EeeBox PC EB1012 - Pocket format High Definition entertainment | Laptops

EeeBox PC EB1012 - Pocket format High Definition entertainment - Benchmark

Wednesday, 02 December 2009 08:23 Laptopfreak

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2914

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2915

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2914

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2915

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2914

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/administrator/components/com_sh404sef/sh404sef.class.php on line 2915

Deprecated: Function eregi() is deprecated in /home/laptop-review.eu/public_html/components/com_sh404sef/sef_ext/com_content.php on line 39

Article Index
EeeBox PC EB1012 - Pocket format High Definition entertainment
Construction
Configuration
Software
Software continued
Benchmark
Benchmark continued
Conclusion
All Pages

Page 6 of 8

Benchmark

To get an idea of the EeeBox PC EB1012’s performance, Futuremark 3DMark06, Futuremark PCMark05 and PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0 evaluation version were used.
In case you want to compare it with your own computer, the EeeBox PC EB1012 is tested in 3Dmark06. Here it scores 1482 3DMarks. It is also tested in PCMark05, scoring 2449 PCMarks. These benchmarks have been run so that you have something to compare it with if you wish.
The PassMark PerformanceTest 7.0 evaluation version gives a good overview of the level of performance we are dealing with.

It is possible to retrieve baselines from others who have used the same program so you have something to compare with. In this case I have decided to compare it with the Asus EB1012, equipped with the Asrock A330GC chipset (tested on 27/10 2009). This has been chosen to see how the Asus EB1012 measures up to other chipsets.

The tests are both run in Windows 7 (32-bit). Both chipsets feature an Intel Atom 330 @ 1.60GHz CPU. In the task manager under the category ASHE, the computer is set to super performance. This makes the CPU run at a clock frequency of 1761 MHz on the Asus EB1012, whereas the Asrock A330GC runs at 1603.4 MHz. This was done to see the maximum performance.

Below is the test of the CPU test on the Asrock A330GC and Asus EB1012:

Here you can see that Asrock A330GC scores 631.5 and Asus EB1012 scores 700.1 in CPU Mark. Not much of a surprise since the latter runs at a higher frequency.

The two machines have different onboard GPUs. The Asrock A330GC sports an ATI Radeon HD 2400 whereas the Asus EB1012 comes with a Nvidia ION chip. First we will look at 2D Graphics Mark:

As can be seen, there is a difference, the largest of which is in the Complex Vectors test where the Asus EB1012 is 77.1% faster than the Asrock A330GC. This test draws up a jungle scene by using a number of complex vector images of trees and animals. This scene will be drawn as many times as possible within a certain time limit but only ends when the drawing is completed.

Note that when it comes to handling the Windows Interface, the ATI Radeon HD 2400 is 2.1% faster than the Nvidia ION chip in the Asus EB1012.