Would love to see an Intel T-series (35W) processor SFF/UCFF in the comparison mix, such as the Lenovo ThinkStation P3 Tiny or its predecessor, the P360 Tiny.
The Intel version is roughly $200-300 more than a 7735U which is roughly equal in performance. I got tired of all the Intel microcode patches and went AMD. On top of that Intel has the ME which is not really needed for the single user and is another security hole.
It's good to see they took Thunderbolt into consideration here. That's a real oversight to this day on professional and enterprise products that annoys the crap out of me, ie, the Probook 450 G9 and 650 G9 are identical down to the case and internals except for one IC (Burnside) that adds TB4. PCIe 4.0 storage is nerfed in firmware on the 450 (limited to 3.0) but easily reactivated with a hex editor.
The 650 model sells at a $300 MSRP markup over the nerfed 450. It's ridiculous.
That said, if this thing has full TB4, it's strange they are using so much real estate for display ports when they could put 2x TB4 Type-C ports in their place offering substantially more capability. Throw in a $5 dongle for DP.
$8 on Amazon, $10 for Lenovo branded one, and those are retail price. An OEM buying thousands in bulk will get them for a few bucks a pop. Not to mention the ports are cheaper and simpler to implement on a PCB over the higher pin count (and license requirements) or HDMI. The whole thing stinks like yesterdays diapers.
I do have a Phoenix-based GTR7 from Beelink here in my testbed, but driver issues are preventing it from completing our benchmark suite. I am waiting for a new driver release from AMD.
I don't think destruction is quite the right to articulate your apparent thoughts. Perhaps "result in higher scores on benchmarks" or maybe "complete compute workloads sooner" would fit better in this case. Computer nerds appear to be rather detached from reality when expressing thoughts which gives all of them a bad reputation among the better positioned and more intelligent normal population.
That was my gripe. Replace the HDMI and DP ports with two TB4-compliant USB-C ports on the rear would be the minimum modification for such an 'industrial' appliance. Seriously, why do you have to plug something into the front to use Thunderbolt?
Probably because nobody uses or cares about Thunderbolt. Sure it has that usual small, insane rabid fanbase that any obscure computer standard had in the past, but outside of the inevitable idiots that inflate its utility, no one cares and no one profits from it.
Yes, using TB to its full potential is somewhat expensive but given a choice, I'll always opt for the TB variant over pure USB, if only for 10Gbit Ethernet.
Front vs. back: I guess they have done their studies on how people use TB and unfortunately habits vary between people.
Most of my dual TB systems have one TB in the front, the other in the back and that works pretty well for me. The 10GBase-T NIC goes into the back port and the front port is open to anything transient, which could be just some USB media (these native SATA 10Gbit USB sticks are hard to beat via anything native TB), a temporary display (Alt-DP handy there) and in theory to things like TB networking, which is typically transient.
The older systems just have a single TB and expect a hub connected on the back, which seems sensible.
Two in the front and two in the back would be better still, even if you couldn't use all four at full speed for lack of PCIe lanes or a cheap enough switch.
Yet again, when your NUC is stuck to the back of a display, who cares what's front or back, because it's all behind the screen anyway and it's only people like me, wo use clusters of these NUCs as µ-servers in a "tiny-rack" who get bothered by the orientation of those ports.
Changing port orientation in a NUC means a mainboard redesign and few would want to pay for that. So I guess their asked their volume customers and this is what those came up with.
What irritates me immensely is that AMD NUCs only ever become available with the previous generation APUs (or older yet).
With Intel NUCs actually tended to lead with the latest generation chips, sometimes even giving you variants that were hard or impossible to get even as a notebook.
Plenty of people will be quite happy with Cezanne, and that's great as an economical industrial option. But for a bit of extra money, I'd like to be able to get a Zen 4 NUC today, not when Zen 5 is coming out.
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
21 Comments
Back to Article
Grapple - Tuesday, July 18, 2023 - link
Would love to see an Intel T-series (35W) processor SFF/UCFF in the comparison mix, such as the Lenovo ThinkStation P3 Tiny or its predecessor, the P360 Tiny.meacupla - Tuesday, July 18, 2023 - link
It seems like it is only worth it, if it cost less than a 7735U or 7740Unandnandnand - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
You mean 7840U. There is no 7740U.meacupla - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
yeah, that one. I hate AMD's naming scheme. It's so confusing.fallaha56 - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
Yes but the Zen4 7840U will destroy the Intel chipOdd not to see one of the many models of equivalent AMD NUC here…
[email protected] - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
The Intel version is roughly $200-300 more than a 7735U which is roughly equal in performance.I got tired of all the Intel microcode patches and went AMD. On top of that Intel has the ME which is not really needed for the single user and is another security hole.
