Performance Metrics - I

The Intel NUC5i5RYK was evaluated using our standard test suite for low power desktops / industrial PCs. We revamped our benchmark suite early last 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 Core i5-5250U is obviously not as powerful as the Iris Pro-equipped Core i7-4770R in the BRIX Pro. However, note that the M.2 PCIe SSD and the faster DRAM (despite the lower latency) help the enthusiast configuration take a handy lead over the mainstream configuration in all the PCMark benchmarks.

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Home OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Creative OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Work OpenCL

Miscellaneous Futuremark Benchmarks

Futuremark PCMark 7 - PCMark Suite Score

PCMark 7 seems to favor the Core i7 models much more compared to the PCMark 8 benches. However, even in this suite, the enthusiast configuration performs better (similar to what we saw in the previous sub-section). The faster memory also helps the GPU post better scores under the enthusiast configuration for the 3DMark benches. Surprisingly, HD 6000 doesn't perform better than the HD 5500 in the Broadwell BRIX s when the 3DMark 2013 scores are considered. However, 3DMark 11 clearly favors the HD 6000.

Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Extreme 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

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Multiple Threads

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - OpenGL

As far as 3D rendering goes, the Broadwell-U NUC really doesn't provide any great benefits compared to the Haswell-U NUC. Faster memory helps with the multi-threaded and OpenGL-accelerated rendering a bit, but, other than that, there is really not much to talk about with this benchmark in terms of performance improvement.

Introduction and Setup Impressions Performance Metrics - II


View All Comments

  • gfieldew - Saturday, February 21, 2015 - link

    Damn, wrong post, please ignore. Reply
  • medi03 - Sunday, February 22, 2015 - link

    Lack of AMD APUs in comparison charts is somewhat suspicious, to say the least. Reply
  • mits2k - Monday, February 23, 2015 - link

    I am glad that Anandtech is evaluating 4K playback on these devices. Regular 1080p HTPCs seem to have reached a plateau in the past few years.
    I was confused by the evaluation of 4K scaled to 1080p. Are the new LAV filters that fix the scaling issues incorporated into the latest MPC-HC? Will LAV be taking advantage of the partially in-hardware 4K decoding via DXVA on Intel QuickSync soon? Does the HDMI output of this device support HDMI 2.0, enabling 4K/60p/4:4:4 color bit-depth? If not, does the DisplayPort support this bitrate? Will this device support HDCP 2.2 for protected 4K bluray output?
    I bought an ASUS chromebox ($179 version) and have been successfully using it with my 4K monitor (Monoprice model) and 4K TV (Samsung). It renders the desktop in 4K30Hz, not at 60Hz. It is too slow/there is not appropriate software in linux to handle 4K videos without occasionally dropping frames, so I was going to upgrade to the NUC to handle this.
  • rangerdavid - Monday, February 23, 2015 - link

    "The first Sandy Bridge NUC was important for two main reasons - the obvious one being the kickstarting of the UCFF craze."

    What, no nod to the Mac Mini, circa 2005? (Or even the G4 Cube if you want to geek out with me...)
  • Kidster3001 - Friday, February 27, 2015 - link

    He didn't say NUC was the first but that it kick started the current popularity of the form factor. Reply
  • Haravikk - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link

    I'm doing quite well on a small form factor system at the moment, using an i7-4790T (45W 2.7ghz quad-core, hyper-threading, 3.9ghz turbo and HD4600 graphics) in an Akasa Euler case. Only downside has been that I had to trade in the mSATA hard drive I was using for a regular 2.5" SSD, as the mSATA just got too hot in such a confined, passively cooled space. Reply
  • jasperjones - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link

    I am shocked what you guys use as a HTPC. And what good are these SSDs in a HTPC???

    I use a rooted Amazon Fire TV as my HTPC (purchased for € 49 at the introductory rate for Prime customers). Thus far, it has handled everything I've thrown at it. By the time I need H.265 and 4K, I imagine another ARM box priced below a hundred bucks will be around.

    To me, this NUC is a desktop replacement (for non-gamers) or a small-server replacement.
  • nerd1 - Sunday, March 1, 2015 - link

    I have no idea why somebody is even bothering to try AMD - they are horrible.

    I am in market for small and lightweight PCs, and have used AMD once - it ate twice the current of NUC yet twice slower. So 1/4 performance per power. Oh and it wasn't that cheaper too.
  • piasabird - Tuesday, March 3, 2015 - link

    Well I would just compare this to at least a desktop Pentium, i3,i5, i7 to see what the difference is. Is this weak slow running processor as good as say an i3 4330 that runs at 3.5 Ghz, with 4 Megs of Cache, and HD 4600 IGP? Reply
  • Ceois - Wednesday, March 4, 2015 - link

    On the first picture from the BIOS gallery it says CPU Core Temp 51C. Isn't that a little too high for it being idle? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now