GIGABYTE GB-BXi7H-5500 Broadwell BRIX Review
by Ganesh T S on January 29, 2015 7:00 AM ESTFinal Words
The GIGABYTE GB-BXi7H-5500 provided us with the opportunity to take a look at what Broadwell-U can deliver. The migration from 22nm to 14nm has allowed for higher base clocks while maintaining the same power envelop. The performance delta over the Haswell-U-based GB-BXi7-4500 (particularly, on the graphics side) is notable. That said, while migrating from Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge is a no-brainer, there is not enough on offer to recommend migrating from a Haswell-based mini-PC.
From the perspective of the BRIX itself, the GB-BXi7H-5500 has two major downsides, and both of them are related to the networking subsystem. Considering that the i7 SKU is the 'premium' SKU in this lineup, use of a 1x1 802.11ac (Intel AC3160) card is disappointing. It would have been nice to have the AC7260 or AC7265. The Broadcom BCM4352 is even more preferable. In addition, GIGABYTE should have opted for an Intel LAN chipset instead of a Realtek one for this high-end configuration.
One of the interesting differentiating features is the availability of NFC. Along with the unit, GIGABYTE also supplied a NFC tag. The accompanying driver DVD has a NFC app (Windows program) which allows creation of profiles to link with the tag. These profiles could be associated with web addresses or files / programs in the system. Tapping the tag against the unit's lid activates the profile. Right now, this is a basic application. GIGABYTE indicated that they are working on bringing more functionality to the app and making it easier to use.
The pricing of the Core i7-5500U makes it attractive for high-end ultrabooks, but the BXi7H-5500 manages to get it to the consumer in a UCFF PC at a reasonable price ($509, when Intel apparently sells the CPU alone for $393). All in all, GIGABYTE has managed to deliver the right balance of price, power, size and thermal / acoustic design in the GB-BXi7H-5500. It remains to be seen what Intel is able to offer with the NUC lineup and how the NUCs will complement and/or compete against the Broadwell BRIX units.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
toshz - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
Does anyone know what's the difference between the AC7260 and AC7265 wireless adapters?I was looking into purchasing the AC7260 to update my ultrabook (currently using AC3160) and then I saw the AC7265. Couldn't find any difference between them on Intel's site.
Thanks.
kevith - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
Nice review, but why have you stopped opening the cases? I would be interested in one of these, but changing/adding cooling is a must.jrs77 - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
Allthough I very much like the idea of the smallest PC possible, the NUC or the BRIX (or anything else in this formfactor) is still too expensive compared to a more powerful and better customizable mITX-system.I can build a low-powered mITX-system for $600 (i5-4590T, H97 board, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 20x20x8cm case incl 90W PSU), which leaves me with money for the Win8.1 license (the one you didn't include in your price there!). Such a system, has much more value and can be strapped to the back of your screen not using anymore space than the NUC or BRIX.
zodiacfml - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
I agree. That's what I thought of this review. The processor is just too pricey.Someone could buy a notebook with an i5-Haswell with a AMD/Nvidia GPU near that price.
piasabird - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
If most of what you plan on doing viewing video an i3 with 4 megs of cache will work just fine.deathwombat - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
Does the top of the box actually say "Supports 2.5" Hard Drivers"? At least have someone proofread your packaging!eanazag - Friday, January 30, 2015 - link
I agree on the networking. 2x2 Wifi would be better and Intel NIC. I dislike the Realtek NICs. With an Intel NIC there are more options from the software side, like a tiny VM server.vision33r - Saturday, January 31, 2015 - link
Intel has no pressure to improve performance.Mikad - Tuesday, February 3, 2015 - link
This is just a small thing, but it has bothered me much lately: Many of the new articles have a quite bad "featured image". For example this one: Just a picture of the box with a bad lightning. The product itself is interesting but the picture is a turn off. IMHO it would be great if you could put more effort into these pictures.Teknobug - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
Looks like gaming is out of the question, at least at 1920x1080. May as well go with an i3 or N2940 and play via Steam stream from a gaming PC.Otherwise everything else about this is awesome.