ASRock Industrial NUC BOX-1360P/D5 Review: Raptor Lake-P on the Leading Edge
by Ganesh T S on July 18, 2023 10:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
- Intel
- UCFF
- Mini-PC
- ASRock Industrial
- Raptor Lake-P
Setup Notes and Platform Analysis
Our evaluation of the NUC BOX-1360P/D5 (after completion of the build using the G.Skill SODIMMs and Samsung M.2 SSD) began with a look at the options available in the BIOS interface. As is typical for systems targeting the industrial market primarily, the main BIOS interface is a vanilla one. It does provide plenty of configuration options. The video below presents the entire gamut of available options.
The key feature is under Advanced > CPU Configuration > CPU Operating Mode, with the option to either keep it at 'Normal' or change it to 'Performance'. The latter setting increases the power budget available to the processor.
The block diagram below presents the overall high-speed I/O distribution.
The key updates over the NUCS BOX-1360P/D4 are evident in the above block diagram. The JHL9040R retimer enables DisplayPort 2.1 support as well as USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (20 Gbps) support on the Thunderbolt 4 Type-C port. The HDMI port uses a ITE IT66318 retimer. Realtek ALC256 fulfils the analog audio codec duties. A dedicated SATA port is brought out on the board along with the required power pins. A TPM device from Infineon communicates over a SPI interface with the Core i7-1360P.
There is a lack of flexibility on the board design side for the HSIO lanes allocation due to the integration of the PCH inside the package. Despite that, ASRock Industrial has delivered a compelling set of I/O options given the form-factor constraints. Making both Type-C ports in the front panel to be Thunderbolt 4-capable would have been a welcome improvement over the previous Intel-based UCFF systems from the company.
In today's review, we compare the NUC BOX-1360P/D5 and a host of other systems based on processors with TDPs ranging from 15W to 35W. The systems do not target the same market segments, but a few key aspects lie in common, making the comparisons relevant.
| Comparative PC Configurations | ||
| Aspect | ASRock NUC BOX-1360P-D5 (Performance) | |
| CPU | Intel Core i7-1360P Raptor Lake 4P + 8E / 16T, up to 5.0 GHz (P) up to 3.7 GHz (E) Intel 7, 18MB L2, Min / Max / Base TDP: 20W / 64W / 28W PL1 = 40W, PL2 = 64W |
Intel Core i7-1360P Raptor Lake 4P + 8E / 16T, up to 5.0 GHz (P) up to 3.7 GHz (E) Intel 7, 18MB L2, Min / Max / Base TDP: 20W / 64W / 28W PL1 = 40W, PL2 = 64W |
| GPU | Intel Iris Xe Graphics (96EU @ 1.50 GHz) |
Intel Iris Xe Graphics (96EU @ 1.50 GHz) |
| RAM | G.Skill RipJaws F5-4800S3434A16GA2-RS DDR5-4800 SODIMM 34-34-34-76 @ 4800 MHz 2x16 GB |
G.Skill RipJaws F5-4800S3434A16GA2-RS DDR5-4800 SODIMM 34-34-34-76 @ 4800 MHz 2x16 GB |
| Storage | Samsung SSD 980 PRO (500 GB; M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe;) (Samsung 128L V-NAND 3D TLC; Samsung Elpis Controller) |
Samsung SSD 980 PRO (500 GB; M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe;) (Samsung 128L V-NAND 3D TLC; Samsung Elpis Controller) |
| Wi-Fi | 1x 2.5 GbE RJ-45 (Intel I226-LM) 1x 2.5 GbE RJ-45 (Intel I226-V) Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX210 (2x2 802.11ax - 2.4 Gbps) |
1x 2.5 GbE RJ-45 (Intel I226-LM) 1x 2.5 GbE RJ-45 (Intel I226-V) Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX210 (2x2 802.11ax - 2.4 Gbps) |
| Price (in USD, when built) | US $700 (barebones) US $840 (as configured, no OS) |
US $700 (barebones) US $840 (as configured, no OS) |
The rest of this review deals with the comparative benchmark numbers for the UCFF systems outlined in the table above. All of the systems are based on 4"x4" motherboards, though the PL1 and PL2 configurations vary.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
21 Comments
View All Comments
ganeshts - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
Any links to such a 'NUC' ?I do have a Phoenix-based GTR7 from Beelink here in my testbed, but driver issues are preventing it from completing our benchmark suite. I am waiting for a new driver release from AMD.
lemurbutton - Friday, July 21, 2023 - link
And any M2 Mac Mini would destroy any Zen4 NUC.TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 24, 2023 - link
Until you have to run something not in the MAC ecosystem. OOPS!PeachNCream - Friday, July 21, 2023 - link
I don't think destruction is quite the right to articulate your apparent thoughts. Perhaps "result in higher scores on benchmarks" or maybe "complete compute workloads sooner" would fit better in this case. Computer nerds appear to be rather detached from reality when expressing thoughts which gives all of them a bad reputation among the better positioned and more intelligent normal population.Samus - Saturday, July 22, 2023 - link
The problem with AMD enterprise and industrial products has always been management adoption. Intel has IT depts hooked on vPro, iME, AMT, etc.nicolaim - Wednesday, July 19, 2023 - link
It's 2023. Only two USB-C ports, none on the back.Samus - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
That was my gripe. Replace the HDMI and DP ports with two TB4-compliant USB-C ports on the rear would be the minimum modification for such an 'industrial' appliance. Seriously, why do you have to plug something into the front to use Thunderbolt?PeachNCream - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
Probably because nobody uses or cares about Thunderbolt. Sure it has that usual small, insane rabid fanbase that any obscure computer standard had in the past, but outside of the inevitable idiots that inflate its utility, no one cares and no one profits from it.abufrejoval - Monday, July 24, 2023 - link
That's a bit harsh.Yes, using TB to its full potential is somewhat expensive but given a choice, I'll always opt for the TB variant over pure USB, if only for 10Gbit Ethernet.
Front vs. back: I guess they have done their studies on how people use TB and unfortunately habits vary between people.
Most of my dual TB systems have one TB in the front, the other in the back and that works pretty well for me. The 10GBase-T NIC goes into the back port and the front port is open to anything transient, which could be just some USB media (these native SATA 10Gbit USB sticks are hard to beat via anything native TB), a temporary display (Alt-DP handy there) and in theory to things like TB networking, which is typically transient.
The older systems just have a single TB and expect a hub connected on the back, which seems sensible.
Two in the front and two in the back would be better still, even if you couldn't use all four at full speed for lack of PCIe lanes or a cheap enough switch.
Yet again, when your NUC is stuck to the back of a display, who cares what's front or back, because it's all behind the screen anyway and it's only people like me, wo use clusters of these NUCs as µ-servers in a "tiny-rack" who get bothered by the orientation of those ports.
Changing port orientation in a NUC means a mainboard redesign and few would want to pay for that. So I guess their asked their volume customers and this is what those came up with.
Very few vendors want to aggravate the customers.
sjkpublic@gmail.com - Thursday, July 20, 2023 - link
Performance comparison says it all. 1360P DOA. 7735U $100-200 cheaper for ASROCK. Even cheaper if you look at other companies.