Samus - Tuesday, July 18, 2023 - link
It's good to see they took Thunderbolt into consideration here. That's a real oversight to this day on professional and enterprise products that annoys the crap out of me, ie, the Probook 450 G9 and 650 G9 are identical down to the case and internals except for one IC (Burnside) that adds TB4. PCIe 4.0 storage is nerfed in firmware on the 450 (limited to 3.0) but easily reactivated with a hex editor.The 650 model sells at a $300 MSRP markup over the nerfed 450. It's ridiculous.
That said, if this thing has full TB4, it's strange they are using so much real estate for display ports when they could put 2x TB4 Type-C ports in their place offering substantially more capability. Throw in a $5 dongle for DP.
meacupla - Tuesday, July 18, 2023 - link
USB-C to Displayport adapters are usually $15~20Samus - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
$8 on Amazon, $10 for Lenovo branded one, and those are retail price. An OEM buying thousands in bulk will get them for a few bucks a pop. Not to mention the ports are cheaper and simpler to implement on a PCB over the higher pin count (and license requirements) or HDMI. The whole thing stinks like yesterdays diapers.fallaha56 - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
Come on guysAny Zen4 7840U NUC will destroy the ‘cutting edge’ Intel chip here
Let’s see one of the many models of equivalent AMD NUC reviewed…
ganeshts - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
Any links to such a 'NUC' ?I do have a Phoenix-based GTR7 from Beelink here in my testbed, but driver issues are preventing it from completing our benchmark suite. I am waiting for a new driver release from AMD.
lemurbutton - Friday, July 21, 2023 - link
And any M2 Mac Mini would destroy any Zen4 NUC.TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 24, 2023 - link
Until you have to run something not in the MAC ecosystem. OOPS!PeachNCream - Friday, July 21, 2023 - link
I don't think destruction is quite the right to articulate your apparent thoughts. Perhaps "result in higher scores on benchmarks" or maybe "complete compute workloads sooner" would fit better in this case. Computer nerds appear to be rather detached from reality when expressing thoughts which gives all of them a bad reputation among the better positioned and more intelligent normal population.Samus - Saturday, July 22, 2023 - link
The problem with AMD enterprise and industrial products has always been management adoption. Intel has IT depts hooked on vPro, iME, AMT, etc.nicolaim - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
It's 2023. Only two USB-C ports, none on the back.Samus - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
That was my gripe. Replace the HDMI and DP ports with two TB4-compliant USB-C ports on the rear would be the minimum modification for such an 'industrial' appliance. Seriously, why do you have to plug something into the front to use Thunderbolt?PeachNCream - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
Probably because nobody uses or cares about Thunderbolt. Sure it has that usual small, insane rabid fanbase that any obscure computer standard had in the past, but outside of the inevitable idiots that inflate its utility, no one cares and no one profits from it.abufrejoval - Monday, July 24, 2023 - link
That's a bit harsh.Yes, using TB to its full potential is somewhat expensive but given a choice, I'll always opt for the TB variant over pure USB, if only for 10Gbit Ethernet.
Front vs. back: I guess they have done their studies on how people use TB and unfortunately habits vary between people.
Most of my dual TB systems have one TB in the front, the other in the back and that works pretty well for me. The 10GBase-T NIC goes into the back port and the front port is open to anything transient, which could be just some USB media (these native SATA 10Gbit USB sticks are hard to beat via anything native TB), a temporary display (Alt-DP handy there) and in theory to things like TB networking, which is typically transient.
The older systems just have a single TB and expect a hub connected on the back, which seems sensible.
Two in the front and two in the back would be better still, even if you couldn't use all four at full speed for lack of PCIe lanes or a cheap enough switch.
Yet again, when your NUC is stuck to the back of a display, who cares what's front or back, because it's all behind the screen anyway and it's only people like me, wo use clusters of these NUCs as µ-servers in a "tiny-rack" who get bothered by the orientation of those ports.
Changing port orientation in a NUC means a mainboard redesign and few would want to pay for that. So I guess their asked their volume customers and this is what those came up with.
Very few vendors want to aggravate the customers.
[email protected] - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
Performance comparison says it all. 1360P DOA. 7735U $100-200 cheaper for ASROCK. Even cheaper if you look at other companies.abufrejoval - Monday, July 24, 2023 - link
What irritates me immensely is that AMD NUCs only ever become available with the previous generation APUs (or older yet).With Intel NUCs actually tended to lead with the latest generation chips, sometimes even giving you variants that were hard or impossible to get even as a notebook.
Plenty of people will be quite happy with Cezanne, and that's great as an economical industrial option. But for a bit of extra money, I'd like to be able to get a Zen 4 NUC today, not when Zen 5 is coming out.