•   
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4(current)
  • 5
  • 6
  • 11
  •   
Intel NUC - Skylake (6th Generation CPU)
#46
(2015-11-01, 22:25)phillyman75 Wrote: Not sure when they hit in the US but this seems to be the first place to have some in stock already.
http://pc24.de/prozessor/intel/pentium/b...i3syk.html

It would seem unlikely that they really would be able to ship them yet (it says arriving in 5-10 days), but I contacted them anyhow. I'd expect Intel to first announce the product, but who knows.

And just got an answer: "Leider ist dieser Artikel zur Zeit nicht Lieferbar."

Translated: Unfortunately the item is not deliverable at the moment.
Reply
#47
Image
Reply
#48
I am wondering why you guys bother about the HDMI port... I am still using gen4 NUC with ~9€ DP to HDMI cable which works totally fine.
KODI on Ubuntu
Reply
#49
(2015-12-23, 02:06)Möhre Wrote: I am wondering why you guys bother about the HDMI port... I am still using gen4 NUC with ~9€ DP to HDMI cable which works totally fine.

Yes, but you'll get maximum 30 fps on 4K resolution.
Reply
#50
i am wondering is this (Intel NUC NUC6i3SYK) enough for 4k, 3d HSBS and 2d movies or not?

with 8Gb of memory and 120GB of SSD space

or i need to buy i5 version of it.

cause this is i3 intel nuc.
Reply
#51
No - if you mean 4k hevc 10 bit.
First decide what functions / features you expect from a system. Then decide for the hardware. Don't waste your money on crap.
Reply
#52
if i dont want to watch any movies in 4k, then it is fine. is that correct?
Reply
#53
(2015-12-27, 18:06)rickyman Wrote: if i dont want to watch any movies in 4k, then it is fine. is that correct?

if you don't care about 4K output or 4K content, then a Skylake NUC is crazy overkill; something Braswell-based is more than adequate for Kodi usage.
Reply
#54
Agree 100% with Matt, Skylake not needed at all and a waste of money just for 1080p Kodi video playback.

These days there are powerful GPU/VPU's in Celeron Chromeboxes and Braswell's, which is exactly what you need for excellent Kodi operation.
CPU Grunt itself is fast becoming irrelevant if all you want to do is basic 1080p / SBS/HSBS (3D) / Audio and Video playback by using Kodi.

Its simple (HD Audio Passthrough included)
- H264/AVC/mpeg2 + more > up to 4K at 30Hz = Chromebox Architecture (no 1080p HEVC hardware decode)

- H264/H265/AVC/mpeg2 + more > up to 4K at 30Hz = Intel Braswell Architecture

Run OpenELEC Kodi on them both and you are good to go, and even then you only need 2GB.

Reply
#55
While it's absolutely true that from a video playback perspective the Braswell is perfectly fine, I find them to be a bit underwhelming in terms of running the more demanding skins out there like AEON MQ 5 & 6. The menus & libraries run silky smooth on my Windows + nvidia machine, as well as my SATV. Heck, I found that my Chromebox ran those skins slightly better than any of the 3 Braswells I own...both Intels & the Beebox. And that's understandable to a degree, they aren't designed to be powerhouse machines.

So if using demanding skins with Kodi at the smoothest frame rate possible is important to the end user, I could certainly see justification for one of the lower end Skylakes.

I will say that I much prefer the image quality of the Beebox over either of the Intel NUCs. The image is a bit sharper & has a little more pop & depth to it than the Intel NUCs.
Reply
#56
(2015-12-30, 00:30)Karnis Wrote: I will say that I much prefer the image quality of the Beebox over either of the Intel NUCs. The image is a bit sharper & has a little more pop & depth to it than the Intel NUCs.
Ya know, that sound quite audiophiley. Maybe the NUC's need audiophile grade hdmi cables .Blush
Reply
#57
Yup, they look...and sound better!...with the gold plated ones especially. Wink
Reply
#58
(2015-12-30, 01:56)smitopher Wrote:
(2015-12-30, 00:30)Karnis Wrote: I will say that I much prefer the image quality of the Beebox over either of the Intel NUCs. The image is a bit sharper & has a little more pop & depth to it than the Intel NUCs.
Ya know, that sound quite audiophiley. Maybe the NUC's need audiophile grade hdmi cables .Blush

