Thinking of upgrading to an NUC - which one?

elsmandino

Hello.

My current setup is as follows:

i3-2105
MSI mATX mobo
2x4GB RAM
2 x SSD [60GB (Linux Mint) and 120GB (Windows 10)]
Antec NSK2480
Antec 400W High Current Gamer PSU
Steinberg UR22 MKII External Soundcard

The vast majority of the PC is used for browsing and word-processing, with a tiny bit used for CUBASE - nothing too taking, though.

The PC is ultimately too big for my office (it is really small) and rather than just try and cram everything into a tiny case and then try and use a PICO-PSU, I thought I would go the whole hog and go with an NUC.

They can get pretty pricey and I have read that it works out cheaper to get a bare-bones version and upgrade it yourself.

What should I be looking for?

I think that I might avoid Celeron/Pentium, and stick with an i3 (I also need to make sure that I get the taller version, so I can stick the 120GB SSD in it and dual boot).

This the seventh generation:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/INTEL-Next-Unit-Computing-NUC7i3DNHE/dp/B078TGV39W/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=NUC7i3DNHE&qid=1555070999&s=gateway&sr=8-1

and this is the eighth:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/BOXNUC8I3BEH2-CANYON-NUC8I3BEH2-Intel®-NUC8i3BEH-Noir/dp/B07JB2M5JS

Which should I go for?

The new generation seems to be cheaper on most sites I have visited and I cannot seem to find out why.

EndlessWaves

I've never been a great fan of Intel's NUC design. It always seemed a shrink to far, getting that extra half litre by moving the power supply into a second box and a big drop in power down to laptop processors.

Some of the newer ones like Bean Canyon have more powerful CPUs that are less weak compared to to other Mini PCs, although they're keeping the two box design with separate power supply (which to be fair is also popular among other designs).

Looking at the specs I don't see any reason to go for a Dawson Canyon model over a Bean Canyon one (the two you've linked). Old products can go up in price after they're discontinued which may be the reason for the price difference.

elsmandino

Thanks very much for that.

NUCs do seem pretty expensive for what they are - could you possibly recommend other options that are better value?

One thing that has been bugging me, having read a few reviews, is that these NUCs are essentially laptops without the extra bits, so you might as well buy a full blown laptop and have all the extras (including convenience) thrown in.

This wouldn't be the end of the world for me as I could just plug the laptop in, under my desk, and use it as a desktop anyway.

EndlessWaves

I'm not familiar with the exact models on sale at the moment, but I'd be surprised if you could get a Mini PC with a mid-range CPU, 8GB  of memory and an SSD for under £350-400. Have a look at alternatives like the Fujitsu Q558, Lenovo's Thinkcentre Tiny or Dell's Optiplex Micro models.

A laptop will have similar processing power to a NUC and the advantage of portability, but there are a couple of downsides such as reduced port counts. A laptop typically only has 2-3 USB ports compared to the 6-8 on a Mini PC. Two display outputs are also much more common among desktops.

elsmandino

Thank you for this - completely agree with what you say and, following a bit more research, have concluded that I could probably build a better value small PC myself.

I shall start a fresh thread for this, so as not to muddy the waters.

Thanks again.

EndlessWaves

It's worth looking at the option, especially if you have bits you can transfer like the SSDs and a boxed retail copy of Windows 7/8/10.

But you'd be looking at £50-75 for the case and PSU, £80-90 for the motherboard, £40 for 8GB DDR4 and £70-100 for the CPU so it's still £250-300 for the equivalent of a NUC barebones.

A self-built system will also be somewhat larger. None of the attempts at a small form factor component standard have been particularly successful or convincing, so the smallest standard with any choice is still the old Mini-ITX form factor. A small Mini-ITX case is around 50% again taller, deeper and wider than the larger Mini PCs.

If budget is a big concern then have you looked second hand? Mini PCs aren't a new thing and you can pick up a three or four year old one for £100 second hand.

elsmandino

Thanks, EndlessWaves.

Your comments have directly led me to what I think will end up being the perfect choice - AsRock Deskminis.

They are not cheap, once you put everything together - as you say, I already have SSD and a copy of Windows, but I still need to shell out for a CPU and an upgrade to DDR4.

That being said, I don't really have a budget in mind - only that I get a system that seems worth the money.

My original choice was just to go with one of these:

ASRock DeskMini 310 Series

and put a G5400 - a chip that a lot of people are raving about.

I have been buying exclusively Intel for the past 20 years or so, on the basis that AMD CPUs were inferior in virtually every way.

However, that seems to have changed as of late.  Everyone seem to be banging on about what a great buy the Rysen 3 2200G is.

One of those would easily pop into one of these instead:

ASRock DeskMini A300 Series

If you had the choice, which route would you take?

EndlessWaves

I don't know whether Mini-STX being a standard is having any impact on your decision to go for that model, but it's gathered little interest so in a few years time I'd expect it to be as dead as it's predecessor - Thin-ITX. I'd consider it no advantage over similar alternatives in proprietary form factors like Shuttle's XPC Slim range.

When I built my mini-ITX system a couple of years ago I went for the G4560, which is essentially the same CPU as the G5400.

It acts as you'd expect it to act. Similar to a mid-range to high end laptop processor. Plenty of power for most stuff, but get a couple of moderately CPU heavy programs going and the rest of the system can slow down.

Back then Ryzen hadn't launched yet, and if I was building again now I'd go for the 2200G, all else being equal. The only area where the G5400 isn't worse is power consumption and the 2200G is still sufficiently low power to be cooled quietly by a 35-40mm CPU cooler.

Although it looks like the A300 hasn't quite made release yet, and when it does it won't be able to use the boxed CPU cooler unlike with the A310 (the Intel cooler does a good job at this power level, I'm using it myself) so that'll add another £10-15 or more to the cost.

I don't know if the AMD model will use the same power brick as the Intel one: