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

In the single-threaded mode, the performance of the Ryzen 5 2400G in the DeskMini A300 is pretty much equivalent to the Core i3-8100 in the DeskMini 310. The Ryzen system pulls ahead by a significant margin in the multi-threaded case, even surpassing other 4C/8T systems such as the Bean Canyon NUC (admittedly featuring a CPU with almost half the TDP of the Ryzen 5 2400G). OpenGL performance is not as good as expected, though it is much better than the DeskMini 310.

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

The x265 benchmarks have the A300 coming in the lower half of the graphs, and it is highly likely to be due to the Intel-optimized x265 encoder executable used in the benchmark. We are attempting to source an x265 executable version optimized for Ryzen. However, we couldn't find one in time for this review.

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 compression rates of the DeskMini 310 and DeskMini A300 are similar, but, the Ryzen system has a significant lead in the decompression rate.

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

The higher memory speed (DDR4-3000) gives the DeskMini A300 a leg up, but, the core cryptographic operations seem to be accelerated better in the Intel-based systems. This is also seen in the 7-Zip AES encryption benchmark below.

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

On the decryption side, the Ryzen system has a significant advantage, which could be related to the buffer sizing and organization of the benchmark data.

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 Ryzen system performs significantly better than the rest of the systems, particularly in the decryption 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 DeskMini A300 takes the least time of all for the first stage, but, the other stages see it in the middle of the graph. Overall, the Ryzen system is ahead of the DeskMini 310 in this benchmark.

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.

Dolphin Emulator Benchmark

Here, the Ryzen system doesn't fare as well as expected, coming in with the same amount of time as the Zotac MI553 with the Core i5-7300HQ. All the other modern systems (including the DeskMini 310) complete the benchmark sooner by a minute or more.

Storage Performance

On the storage side, one option would be repetition of our strenuous SSD review tests on the drive(s) in the PC. Fortunately, to avoid that overkill, PCMark 8 has a storage bench where certain common workloads such as loading games and document processing are replayed on the target drive. Results are presented in two forms, one being a benchmark number and the other, a bandwidth figure. We ran the PCMark 8 storage bench on selected PCs and the results are presented below.

Futuremark PCMark 8 Storage Bench - Score

Futuremark PCMark 8 Storage Bench - Bandwidth

Despite the usage of a budget PCIe 3.0 x2 SSD, we see the storage bench numbers almost approaching systems equipped with PCIe 3.0 x4 SSDs. In any case, as a budget play (the 500GB WD SN500 can be sourced for as low as $65), the numbers above are quite good.

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

88 Comments

View All Comments

  • Haawser - Sunday, April 28, 2019 - link

    @oliwek That's the 310, it's an Intel barebones system, not Ryzen.
  • sor - Saturday, April 27, 2019 - link

    If you sign up for Newegg notifications you’ll probably have one within a week. I got one of mine about three weeks ago and the other last week.
  • yankeeDDL - Monday, April 29, 2019 - link

    I'm just going to throw it as a suggestion.
    I understand the purpose and the rationale in comparing similarly priced models, and all relatively recent/available, however ... I think it would add an enormous value to "normal" users to be able to somewhat put things in perspective with slightly dated hardware.

    I am not saying that we should be able to compare the Ryzen 5 2400G with an 80486, but, to give you an example, I have an A10-8700P and I have been considering an upgrade, but it seems really difficult to find a way to get an idea of just how much faster the 2400G is.
    The A10-8700P is certainly not efficient, but it does have 4 cores, and a decent iGPU, already based on the GCN. There's no question that the 2400G will trounce it in efficiency, but is it a worth upgrade?

    It is just an example, to indicate that having also 2-3 previous generations in the comparisons would not be such a bad idea, in my opinion. Just a thought.
  • Irata - Wednesday, May 1, 2019 - link

    If you are looking for this type of comparison, planet3dnow de has one between an Athlon 5350 (Jaguar) vs Athlon 200GE. It's in German but maybe you can get useable results using Google translate.

