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. It must be noted that R15 is good enough for the current crop of SFF PCs. Once we start getting 16 cores or more, the shift to more modern versions of CINEBENCH will be made.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Single Thread

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Multiple Threads

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - OpenGL

Except for the OpenGL case, both the single (ST) and multi-threaded (MT) versions bring out Frost Canyon on top. As expected, there is negligible difference in the ST performance of the Bean Canyon and Frost Canyon NUCs, as the CPUs are both based on the same Skylake microarchitecture, with the optimizations allowing for higher clocks getting compensated by the increased core count in the processor.

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

In both cases, the hexa-core nature of Frost Canyon stands in good stead, even enabling it to get a sizable lead over competing systems sporting processors with higher TDPs.

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

Here, we again see the hexa-core feature enabling Frost Canyon to surpass the performance of systems sporting processors with higher TDPs.

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 availability of 6 cores to issue AES-NI operations on enables BitLocker to perform better on the Frost Canyon compared to Bean Canyon, despite the Bean Canyon configuration sporting a much higher performing memory sub-system with a DDR4-3000 SODIMM kit at a lower latency.

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

The observations we made for the BitLocker workload work for 7-Zip too. The Ryzen 5 2400G, for some reason, seems to offer much faster / optimized hardware acceleration for certain cryptographic operations, enabling it to be neck-and-neck with the Frost Canyon for AES256-CBC decryption in the above case. Obviously, the TDP difference (65W vs 25W) needs to be taken into account, though it is likely that the Frost Canyon NUC was at turbo-speeds in PL2 for at least the first few iterations of the benchmark.

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

Here, we see the Ryzen 5 2400G completely outperform the Frost Canyon NUC due to better optimization of the workload for the hardware acceleration capabilities offered by the Ryzen processor.

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 hexa-core nature makes the Frost Canyon NUC emerge as the best performer in the Agisoft Photoscan benchmark across all the SFF PCs considered in this review.

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

The benchmark is mostly bound by single-threaded performance, and we do not see much difference between the Bean Canyon and Frost Canyon NUCs in this workload.

UL Benchmarks: PCMark and 3DMark Networking and Storage Performance
Comments Locked

85 Comments

View All Comments

  • YB1064 - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    In the temperature charts (thermal performance page), the green graph shows huge temperature spikes (~ 20 C, Furmark). Is this real? The package graph is less noisy. How are you measuring this?
  • ganeshts - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    All parameters are recorded using HWiNFO. We have been using the program since 2013 for recording the sensor values in all our SFF PC reviews.
  • abqnm - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    "A new set of value-added features include the ability to configure a RAM disk in the BIOS, mount iSCSI volumes prior to boot, and set up various network interface characteristics."

    These are all actually possible in the NUC8 visual bios too, though the settings are a lot harder to find, buried in the boot tab.
  • Ratman6161 - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    This system isn't making a lot of sense to me from a price/performance standpoint. $605 for a bare bones? $940 as configured? Yikes!.

    One of the things I noticed is that there were a lot of benchmarks where the Asrock mini with the i3-8100 did pretty well against the i7 "u" cpu's. Particularly for just a standard office sort of machine, which is what I have
    in mind, the i3 performs just about as well and definitely well into the more than good enough range. Of course the i3-8100 will use more juice but its also way cheaper. I just had to satisfy my curiosity so I priced out a system. The Asrock mini with an i3-9100 (vs the 8100 in the review), 16 GB DDR4, 500 GB Samsung 970 Evo (previous gen without the + to save a few bucks) and a Noctua low profile cooler for a grand total of $465.00. I've got plenty of decommissioned 2.5 inch disk drives if I need to expand. Or if I want to cheap out completely, I could use an old 2.5 inch 850 EVO 256 GB I've got laying around which would bring the price down to $375.00.
    If I really wanted more CPU power, the mini would actually take an i7-9700K which would be +$275 from my local Microcenter and take the $465 configuration up to $740...still $200 under the NUC. Or a more reasonable for this system i5-9400 would add just +$65 to $530 total.

    So, keeping in mind that graphics don't matter for my usage and neither does the power savings of the "U" cpu's, I just can't see the reviewed system as a viable option
  • Holliday75 - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    I need 10k of them to install at buildings across the country. How soon can you build these and deliver?
  • Holliday75 - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    EDIT: Oh and I need ongoing hardware and kernel level support for the next 5 years with an option to extend that to 7 if needed. We boot a custom Linux image via PXE and this image changes on a regular basis along with our network infrastructure that serves it.
  • PeachNCream - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    I get teh point you are making, but there are also other mass-produced options other than NUC systems. Yes they are sometimes physically larger, but a SFF Dell or HP box may cost somewhat less in a bulk buy than a NUC with comparable compute power. If you need 10k fixed location systems, that would be where I would turn first rather than NUCs and certainly not use DIY builds.
  • sandtitz - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    That'll take about 3-4 months since Intel can't provide the CPUs...
  • Ratman6161 - Tuesday, March 3, 2020 - link

    "I need 10k of them to install at buildings across the country. "

    So? You have a different need than me. I just need one :). If you need them mass produced all the major manufacturers build something that's in this general size range with many different options for CPU, RAM, storage etc.

    But my main point still holds. There are options for PC's that are both cheaper and more powerful than the NUC.
  • Irata - Monday, March 2, 2020 - link

    You guys are still using Bapco benchmarks? Really?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now