(2015-11-12, 13:40)kjhambrick Wrote: All --
Sorry if this is off-topic for the forum but it's about the site that mentions the NUC and the Zotac ZBoxes.
I've been testing the new generation boxes for a headless Data Conversion Appliance we supply to our customers.
The App is IO Bound ( insane amount of Disk IO ) and most CPU Load is String Compares with more than a few Integer and Floating Point to String Conversions.
These are the Boxes:
1. Zotac ZBox ID18 ( Celeron 1007U @ 1.5 GHz )
2. NUC NUC5PPYB ( Pentium N3700 @ 1.6 GHz )
3. Zotac ZBox BI323 ( Celeron N3150 @ 1.6 GHz )
All three Boxes have the same HDD ( HGST HTS721010A9E630 ) and each has 8 GB of Crucial Ballistic RAM
The OS is CentOS 6.7 64 bit
The two ZBoxes have 2 - 4GB Sticks of 9-9-9-24 / 1.35 Volt RAM, the NUC has a single 8 GB Stick 10-10-10-30.
The newer Braswell Chips run over 2-times SLOWER than the older ID18 !
1. ID18 - 85 sec
2. NUC - 179 sec
3. BI323 - 187 sec
Any insight out there as to why this might be the case ?
Thanks.
-- kjh
Passmarks :
1007U in the ID 18 = 1419 (Single thread 768)
N3700 in the NUC = 1824 (Single thread 529)
N3150 in the BI323 = 1431 (Single thread 386)
The 1007U is dual core (Ivy Bridge?), the N3700 and N3150 are quad core (Braswell?). If your code is not massively optimised for multithreading, then the older 1007U is likely to perform better. As you can see it's Passmark score in a single thread is twice that of the N3150. Or in other words, the 1007U cores benchmark at twice the speed as the N3150 cores. (4 N3150 cores only just about keep up with 2 1007U cores, and a single N3150 core has approx half the performance of a 1007U core)
Unless you software is hugely optimised for multithreading then the single core/thread figure is worth keeping an eye on.
Obviously benchmarks don't tell the whole story - but the Celeron 1007U is based on an Ivy Bridge (?) Core-series core (i.e. the same as used in the Core i3/5/7 of the same era). The N3700/N3150 are effectively based on (Braswell?) Atom-type cores, even though they are now marketed as Celerons and Pentiums. The inherent CPU architecture in the Braswell isn't as powerful as the Core-series CPU architecture used on the 1007U (and the following 2955/2957U and current 3205U etc.) However they are also a lot more power efficient.
For comparison here are the Passmarks for the newer Core-series based Celerons :
3205U Broadwell Celeron (based on Core not Atom CPU architecture) = 1712 (Single thread 863)
2957U Haswell Celeron = 1488 (Single thread 804)
I'd expect both of the above CPUs to outperform - albeit slightly - the 1007U?
There are other issues that also may play a part - and skew things in favour of the Ivy Bridge/Haswell/Broadwell - is I/O. It could be that the Core-series have a better I/O implementation and are using dual channel memory more effectively? Could also be that IO software/driver support is faster on the more powerful cores?