Miscellaneous Performance Metrics

This section looks at some of the other commonly used benchmarks representative of the performance of specific real-world applications.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

We use CINEBENCH R15 for 3D rendering evaluation. The program provides three benchmark modes - OpenGL, single threaded and multi-threaded. Evaluation of different PC configurations 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

The results track what was observed in the media and entertainment category workloads in SPECworkstation 3.

x265 Benchmark

Next up, we have some video encoding benchmarks using x265 v2.8. The appropriate encoder executable is chosen based on the supported CPU features. In the first case, we encode 600 1080p YUV 4:2:0 frames into a 1080p30 HEVC Main-profile compatible video stream at 1 Mbps and record the average number of frames encoded per second.

Video Encoding - x265 - 1080p

Our second test case is 1200 4K YUV 4:2:0 frames getting encoded into a 4Kp60 HEVC Main10-profile video stream at 35 Mbps. The encoding FPS is recorded.

Video Encoding - x265 - 4K 10-bit

The Ghost Canyon NUC surprisingly performs better than systems equipped with CPUs sporting much higher TDPs.

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 rates when utilizing all the available threads for the LZMA algorithm.

7-Zip LZMA Compression Benchmark

7-Zip LZMA Decompression Benchmark

Given the brief nature of the benchmark workload and the large number of available threads, it is no surprise that the Ghost Canyon NUC performs significantly better than the rest of the systems in this workload.

Cryptography Benchmarks

Cryptography has become an indispensable part of our interaction with computing systems. Almost all modern systems have some sort of hardware-acceleration for making cryptographic operations faster and more power efficient. In this sub-section, we look at two different real-world applications that may make use of this acceleration.

BitLocker is a Windows features that encrypts entire disk volumes. While drives that offer encryption capabilities are dealt with using that feature, most legacy systems and external drives have to use the host system implementation. Windows has no direct benchmark for BitLocker. However, we cooked up a BitLocker operation sequence to determine the adeptness of the system at handling BitLocker operations. We start off with a 2.5GB RAM drive in which a 2GB VHD (virtual hard disk) is created. This VHD is then mounted, and BitLocker is enabled on the volume. Once the BitLocker encryption process gets done, BitLocker is disabled. This triggers a decryption process. The times taken to complete the encryption and decryption are recorded. This process is repeated 25 times, and the average of the last 20 iterations is graphed below.

BitLocker Encryption Benchmark

BitLocker Decryption Benchmark

The BitLocker benchmark results are a bit surprising, particularly given the clear performance benefits of the Core i9-9980HK for cryptography applications in the other applications below.

Creation of secure archives is best done through the use of AES-256 as the encryption method while password protecting ZIP files. We re-use the benchmark mode of 7-Zip to determine the AES256-CBC encryption and decryption rates using pure software as well as AES-NI. Note that the 7-Zip benchmark uses a 48KB buffer for this purpose.

7-Zip AES256-CBC Encryption Benchmark

7-Zip AES256-CBC Decryption Benchmark

As expected, the 8C/16T configuration allows for fast encryption and decryption irrespective of the use of pure software or AES-NI instructions.

Yet another cryptography application is secure network communication. OpenSSL can take advantage of the acceleration provided by the host system to make operations faster. It also has a benchmark mode that can use varying buffer sizes. We recorded the processing rate for a 8KB buffer using the hardware-accelerated AES256-CBC-HAC-SHA1 feature.

OpenSSL Encryption Benchmark

OpenSSL Decryption Benchmark

These results are not surprising given the core count and operating frequency profile of the CPU in the Ghost Canyon NUC.

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). We present the results from our evaluation using the CPU mode only. The benchmark (v1.3) takes 84 photographs and does four stages of computation:

  • Stage 1: Align Photographs (capable of OpenCL acceleration)
  • 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, and others multithreaded, it is interesting to record the effects of CPU generations, speeds, number of cores, and DRAM parameters using this software.

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 1

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 2

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 3

Agisoft PhotoScan Benchmark - Stage 4

The Ghost Canyon NUC is better than any of the other considered systems across all Photoscan stages.

Dolphin Emulator

Wrapping up our application benchmark numbers is the new Dolphin Emulator (v5) benchmark mode results. This is again a test of the CPU capabilities.

Dolphin Emulator Benchmark

In fact, the 249s taken by the Ghost Canyon NUC is the fastest amongst all SFF PCs we have evaluated with this benchmark.

SPECworkstation 3 Benchmark GPU Performance - Gaming Workloads
Comments Locked

109 Comments

View All Comments

  • Namisecond - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    Thirded, the sandwich design the Dancase A4 popularized really revolutionized the DIY SFF world. We are living in the golden age of DIY SFF. :)
  • Namisecond - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    In this case, what is Intel offering for their for their roughly $500-$600 plastic chassis and proprietary unbranded PSU? Superior Intel marketing? I feel your Dan A4 analogy sarcasm is spot on, but I think the reasons it's spot on does not extend to the NUC 9.
  • imaheadcase - Thursday, April 16, 2020 - link

    Unless you got some very specific need for this, not worth getting. Lots of these are used for home media streaming setups, so needing something this powerful is overkill. You can get 4k streaming/movies or whatever on the price of a low end 5 year old NUC or more.
  • BlazingDragon - Thursday, April 16, 2020 - link

    Agreed.

    The seems like the result of a "hey, we could do this" thought process, rather than "we should do this"...

    Massively overpriced for home use.... Enthusiasts will build their own, much cheaper and more capable system, and normal buyers will never pay this much... they could just buy a much cheaper standard PC [for GPU], or a much cheaper Intel NUC8 or NUC10 [or Zotac, etc., equivalent] if gfx performance is not important.

    GamersNexus has a detailed review on Youtube which aligns with the above.

    Maybe the Xeon based Quartz Canyon will find business customers who need/value the small size, but I'm not convinced...

    For anyone interested, prices for all NUC9 models are available [and for pre-order] here: shopblt.com
  • Deicidium369 - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    Agreed - like I said I have no clue what the use case for this is. Even the Xeon unit...
  • erinadreno - Thursday, April 16, 2020 - link

    There are plenty of sff itx case, I mean really sff case(4~6L), out there. They cost from $30 to $200, plus a $120 Enhanced 7660b, which is a 600w PSU instead of 500. Standard high end itx boards costs $300 at best. If you spend the same $1500 on those stuff, you'd left south of 1000 bucks. Heck, you can even get a Xeon 8136 28c CPU at this point (although your only option for motherboard is that ONE ASRock server board and some janky coolers).

    I just don't see the value of this okay-sized box in 2020. As in the past couple years the itx market just expand that much. Just give up on graphics and buy a regular nuc or build your own stuff.
  • pixelstuff - Thursday, April 16, 2020 - link

    That seems really large for a "Next Unit of Computing" classification.
  • Deicidium369 - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    Agreed - for me the NUC is the 4.5"x4.5" units - even the Hades Canyon to me doesn't meet the classification.
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    My dream is for people to mature enough to demand that Intel not be idiotic enough to put skulls on things.
  • Cullinaire - Friday, April 17, 2020 - link

    How about a pelvis instead?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now