What can the Atom-based NUC do for me, that the Foxconn AT-5570 NanoPC can't?

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
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.
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,324
5,360
136
Bay Trail Atoms are generally significantly faster than the old Brazos machines. They're often faster than even their Kabini successors.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,913
2,720
136
Bay Trail had a large IPS boost since IPC and clockspeed went up for the Celeron N2810 present in the NUC. Not sure about graphics, but shouldn't it handle 1080p now?
 

lakedude

Platinum Member
Mar 14, 2009
2,689
490
126
Bay Trail had a large IPS boost since IPC and clockspeed went up for the Celeron N2810 present in the NUC. Not sure about graphics, but shouldn't it handle 1080p now?
Silvermont is the first Atom processor to feature an out-of-order architecture. That ooo helps a bunch!

I should think 1080p would be no problem but you might not be able to do a dozen things in the background at the same time. These tiny systems are also be prone to running out of RAM which is another reason they will not multitask as well as a full blown desktop or even a full sized laptop.