Updated: AOpen MiniPC – Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery
by Jarred Walton on March 3, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
System Benchmarks
We'll start with the most likely usage scenario, general office and system performance. PCMark 04 and 05 were run along with Winstones 2004. Note that both PCMark versions run some 2D and 3D tests, so the IGP will factor into those scores. The AOpen MZ855 could only complete PCMark04 due to the Intel Extreme 2 integrated graphics.
This is basically what we've come to expect from Pentium M systems. It comes out the slowest of all the tested systems, but even dual core Pentium D systems aren't much faster in business tasks. The fact is that the MiniPC does fine in office tasks - it's up to 35% slower than the A64 4000+, but you'll seldom notice. However, the MiniPC struggles a bit in multimedia tasks and is almost half as fast as the 4000+; in many multimedia tasks you will notice the difference. It's doubtful that anyone would really buy this box with the intention of doing lots of video editing, but it can still best most three-year-old PCs in just about every office-related task. The 2.5" 5400 RPM hard drive also has an impact on overall performance, but it's really not too bad compared to the old 4200 RPM drives from a couple years ago.
The Futuremark products show a bit larger spread, and 3DMark scores are almost superfluous for the test systems. Real games might be able to run on some of the IGP solutions out there, but the demanding titles will often struggle to get playable frame rates even at 640x480 with minimal detail settings. Half-Life (the original) did run quite well on all of the systems at 800x600 and even 1024x768 in some cases, but that's about as far as you'd want to go.
Notice also how much of an impact the 6600 GPU has on the Sempron system: we would rate the 3100+ as being slightly slower than the PM 740 overall, and definitely slower than any of the other tested CPUs in overall performance. However, the fastest systems that we tested with the best IGP solutions currently available are still completely dominated by one of the slowest shipping processors around, once you add in a moderate GPU. Does this mean that the MiniPC (or any of the other systems) aren't worth having? Of course not, provided that 3D/gaming isn't a requirement.
We'll start with the most likely usage scenario, general office and system performance. PCMark 04 and 05 were run along with Winstones 2004. Note that both PCMark versions run some 2D and 3D tests, so the IGP will factor into those scores. The AOpen MZ855 could only complete PCMark04 due to the Intel Extreme 2 integrated graphics.
This is basically what we've come to expect from Pentium M systems. It comes out the slowest of all the tested systems, but even dual core Pentium D systems aren't much faster in business tasks. The fact is that the MiniPC does fine in office tasks - it's up to 35% slower than the A64 4000+, but you'll seldom notice. However, the MiniPC struggles a bit in multimedia tasks and is almost half as fast as the 4000+; in many multimedia tasks you will notice the difference. It's doubtful that anyone would really buy this box with the intention of doing lots of video editing, but it can still best most three-year-old PCs in just about every office-related task. The 2.5" 5400 RPM hard drive also has an impact on overall performance, but it's really not too bad compared to the old 4200 RPM drives from a couple years ago.
The Futuremark products show a bit larger spread, and 3DMark scores are almost superfluous for the test systems. Real games might be able to run on some of the IGP solutions out there, but the demanding titles will often struggle to get playable frame rates even at 640x480 with minimal detail settings. Half-Life (the original) did run quite well on all of the systems at 800x600 and even 1024x768 in some cases, but that's about as far as you'd want to go.
Notice also how much of an impact the 6600 GPU has on the Sempron system: we would rate the 3100+ as being slightly slower than the PM 740 overall, and definitely slower than any of the other tested CPUs in overall performance. However, the fastest systems that we tested with the best IGP solutions currently available are still completely dominated by one of the slowest shipping processors around, once you add in a moderate GPU. Does this mean that the MiniPC (or any of the other systems) aren't worth having? Of course not, provided that 3D/gaming isn't a requirement.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
54 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
"...*original* Mac Mini...."The Core Duo version was officially launched this past week.
mlittl3 - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Jarred,Since the article was posted today, I don't think anyone is going to care about the original Mac Mini. The computer industry moves and it moves fast. If Aopen's mini is better than what Apple put out in the past, then Apple has solved that problem with the new Mac Mini. That is the important issue today.
JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
I Aopen had sent this to me in the past week, I wouldn't have bothered with the review. I've been putting this unit through it's paces for a lot more than a week, so the launch of the new Mac Mini is a non-factor. I mentioned it, I suggested it's a better choice right now (at least, I feel I did), and I really wouldn't recommend this model to anyone unless it were to sell for $650 or less. (Core Solo is for all intents and purposes equal to Dothan, so if it matches the Core Solo priced Mac Mini it would be fine.)JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
First word: "I" should be "If..."Update #2: I'm betting not many people bothered reading the whole article, so they missed the comments on page 10 implying that the new Mac Minis are clearly faster. ("...with the recent launch of the Intel-based Mac Minis, that advantage is going to be short-lived.") I've updated the conclusion to make more specific mention of the Core Duo Mac Mini priced at $800.
Sunbird - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Looks like they followed my http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=937">advice on the styling (I can dream cant I?) and its not silver and blue.I like it.
Sunbird - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
A question though:Is all the hardware OSx86 compatible?
Then you could enjoy the best of both worlds on one little box...
plinden - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
I'm afraid I'm going to have to sound like an Apple fanboi now, but AOpen are still playing catchup with Apple:So to compare the specs:
Processor: Intel socket 479 (Celeron M to Pentium M 740) - Intel Core Solo/Duo
RAM: 1 X DDR2 SO-DIMM (Maximum 1GB of RAM) - 2 GB RAM Max
Hard Drive: 2.5" PATA Notebook HDD - Same HD
Graphics: 915GM (Intel GMA900) - Intel GMA950
Optical Drive: Slim CD/DVD slot load - same or similar, i.e. combo or superdrive
Expansion Slots: 1 X Mini-PCI (for WiFi) - no expansion slot but WIFI and bluetooth included by default
Audio: Realtek ALC655 AC'97 2CH (Speaker/Headphones + Microphone) - S/PDIF output
Power Suply: 65W (19V, 3.5A) External Adapter - 85W power supply
Internal connections from motherboard to HDD and ODD
Front Ports: None. Power Button, HDD Activity LED, ODD Eject Button - same
Rear Ports: 2 X USB2.0 - 4xUSB2.0
2 X 3.5mm Audio (speakers and microphone)
LAN (GbE) - same
1 X DVI-D and 1 X TV-Out (S-VIDEO, Composite, Component) - 1xDVI, no TV out
1 X Optional WiFi Antenna wireless G included
All for $599 - $799 (for 512MB RAM).
Despite the moaning over on Mac forums, this is still a much better deal than the MiniPC.
mlittl3 - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
The hard drive in the Mac Mini is SATA not PATA.JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Which is basically what I say in the conclusion. This MP915 has been done for about three months now, and available on the market for just over a month (and a bit longer in Europe/Asia). MP945 will go up against the new Mac Mini, but the real question is whether or not it can come close to matching Apple's price. I'd like $850 with Core Duo 1.86 GHz (or higher), XP Home, 60+ GB HDD, DVD+RW, and 1GB RAM standard. I've said as much to AOpen, so we'll see if they can do that or not.JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Ack!Bold off Let's see if that works.... :p