    They also did a review of the Hewlett-Packard 17-ca1004ng notebook with a Ryzen 5 3500U comparing it to its Bristol Ridge predecessor.

    Both show just how far AMD has come with Ryzen.
  • mikato - Tuesday, April 30, 2019 - link

    Ganesh, you didn't talk about noise at all. I feel like that should always be included in these mini PC articles. You have 3 pages on HTPC credentials and 1 page on Power Consumption and Thermal Performance but no mention of noise. How does it compare to the Intel NUC8i7BEH that you mentioned had a noisy fan with any load? Or the ZBOX CI660 which was fanless but had a dull whine and a strange grating sound though it wasn't noticeable beyond 10 feet? Did you think that optional CPU heatsink/fan they included was adequate?

    By the way, 10 feet isn't close enough. How about 6 feet? If you give one noise impression from 10 feet, you could move a few feet closer and check what it is at 6 feet as well... for future reviews.

    If you keep doing these Mini PC reviews, I will keep reading them!
  • Lucky Stripes 99 - Sunday, May 5, 2019 - link

    I was also puzzled at the lack noise testing. One of the reasons I'm looking at mini-STX and thin mini-ITX systems instead of a NUC is because of the fan noise many of those NUC systems suffer from.

    Some folks have been installing low-profile Noctua CPU coolers in their Deskmini systems and they report that they are "nearly silent", even while under heavy load. I'd really like to know how silent that really is.
  • werpu - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    I have a ryzen 2400g mini itx system with the flat noctua, and it is very silent, even under heavy load it is almost not hearable. I however had to add 2 smaller noctuas later in my system because the vrm would get rather hot with my standalone noctua and the case I was using. Still a very silent system and definitely less noise than a nuc.
  • mikato - Tuesday, April 30, 2019 - link

    At first I thought Bean Canyon was the best way to go for an HTPC with the performance and power efficiency. But with an idle power usage of 11.24 watts for this DeckMini A300 vs the 8.45 watts of the NUC8i7BEH with Bean Canyon - that difference is so little. As my HTPC, it would be left on and most of the time it would be idling. And the "as configured, no OS" prices in your reviews for these were $465 for the DeskMini A300 and $963 for the NUC8i7BEH...

    Let's see, your DeskMini A300 had:
    G.Skill Ripjaws F4-3000C16D-16GRS 2x8 GB (newegg $100)
    Western Digital WD SN500 500 GB (newegg $70)

    While your NUC8i7BEH had:
    G.Skill Ripjaws F4-3000C16D-32GRS 2x16 GB (newegg $185 - your review listed RipjawsV F4-3000C16-16GRS but I couldn't find that anywhere and the photos in your NUC8i7BEH review showed it was F4-3000C16D-32GRS instead so I think your specs table was incorrect)
    Western Digital WD Black 3D NVMe SSD (2018) 1 TB (newegg $238 for the SN750, older 2018 one costs more)

    Let's see... that's $185-100=85 and $238-70=168. 85+168=253
    So your combined storage and memory choices for the NUC8i7BEH cost $253 more.

    And the difference in your overall "as configured, no OS" prices was $963-465=498.

    So if I remove the difference in your storage and memory choices, I calculate that the DeskMini A300 is still $498-253 = $245 cheaper!

    Sure the A300 doesn't look as nice or compact as the NUC, but that is some solid money.
  • Irata - Wednesday, May 1, 2019 - link

    The Intel models are usually configured with higher end components vs. the AMD based models. Same for laptops where $600 AMD based notebooks go up against $1,600 Intel ones .

    I guess it's a hold over of the "AMD = budget" days.
  • mikato - Thursday, May 2, 2019 - link

    Well, it's not a laptop. What do you think might be a higher end component here? This is basically a case, motherboard, and power supply, right?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now