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 Setup
In order to show how the MiniPC performs, comparison results are provided using a few other systems, all running integrated graphics; the one exception is that we did throw in a Sempron system with a 6600 graphics card, just to show what even a moderate GPU adds to the picture. All units were equipped with 2x512 MB of RAM, except for the MiniPC, which was running a single 512MB DIMM. The benchmarks that we'll run generally don't need 1GB of RAM, but dual channel support and 512MB DIMMs did get us there anyway. (As I've said in my Buyer's Guides, 256MB DIMMs are a dead end, and consequently, I don't have any floating around anymore.) Here are the specific systems used.
Please note that the systems tested are not meant to be apples-to-apples comparisons. This is a quick look at a few of the most common platforms on the market, including some that are very likely to compete with the AOpen MiniPC for market share. If that seems unfair, then you should also take into account that every one of the systems tested will cost roughly the same as or less than the MP915-B that we're reviewing. At a roughly equal price, it then becomes a matter of determining where your priorities lie: size or performance.
It's difficult to find anything other than Pentium M/Celeron M processors in computers as small as the MiniPC right now - you can find some of VIA's processors in such systems, and of course there's the Mac Mini - so remember that the smaller case size is arguably the most important factor in this comparison. If you don't care about small cases, you really won't have good reason to buy the MiniPC.
When it comes to small, though, we really are talking small: the MiniPC is about 1/5 the total volume of the next smallest SFF PC, the AOpen MZ855/915! Going to more typical SFF designs, the MiniPC is less than 1/8 the volume of the Shuttle G5 chassis. Finally, compared to your typical ATX case like the Antec SLK-1650, you could fit 27 MiniPCs in the space of such a case. Not that you'd want to, but at least you should have some grasp of how small the AOpen system is in comparison to more common computers.
In order to show how the MiniPC performs, comparison results are provided using a few other systems, all running integrated graphics; the one exception is that we did throw in a Sempron system with a 6600 graphics card, just to show what even a moderate GPU adds to the picture. All units were equipped with 2x512 MB of RAM, except for the MiniPC, which was running a single 512MB DIMM. The benchmarks that we'll run generally don't need 1GB of RAM, but dual channel support and 512MB DIMMs did get us there anyway. (As I've said in my Buyer's Guides, 256MB DIMMs are a dead end, and consequently, I don't have any floating around anymore.) Here are the specific systems used.
| AOpen MiniPC Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | AOpen i915GM |
| Processor: | Pentium M 740 (1.73 GHz 2MB Dothan) |
| RAM: | 1 x 512MB PC2-4200 (4-4-4-11) |
| Hard Drive: | WD 2.5 inch 60GB PATA |
| Graphics: | Intel GMA900 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel Chipset INF 7.2.2.1006; Intel Graphics v14.18 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| AOpen MZ855-II Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | AOpen i855GME |
| Processor: | Pentium M 755 (2.00 GHz 2MB Dothan) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Corsaire Value PC3200 (2.5-3-3-8) |
| Hard Drive: | Seagate 7200.7 80GB PATA |
| Graphics: | Intel Extreme 2 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel i855 6.3.0.1007; Intel Graphics v14.18 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| ASUS Athlon 64 Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | ASUS A8N-VM CSM (939) |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (2.00 GHz 512K L2 Venice) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ R2 Platinum PC3200 (2-2-2-7-1T) |
| Hard Drive: | Seagate 250GB 7200.8 SATA |
| Graphics: | NVIDIA GeForce 6150 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | nForce 430/410 822; ForceWare 81.98 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| ASUS Sempron Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | ASUS K8N4-E Deluxe (754) |
| Processor: | AMD Sempron 64 3100+ (1.80 GHz 256K Palermo) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Generic PC3200 (2.5-3-3-10) |
| Hard Drive: | Hitachi 250GB T7K250 SATA3.0Gbps |
| Graphics: | GeForce 6600 PCIe |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | nForce 4 AMD 6.70; ForceWare 81.98 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Biostar 350G Pentium D Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | Biostar 350G Proprietary |
| Processor: | Intel Pentium D 920 (2 X 2.80 GHz 2MB Presler) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC2-6400@DDR533 (3-3-3-8) |
| Hard Drive: | Western Digital 250GB WD2500KS SATA3.0Gbps |
| Graphics: | Intel GMA-950 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel Chipset INF 7.2.2.1006; Intel Graphics v14.18 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Biostar 350G Pentium 4 Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | Biostar 350G Proprietary |
| Processor: | Intel Pentium 4 506 (2.67 GHz 1MB Prescott) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC2-6400@DDR533 (3-3-3-8) |
| Hard Drive: | Western Digital 250GB WD2500KS SATA3.0Gbps |
| Graphics: | Intel GMA-950 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel Chipset INF 7.2.2.1006; Intel Graphics v14.18 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| HP DX5150 Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | HP DX5150 (ATI Xpress 200 chipset) |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (ClawHammer) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Samsung PC3200 (3-3-3-8-1T) |
| Hard Drive: | Samsung 160GB SP1614C SATA |
| Graphics: | Xpress 200 IGP |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel i915 7.2.2.1006; ATI Catalyst 6.2 IGP CCC |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Shuttle XPC SD31P Configuration | |
| Motherboard: | Shuttle SD31 Proprietary |
| Processor: | Intel Pentium D 820 (Smithfield) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Crucial Ballistix PC2-5300@DDR533 (4-4-4-8) |
| Hard Drive: | WD 74GB Raptor SATA |
| Graphics: | Intel GMA-950 |
| Chipset/Video Drivers: | Intel Chipset INF 7.2.2.1006; Intel Graphics v14.18 |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
Please note that the systems tested are not meant to be apples-to-apples comparisons. This is a quick look at a few of the most common platforms on the market, including some that are very likely to compete with the AOpen MiniPC for market share. If that seems unfair, then you should also take into account that every one of the systems tested will cost roughly the same as or less than the MP915-B that we're reviewing. At a roughly equal price, it then becomes a matter of determining where your priorities lie: size or performance.
