Performance Metrics - I

The Voyo V3 was evaluated using our standard test suite for low power desktops / industrial PCs. Not all benchmarks were processed on all the machines due to updates in our testing procedures. Therefore, the list of PCs in each graph might not be the same.

Futuremark PCMark 8

PCMark 8 provides various usage scenarios (home, creative and work) and offers ways to benchmark both baseline (CPU-only) as well as OpenCL accelerated (CPU + GPU) performance. We benchmarked select PCs for the OpenCL accelerated performance in all three usage scenarios. These scores are heavily influenced by the CPU in the system. The Atom cores in the x7-Z8700 are obviously not as powerful as the Broadwell cores in the Core M-5Y10c in the LIVA Core for general workloads. However, thanks to the higher clocks and four physical cores, the performance is better than other dual-core Braswell PCs such as the Intel Celeron N3000-based ASRock Beebox N3000-NUC.

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Home OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Creative OpenCL

Futuremark PCMark 8 - Work OpenCL

Miscellaneous Futuremark Benchmarks

The above scenario also plays out in other Futuremark benchmarks. The presence of a Broadwell-class GPU in the system also enables top-of-the-line performance in the 3D benchmarks (only getting edged out by Core M).

Futuremark PCMark 7 - PCMark Suite Score

Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Extreme Score

Futuremark 3DMark 11 - Entry Score

Futuremark 3DMark 2013 - Ice Storm Score

Futuremark 3DMark 2013 - Cloud Gate Score

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15

CINEBENCH R15 is used for 3D rendering evaluation. It provides three benchmark modes - OpenGL, single threaded and multi-threaded. Evaluation of select PCs in all three modes provided us the following results. They faithfully follow what we have already seen in the Futuremark benchmarks.

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Single Thread

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - Multiple Threads

3D Rendering - CINEBENCH R15 - OpenGL

Introduction and Setup Impressions Performance Metrics - II
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • ganeshts - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    As you can see from the thermal stress graphs, the GPU clocks in around 280 MHz for the Furmark stress test. It is always above the base clock claimed by Intel (200 MHz). In any case, the configuration is such that the total power draw by the system at the wall doesn't exceed 10W under any circumstance (obviously, power draw by any connected USB peripherals is excluded).
  • woggs - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    How do you know you didn't get viruses or other spy-ware for a Chinese file sharing site? I've seen this happen on low-end and high-end systems going direct to vendor sites for drivers in some cases, which resulted in attempts to create an encrypted link back to Chinese IP addresses. The description of issues raise lots of red flags.
  • ganeshts - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    I downloaded on to a VM first. Mounted with 'Dism' on the VM and scanned with Windows Defender before moving it to the Voyo V3 / main network.

    But, yes, Voyo needs to make the drivers available separately.
  • user_5447 - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    Why iperf (ip perf) is confusingly written as iPerf in Wi-Fi graphs?
  • Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    This bifurcated market remains an insulting joke. You can buy these types of systems for $150 all day long. But simply upgrade the atom into a Core m and all the sudden the price is jacked up by $300? That is so insulting that I wouldnt even contemplate buying either.
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    Most of that's down to Intel's pricing. $40 for atom, vs $280 for core M. Implementing a Core M system is more expensive as well, the SoC has 30% more contacts (FCBGA 1515 vs 1170), some of which correspond to extra mobo traces (more expensive PCB). Component wise, you're also looking at 2 channels of ram not 1 for at few more dollars of parts.

    The OEMs are probably charging slightly higher margins since Core M is branded as a premium product not race to the bottom, and retail margins are generally a percentage of the price not a flat dollar amount; but most of the price difference is down to Intel's pricing. Their holding good mobile CPU prices (ie not their cheap lines: Atom, Pentium, Celeron) at floor of nearly $200 is all about maximizing returns in a portion of the market that they have nearly no effective competition at present. (Hopefully Zen will let AMD compete in CPU performance/watt in the ultrabook processor category soon.)
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    Lastly, Core M is priced at a premium to core i3/5/7 because they're dies that're binned for working decently at extra low power levels, the intermediate level Celeron/Pentium lines are much cheaper because they're a dumping ground for duds.
  • dsraa - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    $359 on the 'advertised' amazon link.....pffft. Ain't buying it from there almost 2x as much.....yuck.
  • ganeshts - Tuesday, March 1, 2016 - link

    You can always use the Gearbest link that is in the final page (just prior to the Amazon link) which reflects the true value / non-inflated cost of the system - around $200.
  • jimbo2779 - Thursday, March 3, 2016 - link

    I would never deal with gearbest. Do your research on them, they are terrible, absolutely awful.

    Their trustpilot reviews are faked so look elsewhere and you get an idea of the type of company they are.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now