How Does the CoreHT Server Perform?

Application performance remains similar to the CoreHT 252B, with the major difference coming in hard drive-specific benchmarks.

Futuremark PCMark Vantage

x264 Encoding—Pass 1

x264 Encoding—Pass 2

For example, look at our WinRAR test, where we estimate how well WinRAR performs, particularly with respect to processing split archives. To evaluate this, we take a 4.36 GB MKV file, compress it in the 'Best' compression mode into a split archive (97.1 MB each), which results in 44 files on the hard disk. The time taken to decompress this split archive is then recorded. The performance in this benchmark is heavily influenced by the hard disk in the system.

WinRAR Benchmarking

In this test, the Server soundly beats the 252B as well as the older Core 100 model. The other possibility here is to reconfigure the hard drives in RAID 1, although performance would decrease.

ASRock CoreHT Server Edition - Internals ASRock CoreHT Server Edition - Heat and Power
POST A COMMENT

44 Comments

View All Comments

  • VivekGowri - Thursday, February 16, 2012 - link

    195mm x 186mm x 70mm (W x L x D) Reply
  • hasseb64 - Friday, February 17, 2012 - link

    18 W @ Idle is very good, it's 6 W less then I have in my server at idle and I have used all the best things I could possible buy for money. Reply
  • biostud - Friday, February 17, 2012 - link

    you have complaints about looks and the HD3000. The Asrock vision 3D has better looks and GT540M.

    http://www.asrock.com/nettop/overview.us.asp?Model...
    Reply
  • Kisper - Saturday, February 18, 2012 - link

    "It was hit all the key points, though it didn’t do anything in particular to set itself apart from the rest of the SFF crowd."

    >>>>> "It was hitting all the key points, ...."
    or
    >>>>> "It hit all the key points, ..."
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now