Performance Metrics - I

The Zotac ZBOX CA320 nano was evaluated using our standard test suite for low power desktops / industrial PCs. We revamped our benchmark suite earlier this year after the publication of the Intel D54250WYK NUC review. We reran some of the new benchmarks on the older PCs also, but some of them couldn't be run on loaner samples. Therefore, the list of PCs in each graph might not be the same.

Futuremark PCMark 8

PCMark 8 provides various usage scenarios (home, creative and work) and offers ways to benchmark both baseline (CPU-only) as well as OpenCL accelerated (CPU + GPU) performance. We benchmarked select PCs for the OpenCL accelerated performance in all three usage scenarios. These scores are heavily influenced by the CPU in the system. The main system for comparison is the ECS LIVA, a fanless Bay Trail PC (that is alot cheaper, but comes with soldered DRAM and eMMC intead of a SO-DIMM slot and ability to take a 2.5" drive). Interesting, the AMD A6-1450 compares quite favourably with the Bay Trail Celeron J1900-based GIGABYTE BXBT-1900, even though the latter is actively cooled. Other than that, there is no surprise in these graphs - particularly, the performance lag when compared to a Haswell-Y CPU with similar TDP levels in the ZBOX CI540 nano.

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Home OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Creative OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Work OpenCL

Miscellaneous Futuremark Benchmarks

Futuremark PCMark 7 - PCMark Suite Score

Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Extreme Score

One of the interesting aspects of the 3DMark 11 benchmarks was that we were unable to get Bay Trail-based units to complete any run other than the Entry-level workload. The Temash-based ZBOX CA320 nano had no trouble processing both the Entry and Extreme workloads. Both graphs are presented here. Temash's HD 8250 seems to be no match for the IGP in the Haswell Core i5-4210Y, but it handily surpasses the IGP in the Bay Trail SoCs. The latter aspect is the important point - Temash-based units are competing at the same price points as the Bay Trail-based ones.

Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Entry Score

Futuremark 3DMark 2013 - Ice Storm Score

Futuremark 3DMark 2013 - Cloud Gate Score

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

We have moved on from R11.5 to R15 for 3D rendering evaluation. CINEBENCH R15 provides three benchmark modes - OpenGL, single threaded and multi-threaded. Evaluation of select PCs in all three modes provided us the following results.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Single Thread

Single-threaded performance for Temash seems to be quite a bit worse compared to even the Bay Trail-based Celeron N2807 in the ECS LIVA. However, multi-threaded performance is better for the Cinebench workload, thanks mainly to the presence of double the number of cores / threads (4 vs. 2) in the A6-1450. The GPU capabilities as exposed by the OpenGL run (and also seen in the 3DMark benches) is also better for Temash compared to Bay Trail.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Multiple Threads

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - OpenGL

Introduction and Setup Impressions Performance Metrics - II
POST A COMMENT

31 Comments

View All Comments

  • Mumrik - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    So what is the argument against building a NAS based on something like this instead of playing for a 4-bay QNAP/Synology product?

    It doesn't really seem more expensive, and the power efficiency looks decent.
    Reply
  • wintermute000 - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    how? you mean with USB (ugh)? Reply
  • Teknobug - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    Now why would I pick this over the other faness Zotac with i5 4210Y? Reply
  • CharonPDX - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    Because the Zotac costs twice as much?

    If this meets your needs, then this wins, hands down, purely on price. Obviously, there are many use cases where this fails miserably, and the more expensive Zotac becomes the better option.
    Reply
  • tential - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    The J1900 Zotac box seems to be a better fit. The review of it prices it close to this except they used a pricier SSD I believe. The box was priced at $170 and you can get RAM/SSD for $100 to match the price of this. And that Zotac box has better performance HTPC wise. Reply
  • duploxxx - Thursday, November 27, 2014 - link

    that J1900 zotax box fails at almost exactly the same HTPC levels. no 4K or 1080.60. SO turn the Q around, why would you always select the intel over the AMD knowing that in the end you screw yourself if there is no more competition.

    don't understand why today they bring a temash based solution.
    Reply
  • ultimatexbmc.com - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    Nice Reply
  • yannigr2 - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    Temash..... Temash? I have been waiting to see an AMD box like this and it comes with Temash? It's almost 2015. Where is Mullins? Reply
  • sonicmerlin - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    I wish someone would release a $100 Atom box that had a cable card slot. Reply
  • kgh00007 - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    Nice! Any chance you could get the CI320 with Windows 8.1 Bing?

    And will you be getting the Alienware Alpha in for review?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now