Haswell NUCs? When?

[VirtualLarry]

Anyone know when the Haswell NUC units should show up? If it's soon, I'll wait. I promised someone I would build them a NUC in the next few months. I'm concerned about what I read about current IB models overheating, at least the higher-end ones.

 

[AtenRa]

Im not 100% sure, early Q4.

 

[NTMBK]

If you're happy to go for a slightly larger box, Zotac have a ZBox out with an Ivy Bridge quad core in it (http://www.ebuyer.com/523038-zotac-...e-i7-3770t-quad-core-2-5ghz-wlan-zbox-id90-be). Still VESA mountable.

 

[Liquid_Static]

Honestly the Zbox is better in just about every way when compared to a NUC.

 

[Mushkins]

I'm waiting for these too. The i3 haswells are coming early September, i'd imagine the NUC line is going to be updated a month or two after. A Haswell NUC would make a great HTPC.

 

[aigomorla]

I WANT ONE!!!!!

Ultra Tiny's are the next pokemon for me... i gotta gobble them all!

Honestly the Zbox is better in just about every way when compared to a NUC.

nah... the nuc is so tiny its mind boggling.
my uncle still tells me each time he turns on his htpc.. he trips out that its a full bloated PC inside, and faster then his old desktop ontop.
(mSATA SSD!!)

Zotac ID on the bottom.. Intel NUC on top!

Anyone know when the Haswell NUC units should show up? If it's soon, I'll wait. I promised someone I would build them a NUC in the next few months. I'm concerned about what I read about current IB models overheating, at least the higher-end ones.

Tiny preconfig package => soldered CPU on the board
soldered CPU on board => No IHS~
No IHS => No IHS gap problem
No IHS Gap problem => All of us VERY HAPPY doing the peanut butter jelly dance~

 

[NTMBK]

nah... the nuc is so tiny its mind boggling.
my uncle still tells me each time he turns on his htpc.. he trips out that its a full bloated PC inside, and faster then his old desktop ontop.
(mSATA SSD!!)

Haha, yeah, that is pretty cute! But by that point I'm not fussed how small it is- if it fits on a VESA mount and I can't see it, I don't care

I know what you mean about your uncle though. My girlfriend absolutely loves her ZBox, she thinks its adorable.

 

[HeCtiC]

How in the hell do they think that switching the two full-size HDMI ports for mini-displayport and mini-hdmi is an upgrade?

What do you guys think?

 

[zarellaro]

me too waiting I3 Haswell in NUC.
But I believe to prefer the Zbox Nano, but having the Zbox 1 Ram slot only, you will lose the benefits of dual channel. Right?

 

[crashtech]

How in the hell do they think that switching the two full-size HDMI ports for mini-displayport and mini-hdmi is an upgrade?

What do you guys think?

DisplayPort has double the bandwidth of HDMI, and DisplayPort to HDMI adapters are available, so it looks like an upgrade from here.

 

[blackened23]

How in the hell do they think that switching the two full-size HDMI ports for mini-displayport and mini-hdmi is an upgrade?

What do you guys think?

Erm, HDMI is worthless in comparison to displayport; the latter is far superior in terms of specifications and bandwidth. Use the mini HDMI for your 1080p HDTV, and use the displayport for a PC monitor. It's a much better solution than 2x HDMI.

By the way, 99% of HDMI implementations do not support greater than 1080p. This is obviously a problem when many PC monitors have greater than 1080p resolutions - this is also why so many ultrabooks are problematic. They're all using mini HDMI and they are all limited to 1080p. That is worthless for me since i'm using a 1600p monitor as my primary at home. (and also why i'm using a macbook for my portable - as it has mini DP)

 

[Mushkins]

Erm, HDMI is worthless in comparison to displayport; the latter is far superior in terms of specifications and bandwidth. Use the mini HDMI for your 1080p HDTV, and use the displayport for a PC monitor. It's a much better solution than 2x HDMI.

