Intel NUC10i7FNH Frost Canyon Review: Hexa-Core NUC Delivers a Mixed Bag
by Ganesh T S on March 2, 2020 9:00 AM ESTHTPC Credentials - Local Media Playback and Video Processing
Evaluation of local media playback and video processing is done by playing back files encompassing a range of relevant codecs, containers, resolutions, and frame rates. A note of the efficiency is also made by tracking GPU usage and power consumption of the system at the wall. Users have their own preference for the playback software / decoder / renderer, and our aim is to have numbers representative of commonly encountered scenarios. Towards this, we played back the test streams using the following combinations:
- MPC-HC x64 1.8.5 + LAV Video Decoder (DXVA2 Native) + Enhanced Video Renderer - Custom Presenter (EVR-CP)
- MPC-HC x64 1.8.5 + LAV Video Decoder (D3D11) + madVR 0.92.17 (DXVA-Focused)
- MPC-HC x64 1.8.5 + LAV Video Decoder (D3D11) + madVR 0.92.17 (Lanczos-Focused)
- VLC 3.0.8
- Kodi 18.5
The thirteen test streams (each of 90s duration) were played back from the local disk with an interval of 30 seconds in-between. Various metrics including GPU power consumption and at-wall power consumption were recorded during the course of this playback. Prior to looking at the metrics, a quick summary of the decoding capabilities of the Intel UHD Graphics is useful to have for context.
The Intel UHD Graphics GPU is no different from the GPUs in the Bean Canyon and Baby Canyon NUCs as far as video decoding capabilities are concerned. We have hardware acceleration for all common codecs including VP9 Profile 2.
All our playback tests were done with the desktop HDR setting turned on. It is possible for certain system configurations to have madVR automatically turn on/off the HDR capabilities prior to the playback of a HDR video, but, we didn't take advantage of that in our testing.
VLC and Kodi
VLC is the playback software of choice for the average PC user who doesn't need a ten-foot UI. Its install-and-play simplicity has made it extremely popular. Over the years, the software has gained the ability to take advantage of various hardware acceleration options. Kodi, on the other hand, has a ten-foot UI making it the perfect open-source software for dedicated HTPCs. Support for add-ons make it very extensible and capable of customization. We played back our test files using the default VLC and Kodi configurations, and recorded the following metrics.
| Video Playback Efficiency - VLC and Kodi | |||
VLC doesn't seem to take advantage of VP9 Profile 2 hardware acceleration, while Kodi is able to play back all streams without any hiccups.
MPC-HC
MPC-HC offers an easy way to test out different combinations of decoders and renderers. The first configuration we evaluated is the default post-install scenario, with only the in-built LAV Video Decoder forced to DXVA2 Native mode. Two additional passes were done with different madVR configurations. In the first one (DXVA-focused), we configured madVR to make use of the DXVA-accelerated video processing capabilities as much as possible. In the second (Lanczos-focused), the image scaling algorithms were set to 'Lanczos 3-tap, with anti-ringing checked'. Chroma upscaling was configured to be 'BiCubic 75 with anti-ringing checked' in both cases. The metrics collected during the playback of the test files using the above three configurations are presented below.
| Video Playback Efficiency - MPC-HC with EVR-CP and madVR | |||
LAV Filters with EVR-CP is able to play back all streams without dropped frames, but madVR is a different story. Almost all streams 1080p and higher see varying levels of significant spikes in power consumption pointing to the decode and display chain struggling to keep up with the required presentation frame rate. Given that the GPU is weaker than the one in Bean Canyon, this is not a surprise. Overall, the Frost Canyon NUC is acceptable for a vanilla decode and playback device without extensive video post-processing.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
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?