The ASRock DeskMini A300 Review: An Affordable DIY AMD Ryzen mini-PC
by Ganesh T S on April 26, 2019 8:00 AM ESTClosing Thoughts
Throughout this review we've taken a comprehensive look at performance of the DeskMini A300 for a range of SFF PC workloads. It is now time for some closing thoughts from two perspectives - the Ryzen 5 2400G APU, and, the DeskMini A300 motherboard and chassis combination.
SFF machines are popular as space-savers in office environments. For typical office productivity and business workloads, we see that the BAPCo benchmarks and PCMark 8 approximately lead to the same conclusions. The energy consumption metrics show that Intel-based solutions are delivering better performance per watt for equivalent performance. However, the Ryzen-based solutions have lower upfront costs for the same performance. Meanwhile the PCMark 10 overall score shows the Ryzen 5 2400G in much better light because of the inclusion of 3DMark GPU workloads as contributors to the score.
If a PC with gaming credentials is required and the budget doesn't allow for a discrete GPU, a Ryzen APU like the Ryzen 5 2400G is simply the only choice. There are no ifs, ands, or buts here. Even the most powerful integrated GPU that Intel can offer (Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655) is way behind the Radeon RX Vega 11 in the Ryzen 5 2400G. This is across all our gaming benchmarks, irrespective of the quality settings or resolution. The reason for this is easy to infer from our thermal stress tests. With the GPU alone active, the DeskMini A300 draws more than 65W at the wall. In comparison, the most powerful Intel iGPU-equipped system - the Bean Canyon NUC - draws 48W in the same scenario. The corresponding number for the DeskMini 310 with the Core i3-8100 is around 42W. The Radeon Vega architecture and the APU design allows for a much higher power budget for the GPU compared to Intel's designs. All these contribute to the excellent graphics performance of the Ryzen 5 2400G.
On the multimedia front, unfortunately a Ryzen APU-based SFF PC is not advisable for anything beyond the most casual of uses. The hardware itself is actually rather capable (as noted above), but the the current state of the Radeon drivers holds it back. Overall, as a vanilla 1080p playback machine with minimal DRM requirements (read, playback of YouTube videos and basic Netflix streaming), it can do a decent job (assuming power efficiency is not a big factor). However, as soon as we get to more contemporary or arcane requirements (Netflix with 4K HDR, VP9 Profile 2 playback with open source software like VLC or MPC-HC, or UHD Blu-ray support), we run into driver issues or hardware limitations, as described in the HTPC sections.
These sorts of compatibility issues are disheartening to see, given that the system natively supports 4Kp60 output on the HDMI port with HDR. The true HDMI 2.0a output is is contrast to Intel's native HDMI 1.4a output (which has to be worked around with an extra board component by OEMs wanting to provide a HDMI 2.0 port in their system). Folks looking to build a modern media consumption-centric HTPC should look at Intel-based platforms such as the Bean Canyon NUC. The silver lining here, at least, is that these appear to be software issues; so AMD has an opportunity to fix these problems (and change our minds) in future driver versions.
Moving on to our choice of other build components in the DeskMini A300, we first talk about the Western Digital WD Blue SN500 NVMe SSD. Despite its PCIe 3.0 x2 interface, the performance per dollar metric, as well as its general consistency, is excellent. The 500GB version we used in our build is available for as low as $65. This complements the cost of the DeskMini A300 ($190 or $150) and the Ryzen 5 2400G ($150) when attempting a budget build. We did splurge a bit on the RAM, opting for the G.Skill Ripjaws Series DDR4 SODIMM rated for 3000 MHz operation (2x $50). The reason to not go in with SODIMMs operating at lower frequencies was to ensure that we were able to provide the APU with more that the bandwidth available at its rated memory clocks (DDR4-2933) while not losing out much on the latency front. With its 16-18-18-43 timing configuration, the G.Skill Ripjaws series DDR4-3000 kit represented the best balance of price, bandwidth, and latency.
