OpenSSL Encryption Benchmark

OpenSSL Decryption Benchmark

The Bean Canyon NUC turns out to be the best performer in this benchmark.

Agisoft Photoscan

Agisoft PhotoScan is a commercial program that converts 2D images into 3D point maps, meshes and textures. The program designers sent us a command line version in order to evaluate the efficiency of various systems that go under our review scanner. The command line version has two benchmark modes, one using the CPU and the other using both the CPU and GPU (via OpenCL). We present the results from our evaluation using the CPU mode only. The benchmark (v1.3) takes 84 photographs and does four stages of computation:

  • Stage 1: Align Photographs (capable of OpenCL acceleration)
  • Stage 2: Build Point Cloud (capable of OpenCL acceleration)
  • Stage 3: Build Mesh
  • Stage 4: Build Textures

We record the time taken for each stage. Since various elements of the software are single threaded, and others multithreaded, it is interesting to record the effects of CPU generations, speeds, number of cores, and DRAM parameters using this software.

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 1

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 2

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 3

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 4

The Bean Canyon NUC performs admirably, beaten out only by CPUs with higher core counts and/or clock speeds.

Dolphin Emulator

Wrapping up our application benchmark numbers is the new Dolphin Emulator (v5) benchmark mode results. This is again a test of the CPU capabilities, and the Bean Canyon NUC comes in just behind the ASRock DeskMini Z370 (equipped with a hexa-core Core i7-8700).

Dolphin Emulator Benchmark

UL Benchmarks - PCMark, 3DMark, and VRMark GPU Performance - Gaming Workloads
Comments Locked

81 Comments

View All Comments

  • jeremyshaw - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link

    Yeah, I made the mistake of going for an IGP + eGPU setup this time around (X1 Carbon + Lenovo GTX1050 dock). Nevermind the TB3 power issues that Lenovo finally fixed (silently), or GPU driver issues, just the need to lug around another box and its own power brick negates any weight savings over a heavier laptop with even a weak dGPU.

    This is a mistake I will never, ever make again. The eGPU idea really only works for Mac users, who are "forced" to buy from a range of 4 laptops (5, if you count three year old laptops being sold at full price), of which only one has a dGPU. Another has a passable IGP, that is still weaker than the worse of the current dGPUs (unless if one counts the Lenovo E480's severely throttled RX540). If you are a mac user and intend on staying one, choices are very limited, making eGPUs a necessity for those wanting more power. For anyone else out there, such sacrifices are not necessary.
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link

    Honestly, the eGPU thing only makes sense to me in one scenario: with a laptop that has an anemic GPU inside (low end AMD/Intel or just integrated) that has great battery life on the go but the owner wants to play some games at home on a larger monitor with good image quality and not have the hassle to maintain two independant systems. So the eGPU enclosure stays in one place, the laptop gets lugged around, is light, long lasting and productive on the go and when you get home, one cable to make it into a decent gaming PC.
    eGPU on already stationary desktops is just weird (get a slightly bigger case and stick a GPU inside that, more options, probably cheaper as well) and people who lug around the eGPU enclosure and their laptop are also kinda missing the point. If you do that, why not just get a 1060 or 1080 laptop and be done with it? The prices of the whole GPU+enclosure should not be much cheaper than the built in versions and the performance delta is probably negligible compared to the increased ease of use.
  • flyingpants265 - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link

    Not sure if I understand these things. ITX is already like 7x7 inches, and supports up to 9900k. Especially with undervolted chips you're looking at under 150 watts.
  • CaedenV - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link

    I just hope they all come with TPM modules now. The few physical machines we have are Intel NUCs, and in the first batch we bought they didn't have them and I was speechless... I mean, even dirt cheap $300 laptops come with TPMs these days!?! how could a $4-500 machine NOT have it?
    Then when ordering the next round of devices we found that most of the units available through our vendors did not have them; had to do a special order! This should be a standard feature, not something we have to search out any longer!
  • Jorgp2 - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link

    Pretty sure Laptops come with an embedded TPM, which is less secure than a discrete one.
  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, April 3, 2019 - link

    "Season 4 Episode 4 of the Netflix Test Patterns title" That's definitely something I had no clue about. :D
  • imaheadcase - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link

    $963 (as configured, no OS)

    ok right..
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link

    That's with a 1TB NVME SSD and 32GB RAM. Look at the base model and configure your own options and see how much it costs then (still not cheap, probably, but not as bad). And compare it to a laptop of similar specs (28W quad core with thunderbolt and eDRAM).
  • mikato - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link

    Yeah it said $503 barebones (need to add memory and storage). I guess you must have to really like that CPU and the case to make that competitive. When I say that, I mean it might be losing the HTPC crowd.
  • mikato - Thursday, April 4, 2019 - link

    Actually it's not as bad as I guessed. Here is an alternative-
    $150 2400G
    $120 Mini ITX mobo
    $131 In Win Chopin

    $401 total. Both would probably be plenty of power for most anyone's HTPC. The 2400G is more power/heat.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now