"Outright performance" is likely to lag behind Core2 Q6600 ...
But yeah, between move from 65 nm process to 45 nm, 32 nm, 22 nm + implementation of FinFETs and finally 14 nm, Appolo Lake does consume less power - for inferior performance.
This is a stupid comment. The goal of these tiny machines is efficiency, not performance.
What are you comparing this to, a Core 2 Quad? The Q6600 was a quad-core, 2.4GHZ, *105W* part. This is a quad-core, 2.3GHz, *10W* part. And that 10W power envelope includes integrated graphics capable of decoding HEVC content.
You're talking about a >90% power reduction over a decade for the same performance. Actually, better performance in many respects, try watching HEVC content on a Core 2 and see how that goes. That is, if you don't mind the leaf blower sound your computer makes while watching movies, to cool both the ridiculously hot CPU and the inevitable discrete GPU you'll need once you figure out your CPU is just too old to handle HEVC...
Netflix is offering 4K streaming on Windows now, using HEVC. It only works with Intel Gen9 graphics for now, meaning Kaby Lake--or these Apollo Lake boxes.
Sorry for the dumb question, but does the model that comes with the eMMC use up the 2.5"/9.5mm bay? Or does the eMMC fit somewhere else and leave you a storage bay for expansion?
Yeah, 8GB is generally more than acceptable for a machine of this power. Besides, isn't even DDR4, which has a lot more headroom for density on SODIMMs.
Intel's NUCs are among the few systems that give their budget CPUs a fair shake. Lots of other OEMs have only outfitted such processors with a single memory channel despite processors in this price bracket having supported dual channel for a while now.
The complete system doesn't make a lot of sense though. You're paying an extra ~$75 for 2GB of memory and 32GB of storage. Neither is sufficient even for light use and wasn't even when budget 32GB-equipped systems first hit retail channels. Here we are practically drowning in cheap solid state storage and the bottom end is still shipping with those same specs. It makes a lot more sense to pick up the barebones model and outfit it accordingly.
I think the integrated one will be the more popular. It has Windows installed, and an SSD which doesn't take up any slot. You can get an SSD+HDD combination very easily which is perfect for HTPC.
On the other model I don't think you can take out the M.2 WiFi card and replace it with an SSD going by prevoius low-end NUCs; I could be wrong though.
The fully-equipped model will probably sell better than the barebones one. That doesn't really make it a better deal though. After having a laptop with 32GB of storage, I can safely say that even with no applications installed aside from what it shipped with from the factory, the computer began to complain about being short of space within a couple of weeks. I ended up disabling hibernation and virtual memory to clear up enough storage for updates to run correctly. Killing off virtual memory had adverse impacts when running programs inside of 2GB of RAM since the graphics adapter insisted on reserving about a third of that memory for its usage. It was a pretty abysmal computing experience. Mind you that was on Windows 8.1. 10 might be a bit better about working in a storage-limited situation like that, but I wouldn't want less than 64GB on a Windows machine and 4GB of RAM would be preferred. In my case, that'd mean spending on upgrades right away so it makes more sense to get a barebones NUC.
Hopefully they don't charge an arm and a leg for what is essentially a celeron barebones kit, with no keyboard, mouse, monitor, etc. I often see Dell selling full PCs with accessories for under $400, so these need to be priced adequately.
Datasheet seems to confirm that the two dots on the front (also on the images of the Kaby Lake NUC) are mics; cool. Also wild that consumer Atom boxes take up to 8 GB RAM now, though that's gotta be an unusual way to configure it.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
Back to Article
damianrobertjones - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Dear Intel,Please, please, PLEASE... make sure that they actually work instead of making people wait months.
Samus - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Hah, yeah I returned my old NUC when it wouldn't work with my PCIe SSD and got an Gigabyte BRIX. Great machine.nathanddrews - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Unless I'm reading this wrong, the MegaChips HDMI 2.0 LSPCON also supports HDCP 2.2:https://media.digikey.com/pdf/Data%20Sheets/MegaCh...
Shadowmaster625 - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
OMG I cant wait to get my hands on the latest and greatest 2007 cpu performance. I want to celebrate the 10 year anniversary of cpu nowhereness.Wilco1 - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
What is really mind boggling is that it's just as fast as an old phone like the Galaxy S6...negusp - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
/sscottjames_12 - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Outright performance might not be that impressive, but performance per watt has certainly improved since 2007.Arnulf - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
"Outright performance" is likely to lag behind Core2 Q6600 ...But yeah, between move from 65 nm process to 45 nm, 32 nm, 22 nm + implementation of FinFETs and finally 14 nm, Appolo Lake does consume less power - for inferior performance.