Coming back to the DeskMini A300 itself, the chassis is the same as what we have seen in the previous DeskMini 1.92L machines. It will not win any industrial design awards, but it is functional enough. It has plenty of ventilation to aid in dissipating the heat from the board components. The external I/O and the internal board slots represent the best that can be done with the A300 Promontory chipset. Without spare PCIe lanes, the board can only have the NVMe, SATA, and USB ports driven directly by the Ryzen APU + chipset. That is still enough to provide plenty of storage options on the motherboard (given its mini-STX size), but additional USB ports would really be nice to have. ASRock should have included the dual USB 2.0 header cable (currently optional) as part of the package. The DeskMini A300 scores over the comparable Intel-based DeskMini 310 system by including a second M.2 NVMe SSD slot. However, it doesn't have the microSDXC slot available in the latter. In terms of external I/O capability, the two budget mini-STX PCs are equivalent.
Overall, the DeskMini A300 is one of the first AMD-based SFF PCs in the market. And while the SFF situation with AMD's Ryzen APUs is still a uneven at this time, it's still proven a capable system that we can recommend for specific usage scenarios. Particularly, if the PC is expected to service any type of gaming/graphics workload, it provides way more performance compared to any Intel-based alternative at similar price points (i.e, ruling out the use of a discrete GPU). For traditional office and business workloads, it gets the job done; and while it's not particularly energy efficient, the upfront cost itself is lower.
In other words, as is often the case, there are pros and cons to the DeskMini A300. It's a rather capable machine when playing up its strengths, but potential buyers will definitely want to first make sure their workloads are a good fit for what the SFF PC can offer.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
88 Comments
View All Comments
BigMamaInHouse - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
Comparing 2400G with Real iGPU vs $431 i7-8559U - I'd say it performs Great!.Irata - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
To be more specific, on the "productivity benchmark", the A300 has 89% of the A310's score with 86% of its power consumption, so for office type tasks, it is actually a bit more efficient.ganeshts - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
Ah, the pitfalls of saying ProdA scores X% of ProdB in metric M at Y% in metric N, when M and N are not linearly correlated!Extending it the same way, if I were to build the DeskMini 310 system with the same original review components at the current prices, I am going to splurge : 162 (DeskMini 310 board with Wi-Fi compared to DeskMini A300 without Wi-Fi) + 139 (Core i3-8100) + 76 (DDR4-2400 2x8GB SODIMM) + 78 (PCIe 3.0 x4 240GB NVMe SSD - Corsair Force MP510) = $455 ; Let me look up the table for the DeskMini A300 cost without Wi-Fi - tada, it is $465 - oh oh oh!!!! Does the lower upfront cost for the AMD system (as claimed in the article in the same BAPCo section) evaporate into thin air? No!
The reason is that when you are looking at SYSmark 2018 scores and SYSmark 2018 energy consumption numbers, you compare against systems that score approximately the same in those particular metrics.
For the overall SYSmark 2018 scores, the DeskMini A300 is approximately the same as the Baby Canyon NUC - then, let us look at the energy consumption numbers for those two - the Baby Canyon consumes lesser energy.
For the energy consumption numbers, the A300 and 310 are approximately in the same ball park - and there, you see the the 310 with a higher score.
As for accusations that 'Intel CAN"T be shown in anything other than their best light' - take a chill pill - the PCMark 8 numbers back up SYSmark 2018. And, in the gaming section, we show that AMD outperforms the best that Intel can offer. As an impartial reviewer, my aim is to present the facts as-is and provide my analysis - if you come with pre-conceived notions that one product / vendor is better than the other, then, no amount of facts will convince you otherwise.
Irata - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
Replying to two different comments with one reply is a bit unfortunate as another poster made the "Intel can't be shown in..." comment.As for the price, if you check Newegg, the $150 A300 does include a Wifi kit.