The image quality of the Beebox ... - the quality is totally the same, there is no difference at all. If you tried them on windows, you got a driver issue or some setting wrong.
First decide what functions / features you expect from a system. Then decide for the hardware. Don't waste your money on crap.
Reply
#59
(2015-12-23, 02:06)Möhre Wrote: I am wondering why you guys bother about the HDMI port... I am still using gen4 NUC with ~9€ DP to HDMI cable which works totally fine.

But your adaptor converts Displayport to HDMI 1.4 - or more accurately doesn't do any video conversion, but instead sends a signal to the GPU to output HDMI over the Displayport connector pins which is remapped to the HDMI pins by the converter. This is limited to HDMI 1.4 bandwidths, and the HDMI implementation in the GPU. This means with an Intel GPU you are limited to 1080p/60p or 2160/30p resolutions.

The interest in DP to HDMI 2.0 active conversion is to allow 2160/60p output from a Skylake NUC. However the NUCs still have HDMI 1.4 outputs so are limited to 2160/30p (Intel don't implement the 4:2:0 2160/60p HDMI 2.0 mode that can be carried over an HDMI 1.4 connection, which was nVidia's trick to get 2160/60p over a legacy HDMI 1.4 bandwidth connection) This means that the Displayport output, which does support 2160/60p, has to be converted.

However the Displayport outputs don't support 2160/60p when running in "HDMI over DIsplayport" mode (i.e. what happens with a €9 connector), and instead needs an active converter that allows the GPU to stay in Displayport mode, thinking it is connected to a Displayport display, but with the converter doing the clever Displayport protocol to HDMI 2.0 protocol conversion. This is a non-trivial function, and devices have taken a good while to appear on the market. I've still not seen a decent review of one...

There is a lot of confusion about how Displayport works with cheap HDMI converter cables. The simple fact is that it stops being Displayport and becomes HDMI (just not on an HDMI connector)
Reply
#60
(2015-12-30, 10:01)fritsch Wrote:
(2015-12-30, 01:56)smitopher Wrote:
(2015-12-30, 00:30)Karnis Wrote: I will say that I much prefer the image quality of the Beebox over either of the Intel NUCs. The image is a bit sharper & has a little more pop & depth to it than the Intel NUCs.
Ya know, that sound quite audiophiley. Maybe the NUC's need audiophile grade hdmi cables .Blush

The image quality of the Beebox ... - the quality is totally the same, there is no difference at all. If you tried them on windows, you got a driver issue or some setting wrong.

Nope, all 3 boxes running the same OE 6 updated to 6.0.95.

The first most obvious thing I noticed was the output of the Beebox was significantly sharper, I had to turn the sharpness setting on my HDTV down 5 points from 8 to 3.

I have made extensive A/B comparisons comparing all 3 boxes playing the same material at the same time, comparing the image quality over my Denon. I found the picture quality of the 2 Intel NUCs to be virtually identical (as one would expect). The Beebox has an overall sharper image being output. It's not huge, but it is noticeable.

I'm a 30 year HT enthusiast. I've been using HTPC's for over 15 years. I'm a former Mod at the HTPC section of the AVS Forums. I was involved with the original TheaterTek DVD software back in the day. I'm a 25 year CCTV specialist. I know a thing or two about video. Don't assume I'm some novice because of my post count. I stand by my findings. Smile
Reply
  •   
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4(current)
  • 5
  • 6
  • 11
  •   



Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
Intel NUC - Skylake (6th Generation CPU)1
This forum uses Lukasz Tkacz MyBB addons.