By the way, 99% of HDMI implementations do not support greater than 1080p. This is obviously a problem when many PC monitors have greater than 1080p resolutions - this is also why so many ultrabooks are problematic. They're all using mini HDMI and they are all limited to 1080p. That is worthless for me since i'm using a 1600p monitor as my primary at home. (and also why i'm using a macbook for my portable - as it has mini DP)

Dont forget these things aren't really designed to be home PCs with monitors and keyboards. They're mainly designed for business use: aka hooking it up to a display terminal or a tv up on the wall. Most of those displays are not greater than 1080p yet. Needing an adapter is one more thing that can shake loose or fail and make your display go out. IMO best solution wouldve been standard HDMI paired with displayport or mini-dp.

 

[crashtech]

There are plenty of cables with mini-HDMI on one end, and full size HDMI on the other. There's no real issue here, unless you think the cable should be bundled with the unit.

 

[Asterox]

I'm waiting for these too. The i3 haswells are coming early September, i'd imagine the NUC line is going to be updated a month or two after. A Haswell NUC would make a great expensive HTPC.

Now it is ok no doubt, but in the case of a small HTPC PC Gigabyte Brix / Kabini APU is far cheaper solution but still price/performanse a great solution.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/systems/56289-gigabyte-brix-barebones-come-haswell-kabini-flavours/

 

[Mushkins]

There are plenty of cables with mini-HDMI on one end, and full size HDMI on the other. There's no real issue here, unless you think the cable should be bundled with the unit.

Is it an absolute dealbreaker that makes the unit unpurchasable? Of course not, but it's inconvenient. Mini-hdmi doesn't offer any real benefits over standard HDMI in this use scenario. Hence why it's a bit of a head scratcher. It's not a smartphone, we're not fighting to have the worlds tiniest and fastest cable plugged into the bottom of it.

 

[blackened23]

Is it an absolute dealbreaker that makes the unit unpurchasable? Of course not, but it's inconvenient. Mini-hdmi doesn't offer any real benefits over standard HDMI in this use scenario. Hence why it's a bit of a head scratcher. It's not a smartphone, we're not fighting to have the worlds tiniest and fastest cable plugged into the bottom of it.

The first answer is that HDMI out takes a lot more space than mini HDMI. This is why ultrabooks do not use full size HDMI, and use mHDMI instead - with space being a prime consideration with the NUC, mini HDMI with mini DP provides the greatest good to the greatest number of users. HDMI would be problematic because it would take up much more room on the box itself, which is intended to be a super small form factor box. Space is limited.

Also, Mini HDMI to HDMI is a very common. The improvement is allowing displayport for monitor functionality - this implementation makes the NUC not absolute trash for use with PC monitors, while HDMI is worthless for PC monitor use. HDMI not only does not support greater than 1080p in 99% of implementations (including the NUC), it does not support anything higher than RGB color output. Worthless. HDMI is fine for your HDTV and you can use your HDTV with mini HDMI just fine, but if you want to connect a NUC to a PC monitor, then HDMI is garbage.

A lot of people use these small boxes with PC monitors on occassion, Apple's mac mini is a prime example. The NUC and Mac mini would be completely worthless without some form of displayport for many folks, the new Haswell NUC will fix this issue. Having displayport on the NUC is a HUGE improvement - if you're using one with aRGB or an IPS panel with higher than 1080p resolution. HDMI would be worthless with those types of displays.

 

[VirtualLarry]

HDMI is fine for your HDTV and you can use your HDTV with mini HDMI just fine, but if you want to connect a NUC to a PC monitor, then HDMI is garbage.

About as garbage as DVI-D is. Oh, wait, you mean we still use DVI-D to connect PC monitors? Why do we use such "garbage" standards...

 

[blckgrffn]

About as garbage as DVI-D is. Oh, wait, you mean we still use DVI-D to connect PC monitors? Why do we use such "garbage" standards...

DVI-D is superior to HDMI when it comes to nearly all HDMI implementations if you don't need audio.

In the usage case quoted, DVI-D will function without issue where HDMI will not.

There really is no reason (other than access to super cheap cables) to want HDMI over DP.

 

[TerryMathews]

About as garbage as DVI-D is. Oh, wait, you mean we still use DVI-D to connect PC monitors? Why do we use such "garbage" standards...

HDMI is the same as single link DVI. It doesn't support the same bandwidth as dual link.

 

[tential]

Ivybridge Nuc was pretty freaking good. EXTREMELY good actually when I read reviews on it. After seeing those Haswell underclocking wattage numbers, I am expecting this to be quite freaking good.