It's difficult to find anything other than Pentium M/Celeron M processors in computers as small as the MiniPC right now - you can find some of VIA's processors in such systems, and of course there's the Mac Mini - so remember that the smaller case size is arguably the most important factor in this comparison. If you don't care about small cases, you really won't have good reason to buy the MiniPC.
When it comes to small, though, we really are talking small: the MiniPC is about 1/5 the total volume of the next smallest SFF PC, the AOpen MZ855/915! Going to more typical SFF designs, the MiniPC is less than 1/8 the volume of the Shuttle G5 chassis. Finally, compared to your typical ATX case like the Antec SLK-1650, you could fit 27 MiniPCs in the space of such a case. Not that you'd want to, but at least you should have some grasp of how small the AOpen system is in comparison to more common computers.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
54 Comments
View All Comments
Questar - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Where else in the x86 market is Apple not price competetive?rowcroft - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Considering it's Friday, the new Mac Mini's were announced on Tuesday (one is on a FedEx truck on it's way to my house) the article really shouldn't have the errors that it does. You can certainly tell Anand didn't write this one....JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
There are a couple places where I mention the fact that this has already been superceded by the new Mac Mini. Considering this product is less than two months old (and really only 1 month in the US), the choice is either to not review it at all or to review it and basically end up with "nice, but unless you're a die-hard Windows user the Mac Mini is better." If it wasn't clear that I think that the Mac Mini is the better choice, I apologize. However, for people dead set on XP, until the MP945 is launched you really don't have any other option that uses a Pentium M chip. The only factual error right now (that is corrected) is that a USB X-Fi doesn't exist, unless you've spotted something else?rowcroft - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
I was referring to comments about i386 macs not yet shipping on the first page and overall sense that there the comparable mini's are the one's released a year ago now. I was a bit too harsh though, I apologize for that.JarredWalton - Saturday, March 4, 2006 - link
Oh... heh. That intro page was written a couple weeks ago, then the article got delayed as I waited for some answers and other information. I'll change it to the present tense instead of future tense. Of course, we're still waiting for a "Windows on Intel Macs" solution. I'm betting Vista will be necessary, as I don't know if it's even feasible to get XP runnign on an EFI architecture without massive effort. (First person to prove me wrong gets a pretty sizeable check, I suppose.)Nocturnal - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
I have worked with many laptops and this unit doesn't look that much different from the pictures although the pictures are probably a little bigger than the actual unit (I think?). Other than that, I'd definately invest in one of these for the wife.themelon - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
There are quite a few USB audio devices on the market today, including an X-Fi product from Creative.They have a USB X-Fi? It's not on there product page and this is the first time that I have seen mention of one.
JarredWalton - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Right you are. I could have sworn I saw a Creative X-Fi USB, but I'm clearly mistaken. The best Creative USB option is still the Audigy 2 NX (right?). I will fix this error.psychobriggsy - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Pointless unless you have a Windows based application that you need to use.And for the uses this type of system will be good for, there aren't many of those.
If you want a small system, then the Mac Mini is clearly the better choice, and will be cheaper to boot. AOpen really need to trim their prices when they release their more-equivalent update.
There is still the issue of the market size for a computer this small. In home entertainment systems you have the option of creating a system as large as your standard HiFi separate. Elsewhere the large box can be stuck under the desk. However it is ideal as a zero-configuration computer, one that you'll use until it dies or you replace it.
It feels really odd writing 'Macs are cheaper and better' ...
Hikari - Friday, March 3, 2006 - link
Page two says, "Open has cloned the original Mac Mini with a system that is going to be faster in nearly every area."How old is this review? This isn't even close to as fast as a Mac mini with a Core Duo in it and 945G chipset. You just might want ot make sure you're making it clear that its slower than the old G4-based mini.