BAPCo SYSmark 25

The ASRock DeskMini H470 was evaluated using our Fall 2018 test suite for small-form factor PCs. In the first benchmarks section, we will be looking at SYSmark 25.

BAPCo's SYSmark 25 is an application-based benchmark that uses real-world applications to replay usage patterns of business users in the areas of productivity, creativity, and responsiveness. The 'Productivity Scenario' covers office-centric activities including word processing, spreadsheet usage, financial analysis, software development, application installation, file compression, and e-mail management. The 'Creativity Scenario' represents media-centric activities such as digital photo processing, AI and ML for face recognition in photos and videos for the purpose of content creation, etc. The 'Responsiveness Scenario' evaluates the ability of the system to react in a quick manner to user inputs in areas such as application and file launches, web browsing, and multi-tasking.

Scores are meant to be compared against a reference desktop (the SYSmark 25 calibration system, a Lenovo Thinkcenter M720q with a Core i5-8500T and 8GB of DDR4 memory to go with a 256GB M.2 NVMe SSD). The calibration system scores 1000 in each of the scenarios. A score of, say, 2000, would imply that the system under test is twice as fast as the reference system.

SYSmark 25 - Productivity

SYSmark 25 - Creativity

SYSmark 25 - Responsiveness

SYSmark 25 - Overall

SYSmark 25 also adds energy measurement to the mix. A high score in the SYSmark benchmarks might be nice to have, but, potential customers also need to determine the balance between power consumption and the efficiency of the system. For example, in the average office scenario, it might not be worth purchasing a noisy and power-hungry PC just because it ends up with a 2000 score in the SYSmark 2014 SE benchmarks. In order to provide a balanced perspective, SYSmark 25 also allows vendors and decision makers to track the energy consumption during each workload. In the graphs below, we find the total energy consumed by the PC under test for a single iteration of each SYSmark 25 workload. For reference, the calibration system consumes 8.88 Wh for productivity, 10.81 Wh for creativity, and 19.69 Wh overall.

SYSmark 25 - Productivity Energy Consumption

SYSmark 25 - Creativity Energy Consumption

SYSmark 25 - Overall Energy Consumption

SYSmark 25 is a relatively recent addition to our benchmark suite, and we only have results from the Ghost Canyon NUC for comparison in this section. In pitting a 45W Core i9-9980HK against a 65W Core i7-10700 - both having a 8C/16T configuration, we expect the higher TDP part to have a slight edge in performance. The benchmark scores back that up. However, the discrete GPU in the Ghost Canyon NUC puts it at a distinct disadvantage in the energy consumption numbers.

BIOS Options and Platform Analysis UL Benchmarks - PCMark and 3DMark
POST A COMMENT

26 Comments

View All Comments

  • Tomatotech - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    That’s possibly one of the best possible arrangements for the m.2 slot then as the metal tray will be an excellent heat sink. You could even add a bit of thermally conductive foam (make sure it’s not the electrically conductive type) to help with heat transfer to the tray. Reply
  • ganeshts - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    The Ultra M.2 slot is on the top side of the board. That is the one used with Comet Lake CPUs. The slot you are referring to is the Hyper M.2 (PCIe 4.0 x4) slot which is usable only when the Rocket Lake CPUs come around. Reply
  • twotwotwo - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    Its AMD relative the A300 was my main machine for a while, and had it been easier to get Zen 2 desktop APUs I might still be using it. Quiet (given a decent fan), cheap, tiny (obvs), reasonably expandable, gets the job done--about all I can ask for from a work desktop. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    The 4000 Series Pro APUs are pretty well available in Germany, from reputable online retailers. I can get the R5 Pro 4650G for 20% more than the equivalent R5 3600 (200€ vs 240€ roughly). That would be my sweet spot, personally. For 8 cores it's also roughly 20% (280€ vs 340€) but for that price difference, you could get a nice used GPU already that will maybe game better. I personally could never justify a GPU-less build, although I am eternally curious about them and plot one out once every couple of months.... and then I look at benchmarks of dGPU vs iGPU and stop. :D Reply
  • Tomatotech - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    I didn’t see it in the article so here are the specs:

    155 x 155 x 80 mm (1.92L)

    Not bad, though for most low to mid-level use cases it’d be far cheaper to buy a used Lenovo or Dell USFF PC - these have even less volume at around 1.1L but are slightly larger and flatter (around 180x180x35mm)

    For SFF with GPU I still prefer something like the K39 mITX chassis on the low end which comes in at 3L but allows you to use most full-sized GPUs (but for now possibly not the nVidia 3000 series).
    Reply
  • Samus - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    I've been rocking the FT03-Mini and while it is an absolute nightmare to work inside of (and I question my sanity for why I put myself through owning it) it is still a very effective ITX chassis for the size, capable of 10.5" videocards, multiple hard drives (plus two m2 drives you can mount to most current motherboards) while using a single 140mm fan to cool everything. Realistically the highest TDP CPU you want to use is around 88-watts as anything more you will stress any closed loop cooler with a 25mm radiator (the max the case can accept) and need to go to a heatsink of some sort with another dedicated fan. Reply
  • Obrut - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    It will be interesting to see a comparison with ASRock Jupiter H470, which has a much different form factor and cooling solution. Reply
  • M O B - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    I have a Deskmini 310w--is the UHD 630 on 10th gen CPUs any faster than the UHD 630 on older CPUs?

    If not, then it seems like this iteration basically adds some USB 3.0 ports versus my current build.
    Reply
  • ganeshts - Wednesday, December 30, 2020 - link

    I think the additional angle here is that of a low-cost platform that can take advantage of the RKL-S CPUs coming in 2021. Personally, I also think it is not a great choice to upgrade for those who already have the 310. It is meant more for folks getting their first mSTX machine. Reply
  • Samus - Tuesday, December 29, 2020 - link

    I had the SST-AR11 cooler in my Silverstone FT03-Mini and was pretty disappointed (partially due to the chassis inherently poor ventilation) and equally disappointed by closed-loop coolers due to the 25mm thickness limitation of radiators. After spending seemingly hundreds of dollars and way too much time hunting for a thermal solution, some forum posts directed me to try the NT06-Pro, which would theoretically fit this mSTX chassis as long as there is no interference with the power supply.

    It performs incredible well as you position the fan under the fins and blow the heat away from the motherboard instead of onto it, giving it somewhat of the beneficial effect of a tower-style cooler.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now