Meteor2 - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
A Q6600 is no slouch. Really, how much computing power do you need in a box this small and discrete?beginner99 - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
Yeah you gotta be wondering when the main selling point of an intel CPU is the iGPU (VP9 and HEVC decode).CSMR - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
Actually even good 2013 CPUs struggle with HEVC decoding.shelbystripes - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
This is a stupid comment. The goal of these tiny machines is efficiency, not performance.What are you comparing this to, a Core 2 Quad? The Q6600 was a quad-core, 2.4GHZ, *105W* part. This is a quad-core, 2.3GHz, *10W* part. And that 10W power envelope includes integrated graphics capable of decoding HEVC content.
You're talking about a >90% power reduction over a decade for the same performance. Actually, better performance in many respects, try watching HEVC content on a Core 2 and see how that goes. That is, if you don't mind the leaf blower sound your computer makes while watching movies, to cool both the ridiculously hot CPU and the inevitable discrete GPU you'll need once you figure out your CPU is just too old to handle HEVC...
Michael Bay - Thursday, December 15, 2016 - link
Proper HEVC adoption is still way in the future. Power consumption argument is good.shelbystripes - Thursday, December 15, 2016 - link
Netflix is offering 4K streaming on Windows now, using HEVC. It only works with Intel Gen9 graphics for now, meaning Kaby Lake--or these Apollo Lake boxes.sfwineguy - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Sorry for the dumb question, but does the model that comes with the eMMC use up the 2.5"/9.5mm bay? Or does the eMMC fit somewhere else and leave you a storage bay for expansion?scottjames_12 - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
I'm 99% sure the eMMC is soldered to the mainboard, so you should have the drive bay available for expansion.spikebike - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
What a shame to limit such a nice unit to 8GB ram max.yuhong - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
And you still can only use 4Gbit DDR3 based modules.scottjames_12 - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
I'm curious, what use case do you have that would use more than 8GB of RAM?Samus - Monday, December 12, 2016 - link
Yeah, 8GB is generally more than acceptable for a machine of this power. Besides, isn't even DDR4, which has a lot more headroom for density on SODIMMs.zepi - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
10W TDP? Atom TDP's have just skyrocketed since the first versions. I want a passively cooled machine thank you.negusp - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
That's a Celeron CPU, not an Atom, though of the same architecture.And they're much, much faster than Atom's of yore.
Wilco1 - Saturday, December 17, 2016 - link
But still can't beat your mobile phone performance...BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
Intel's NUCs are among the few systems that give their budget CPUs a fair shake. Lots of other OEMs have only outfitted such processors with a single memory channel despite processors in this price bracket having supported dual channel for a while now.The complete system doesn't make a lot of sense though. You're paying an extra ~$75 for 2GB of memory and 32GB of storage. Neither is sufficient even for light use and wasn't even when budget 32GB-equipped systems first hit retail channels. Here we are practically drowning in cheap solid state storage and the bottom end is still shipping with those same specs. It makes a lot more sense to pick up the barebones model and outfit it accordingly.
CSMR - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
I think the integrated one will be the more popular. It has Windows installed, and an SSD which doesn't take up any slot. You can get an SSD+HDD combination very easily which is perfect for HTPC.On the other model I don't think you can take out the M.2 WiFi card and replace it with an SSD going by prevoius low-end NUCs; I could be wrong though.
BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
The fully-equipped model will probably sell better than the barebones one. That doesn't really make it a better deal though. After having a laptop with 32GB of storage, I can safely say that even with no applications installed aside from what it shipped with from the factory, the computer began to complain about being short of space within a couple of weeks. I ended up disabling hibernation and virtual memory to clear up enough storage for updates to run correctly. Killing off virtual memory had adverse impacts when running programs inside of 2GB of RAM since the graphics adapter insisted on reserving about a third of that memory for its usage. It was a pretty abysmal computing experience. Mind you that was on Windows 8.1. 10 might be a bit better about working in a storage-limited situation like that, but I wouldn't want less than 64GB on a Windows machine and 4GB of RAM would be preferred. In my case, that'd mean spending on upgrades right away so it makes more sense to get a barebones NUC.JoeyJoJo123 - Tuesday, December 13, 2016 - link
Hopefully they don't charge an arm and a leg for what is essentially a celeron barebones kit, with no keyboard, mouse, monitor, etc. I often see Dell selling full PCs with accessories for under $400, so these need to be priced adequately.twotwotwo - Wednesday, December 21, 2016 - link
Datasheet seems to confirm that the two dots on the front (also on the images of the Kaby Lake NUC) are mics; cool. Also wild that consumer Atom boxes take up to 8 GB RAM now, though that's gotta be an unusual way to configure it.