Looking at Newegg prices, I get the following:
Desk Mini 300: $150
Desk Mini 310: $168
Ryzen 2400G: $150
Core i3-8100: $142
Memory: 100 (for the AMD system) vs. 80 (for the Intel based one)
note: I had a hard time finding the exact memory so I was looking at Team Group memory with roughly the same specs
WDS500G1B0C: $78
Corsair FORCE MP500: $130
When possible, in stock retail items with free shipping were chosen.
This gives me a total of $ 478 for the Desk Mini 300 (including WiFi) and $ 520 for the 310. But calling the price even would be OK, considering how prices can fluctuate.
MASSAMKULABOX - Monday, December 9, 2019 - link
AMd 150 + 150 +100 = $400INT $168 + 142 + 80 = $ 390 ... makes Intel cheaper , ..altho at this late date you can get the 2400g for $120 or less
Irata - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
Second reply as I wanted to keep things separately.As I stated below, the comment regarding Intel having to be shown in the best light was made by another poster. Why could (she) have said this ?
For one, Intel is a client of your parent company Purch. They even mention this on their web site under "experience", stating "We’re focused on serving our action-oriented audience, as well as elevating the sponsor’s brand with that audience. We tailor the Native content that runs across our sites to better suit each environment, while keeping the integrity of the sponsor’s original content and brand."
In addition, you are using Bapco Sysmark, a benchmark that - given this "organization's" history - leaves a rather bad taste.
Now, I am not attacking your personal or journalistic integrity, however you must admit that the though AT may not be impartial does cross ones mind.
And this does not have to be overly obvious shilling (as that would be counter productive), but can be small nuances or tones, stressing one thing while leaving out another.
Do I have a pre-concieved notion of which one is better ?
Besides seeing the Intel iGPU as inferior (with the exception of video encode / decode) not really, but I admit that I do not particularly like Intel as a company
Ryan Smith - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
"Now, I am not attacking your personal or journalistic integrity, however you must admit that the though AT may not be impartial does cross ones mind."Above all else, I think people vastly overestimate both how much work vendors are willing to put in, and how much they actually care about AnandTech. Being underhanded is a lot of work, especially for as small an audience as AnandTech has.
To be sure, there is a significant editorial firewall up between ad sales and editorial. I honestly couldn't even tell you about our (former) publisher's comments, because none of that ever involved AnandTech. It was probably a campaign that ran on Tom's Guide or such.
But regardless, we don't do shenanigans, and I won't stand for them. Vendors don't get to see articles early, we don't let vendors buy preferential treatment, and any sponsored content is going to be very clearly labeled as such. All AnandTech has its its honesty; so to sacrifice that would cost us everything.
Which, to loop back to the discussion of Sysmark, Ganesh uses it as part of his mini-PC evaluations. It's a pretty useful benchmark, especially for the energy efficiency metrics. It works well for what Ganesh needs, and the workloads seem reasonable. At the same time we're well-aware of the controversy surrounding it, and we'd never trust a single benchmark for a review - and certainly not Sysmark. Which is why we run many benchmarks, to look at different workloads and get different points of view on performance.
Irata - Saturday, April 27, 2019 - link
Thanks for the clarification Ryan. I still think that Sysmark is a no-go, but that's just my personal opinion.Smell This - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
*As an impartial reviewer*_____________________
I snorted.
BPB - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
I have one of these, and really like it. My problem is I bought this to replace an older NUC, and the older NUC runs Windows 8.1. I use the older NUC for WMC. Obviously the DeskMini doesn't support 8.1, but I thought I could get it to run 7. I can't. I noticed that ASRock has a utility for installing Windows 7 on AM4 motherboards, and I was given the impression that ASRock would update the DeskMini BIOS so I could install Windows 7. Then I found out the 2400G is only Windows 10 compatible. I don't know how I missed that when I did my research... So, my son gets nice little PC to replace his older one. This is a nice little setup, I just wish Windows 10 had something even 80 percent as good as WMC.