UL Benchmarks - PCMark and 3DMark

This section deals with a selection of the UL Futuremark benchmarks - PCMark 10, PCMark 8, and 3DMark. While the first two evaluate the system as a whole, 3DMark focuses on the graphics capabilities.

PCMark 10

UL's PCMark 10 evaluates computing systems for various usage scenarios (generic / essential tasks such as web browsing and starting up applications, productivity tasks such as editing spreadsheets and documents, gaming, and digital content creation). We benchmarked select PCs with the PCMark 10 Extended profile and recorded the scores for various scenarios. These scores are heavily influenced by the CPU and GPU in the system, though the RAM and storage device also play a part. The power plan was set to Balanced for all the PCs while processing the PCMark 10 benchmark.

Futuremark PCMark 10 - Essentials

Futuremark PCMark 10 - Productivity

Futuremark PCMark 10 - Gaming

Futuremark PCMark 10 - Digital Content Creation

Futuremark PCMark 10 - Extended

The performance of the DH370 is not as good as what one might expect from a system equipped with a Core i7-8700. In fact, we see it barely surpassing the DeskMini 310 equipped with a Core i3-8100. Two contributors to this overall issue are the use of a PCIe 3.0 x2 NVMe SSD (compared to the PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe SSDs in almost all the systems above it in the benchmarks) and the usage of a DDR4-2400 kit (almost all other systems have the SODIMMs operating between 2666 MHz and 3000 MHz).

PCMark 8

We continue to present PCMark 8 benchmark results (as those have more comparison points) while our PCMark 10 scores database for systems grows in size. 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 and the memory sub-system.

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Home OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Creative OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Work OpenCL

The PCMark 8 numbers follow the PCMark 10 ordering, largely due to the same reasons discussed earlier.

3DMark

UL's 3DMark comes with a diverse set of graphics workloads that target different Direct3D feature levels. Correspondingly, the rendering resolutions are also different. We use 3DMark 2.4.4264 to get an idea of the graphics capabilities of the system. In this section, we take a look at the performance of the Shuttle XPC slim DH370 across the different 3DMark workloads.

3DMark Ice Storm

This workload has three levels of varying complexity - the vanilla Ice Storm, Ice Storm Unlimited, and Ice Storm Extreme. It is a cross-platform benchmark (which means that the scores can be compared across different tablets and smartphones as well). All three use DirectX 11 (feature level 9) / OpenGL ES 2.0. While the Extreme renders at 1920 x 1080, the other two render at 1280 x 720. The graphs below present the various Ice Storm worloads' numbers for different systems that we have evaluated.

UL 3DMark - Ice Storm Workloads

3DMark Cloud Gate

The Cloud Gate workload is meant for notebooks and typical home PCs, and uses DirectX 11 (feature level 10) to render frames at 1280 x 720. The graph below presents the overall score for the workload across all the systems that are being compared.

UL 3DMark Cloud Gate Score

3DMark Sky Diver

The Sky Diver workload is meant for gaming notebooks and mid-range PCs, and uses DirectX 11 (feature level 11) to render frames at 1920 x 1080. The graph below presents the overall score for the workload across all the systems that are being compared.

UL 3DMark Sky Diver Score

3DMark Fire Strike Extreme

The Fire Strike benchmark has three workloads. The base version is meant for high-performance gaming PCs. Similar to Sky Diver, it uses DirectX 11 (feature level 11) to render frames at 1920 x 1080. The Ultra version targets 4K gaming system, and renders at 3840 x 2160. However, we only deal with the Extreme version in our benchmarking - It renders at 2560 x 1440, and targets multi-GPU systems and overclocked PCs. The graph below presents the overall score for the Fire Strike Extreme benchmark across all the systems that are being compared.

UL 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score

3DMark Time Spy

The Time Spy workload has two levels with different complexities. Both use DirectX 12 (feature level 11). However, the plain version targets high-performance gaming PCs with a 2560 x 1440 render resolution, while the Extreme version renders at 3840 x 2160 resolution. The graphs below present both numbers for all the systems that are being compared in this review.

UL 3DMark - Time Spy Workloads

3DMark Night Raid

The Night Raid workload is a DirectX 12 benchmark test. It is less demanding than Time Spy, and is optimized for integrated graphics. The graph below presents the overall score in this workload for different system configurations.

