Performance Metrics - II

In this section, we mainly look at benchmark modes in programs used on a day-to-day basis, i.e, application performance and not synthetic workloads.

x264 Benchmark

First off, we have some video encoding benchmarks courtesy of x264 HD Benchmark v5.0. This is simply a test of CPU performance. The Core m3-6Y30 in the Compute Stick form factor is given a bit of a challenge by the Core i5-4210Y in the Zotac ZBOX CI540 nano, a NUC-form factor machine.

Video Encoding - x264 5.0 - Pass 1

Video Encoding - x264 5.0 - Pass 2

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 MIPS ratings when utilizing all the available threads.

In these multi-threaded benchmarks, the quad-core processors (4C/4T) are able to score better than the 2C/4T configuration of the Core m3-6Y30.

7-Zip LZMA Compression Benchmark

7-Zip LZMA Decompression Benchmark

TrueCrypt

As businesses (and even home consumers) become more security conscious, the importance of encryption can't be overstated. The Core m3-6Y30 supports the AES-NI instruction for accelerating the encryption and decryption processes. TrueCrypt, a popular open-source disk encryption program can take advantage of the AES-NI capabilities. The TrueCrypt internal benchmark provides some interesting cryptography-related numbers to ponder. In the graph below, we can get an idea of how fast a TrueCrypt volume would behave in the Intel Core m3-6Y30 Compute Stick and how it would compare with other select PCs. This is a purely CPU feature / clock speed based test.

TrueCrypt 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). The benchmark takes around 50 photographs and does four stages of computation:

  • Stage 1: Align Photographs
  • 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, others multithreaded, and some use GPUs, it is interesting to record the effects of CPU generations, speeds, number of cores, DRAM parameters and the GPU using this software.

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 1

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 2

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 3

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 4

Dolphin Emulator

Wrapping up our application benchmark numbers is the Dolphin Emulator benchmark mode results. This is again a test of the CPU capabilities, and the pure single-threaed performance advantage of the Core m3-6Y30 is evident here.

Dolphin Emulator Benchmark

Performance Metrics - I Networking and Storage Performance
POST A COMMENT

104 Comments

View All Comments

  • pencea - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    A month has passed and yet still not a single review of the GTX 1080. Reply
  • testbug00 - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    And good thing this reviewer was their review for videocards so it slowed down the review! Wait, what?!? They have multiple reviewers and one review happening from 1 reviewer isn't related to how long another is taking?!?! Reply
  • RaichuPls - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    Except it doesn't matter which review the comment was posted on, the GTX 1080 review is still 1 month late. The Pascal cards were hyped up as hell, but Anandtech has failed to deliver. Reply
  • ddriver - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    I guess they are too busy reviewing useless overpriced garbage ;) Reply
  • fanofanand - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    Who can review devices consumers are interested in when there are shiny Apple toys to play with? How many months did they spend on the iGarbage Pro review? Reply
  • RaichuPls - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    I mean it's taking them over 3 months just to write up HALF of the Galaxy S7 review due to "OH I'M HAVING FINALS" but cmon, finals last for like 1 month max... Reply
  • JoshHo - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    The Galaxy S7 part 2 review is effectively a rewrite of part 1 and an extension, so it is quite a bit more than just half of a review.

    "Finals" is probably not a full explanation of the situation but I'll avoid discussing these issues until I'm finished with at least one review.
    Reply
  • 3ogdy - Monday, June 27, 2016 - link

    You are totally right about that. CrApple shitviews shouldn't even exist on this website. It used to be a quality reviews site, but it's been falling for some time now, especially since Anand left for....you guessed it, CrApple. Reply
  • michael2k - Tuesday, June 28, 2016 - link

    The website would probably fold without Apple articles. Reply
  • Venya - Tuesday, June 28, 2016 - link

    Useless overpriced garbage - you mean GTX 1080? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now