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. As expected, the quad-core A6-1450 can give a good fight to the dual-core Bay Trail-based Celeron N2807 in the ECS LIVA. However, it is no match for the quad-core Celeron J1900 at much higher clocks (but, one which also has a much higher TDP and is actively cooled).

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.

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 AMD A6-1450 APU does have accelerated AES capabilities, but the lower clock speeds tend to pull down the performance a bit. TrueCrypt, a popular open-source disk encryption program can take advantage of the AES 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 Zotac ZBOX CA320 nano 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. This benchmark appears to be heavily influenced by the clock speeds - the performance difference between the Celeron N2807 in the ECS LIVA is more pronounced compared to the other benchmarks.

Dolphin Emulator Benchmark

Performance Metrics - I Networking and Storage Performance
Comments Locked

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.
  • wintermute000 - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

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

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

    Nice
  • 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?
  • sonicmerlin - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link

    I wish someone would release a $100 Atom box that had a cable card slot.
  • 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?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now