 

[AtenRa]

HDMI is the same as single link DVI. It doesn't support the same bandwidth as dual link.

HDMI 1.4 can support 4K resolutions at 24bit color
HDMI 1.3 can support 2560x1600 at 24bit color

Dont forget that HDMI 1.4 and up officially supports 120Hz and 3D(1080p at 60Hz).

edit: Dual link DVI only supports UP TO 2560x1600

 

[TerryMathews]

HDMI 1.4 can support 4K resolutions at 24bit color
HDMI 1.3 can support 2560x1600 at 24bit color

Dont forget that HDMI 1.4 and up officially supports 120Hz and 3D(1080p at 60Hz).

edit: Dual link DVI only supports UP TO 2560x1600

What refresh rate? You can run any resolution if you slow the refresh down enough.

 

[blackened23]

HDMI 1.4 can support 4K resolutions at 24bit color
HDMI 1.3 can support 2560x1600 at 24bit color

Dont forget that HDMI 1.4 and up officially supports 120Hz and 3D(1080p at 60Hz).

edit: Dual link DVI only supports UP TO 2560x1600

There is no product that i'm aware of using a proper HDMI implementation. Do you have a 1600p monitor? Have you tried using it with HDMI? Go ahead and try it. Have fun with that. Do you have an ultrabook with mini HDMI? Connect that HDMi port to a 1600p monitor. Again, have fun with your eyes bleeding from using a 1600p monitor which is now limited to 1080p at 30 or 60hz depending on your cable or outlet.

I have tried HDMI with every GPU i've ever owned, that includes 7970s, GTX 680, GTX 780, GTX 580, not a single one supports over 1080p through HDMI. I have to use DVI-D or displayport.

Anyone with actual experience with trying to use HDMI on a high resolution screen (eg 2560x1440 or higher) would attest to HDMI being junk. Furthermore, every ultrabook and HDTV implementation is 1.2. Every cable known to man is 1.2. That's the entire problem with HDMI, nothing is compatible with anything else and thus everything falls back to the lowest common denominator, 1080p. Some HDMI implementations don't even allow 60hz at 1080p. It's a joke. Furthermore, the cable has to be a certain spec, the output (eg. GPU or laptop) has to be a certain spec, and the monitor has to have a certain spec of HDMI. If anything is out of wack between the three, you again go to the lowest common denominator - 1080p at 30 at 60hz. Using HDMI with a high resolution screen is an exercise in frustration for this reason. Oh. Another point - HDMI 1.4 doesn't exist yet, nothing is using it. As far as i'm aware, using 4k resolution with HDMI involves 2 cables and you will be limited to 30hz despite using 2 HDMI cables.

HDMI is not a replacement or substitute for DVI-D or displayport / mini displayport as a PC display - Anyone using a 1600p monitor can attest to this fact easily. Again, i'm sorry for the in-eloquent language here but HDMI is garbage for anything but your HDTV. Until cable and panel manufactures can get their mess together, there is absolutely not a single reason for anyone to ever use HDMI for a PC. Unless they need the sound, or they're already at 1080p.

 

[Essence_of_War]

Furthermore, every ultrabook and HDTV implementation is 1.2. Every cable known to man is 1.2. That's the entire problem with HDMI, nothing is compatible with anything else and thus everything falls back to the lowest common denominator, 1080p.

Preach it. Unless the monitor in question is a 1920x1080 monitor, my rule has been to just ignore any sort of HDMI anything.

I've had problems getting HDMI to work with bloody 1920x1200!

DP, DVI, VGA all work perfectly. No need to muck about with cable revision vs. gpu supported revision vs. controller on monitor revision.

 

[AtenRa]

What refresh rate? You can run any resolution if you slow the refresh down enough.

HDMI 1.4A can support the following.

1080p at 120Hz
1080p 3D at 60Hz
1600p at 60Hz
3840x2160 at up to 30Hz
4K at 24Hz

HDMI 1.4a pdf
http://www.hdmi.org/download/press_kit/PressBriefing_HDMI1_4_Final_083109.pdf

You can buy HDMI 1.4A from newegg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...CE&PageSize=20