- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,560
- 10,176
- 126
Just curious. Interested in NUCs, but when Newegg put the Foxconn NanoPC on sale for $125 and then $100, I bought two.
The NanoPC is an aluminum chassis, passive (no fan), has an AMD C-70 APU, one DDR3 SO-DIMM (using 1.5v in mine), along with what appears to be an mSATA slot, as well as a 2.5" drive bay. I'm using an OCZ 2.5" SSD in mine.
Well, it works... alright, I guess. The 1.0Ghz CPU speed kind of gets to me. Listening to streaming radio, and web browsing, sometimes causes the radio to skip. Skype uses up nearly 100% of the CPU.
Altogether, the NanoPC is a bit underpowered for an HTPC. Maybe it's OK for driving sign displays.
It does have superior connectivity to the NUC though, which is one reason I chose it.
Is the Atom-based NUC significantly faster than the NanoPC, or more of the same? Budget is a factor, which is why I didn't get an i3-based NUC originally.
The NanoPC is an aluminum chassis, passive (no fan), has an AMD C-70 APU, one DDR3 SO-DIMM (using 1.5v in mine), along with what appears to be an mSATA slot, as well as a 2.5" drive bay. I'm using an OCZ 2.5" SSD in mine.
Well, it works... alright, I guess. The 1.0Ghz CPU speed kind of gets to me. Listening to streaming radio, and web browsing, sometimes causes the radio to skip. Skype uses up nearly 100% of the CPU.
Altogether, the NanoPC is a bit underpowered for an HTPC. Maybe it's OK for driving sign displays.
It does have superior connectivity to the NUC though, which is one reason I chose it.
Is the Atom-based NUC significantly faster than the NanoPC, or more of the same? Budget is a factor, which is why I didn't get an i3-based NUC originally.