UL 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score

The numbers in the 3DMark workloads roughly tally with what can be expected from the Intel UHD Graphics 630 (also present in the Core i3-8100, which was used in the DeskMini 310 review). It is clear that performance in 3D / gaming workloads is not a strong point of the XPC slim DH370. Fortunately, Shuttle makes no mention of the gaming segment when discussing the target markets for the system.

BAPCo SYSmark 2018 Miscellaneous Performance Metrics - I
Comments Locked

37 Comments

View All Comments

  • timecop1818 - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    Intel CPUs only have native DisplayPort output, not HDMI (licensing?). Nothing is technically preventing fullly complaint HDCP 2.2 path when using the MCDP part - unless shuttle cheaped out and didn't include the keys? Anyway i never looked into this as HDMI port is never something I'm looking for in a PC. I'm curious what exactly prevents the playback, as the same part (or a similar one from Parade tech) is what would be used inside a USBC to HDMI 2.0 cable as well.
  • ganeshts - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    All three display outputs support HDCP 2.2

    Intel supports HDMI, but, only 1.4a as of now. If OEMs want to put a HDMI 2.0a port, then, that HDMI capability of the Intel CPU is left un-used.

    Some LSPCons do not do Stereoscopic 3D forwarding, which results in the loss of 3D capabilities.
  • rchris - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    Thanks for a good review. But please include physical dimensions; particularly important when you're reviewing a compact system. The volume specs are nice, but not sufficient. Yes, they are available at the "Full Specifications" link, but would be more helpful to be in your article.
  • Guspaz - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    Be wary of Shuttle claims that their systems support standard motherboards. I bought a Shuttle XPC SZ77R5. Years later, the motherboard died and Shuttle wanted an absurd amount of money for the replacement (enough to buy a whole new computer). They claimed in the advertising for the system that it was "easily" upgradable with any standard mini-itx motherboard. In fact, the product website STILL says that.

    Three problems: the case uses a non-standard motherboard standoff height, and does not include any standoffs. There are a few of them directly welded to the chassis, but only enough for Shuttle motherboards, more are required for a mini-ITX board. I couldn't even find any of the right height online to buy, short of ordering them in bulk from China and waiting a few months. Instead, I had to take standard brass motherboard standoffs and filed them down by hand. It took hours.

    Second: the included power supply didn't have a full-width power connector that mini-ITX motherboards required. Luckily, the missing pins were just for providing power, so they seem to be in the "strongly recommended but technically not required" category, and it worked OK without them.

    Third: Shuttle motherboards don't have the CPU in the same location as a mini-ITX motherboard, so the system's custom heatpipe-based cooling system must be thrown out and replaced by traditional air cooling, which is less effective.
  • Death666Angel - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    Well, mITX motherboards don't have the CPU sockets in the same location, so that point is moot. And all I just read about their advertising the ITX compatiblity (granted, I only found the German site) is that they said you can use mITX motherboards without having to modify the case. And that seems right, doesn't it?
  • Guspaz - Wednesday, May 8, 2019 - link

    It was not really true for the SZ77R5, no. Because short of fabricating custom mounting hardware like I did, you would have needed to modify the case with a deemed to install an mITX board. Requiring mounting hardware that does not exist is far from the easy upgradability they claimed. Now, hopefully this isn’t the case with the product that is the subject of this anandtech article. But I’ve been burned by them before.
  • Guspaz - Wednesday, May 8, 2019 - link

    *with a dremel, not a “deemed”
  • timecop1818 - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link

    Dude this is a completely non-standard SFF motherboard that doesn't follow any particular layout or spec. Do you complain that Intel NUC doesn't fit into Mini ITX board? There are no claims made anywhere that this board is user replaceable.
  • 0ldman79 - Tuesday, May 7, 2019 - link

    "Mini-ITX Mainboard Support
    Shuttle expands the capabilities of its R chassis, adding support for Mini-ITX mainboards (17 x 17cm or 6.7 x 6.7 inches). The Shuttle chassis can go beyond the Shuttle mainboard, so you can easily upgrade or downgrade the mainboard to your desire, without any modifications to the chassis."

    http://global.shuttle.com/main/productsDetail?prod...
  • timecop1818 - Tuesday, May 7, 2019 - link

    Yes and that link has nothing to do with the product reviewed here...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now