Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Zotac Zbox Nano ID65 Plus

Seven Small (But Powerful) Mini-PCs, Reviewed
By

Zotac was in the mini-PC business long before Intel joined the party. Its Zbox line-up emerged back in 2010, and the ultra-compact Zbox nano form factor surfaced in 2011. Armed with an anemic AMD E-350 APU, integrated Radeon HD 6310 graphics, 2 GB of RAM, and a 320 GB hard drive, the 5" x 5" x 1.8" AD10 beat Intel's option to market by a year and a half. The NUC looks awfully similar, doesn't it? Just look at how far we've come performance-wise.

Compelled by the thermal ceiling of Intel's low-voltage Ivy Bridge-based CPUs, Zotac squeezed much more powerful hardware into the nano's chassis, yielding the ID65 Plus. It comes equipped with a Core i7-3537U processor sporting a 2 GHz base clock, 3.1 GHz peak Turbo Boost frequency, and 4 MB shared L3 cache.

Intel's HD Graphics 4000 is perhaps the platform's weakest link. To be fair to Zotac, this isn't a new product; it was introduced earlier in 2013. We chose it to serve as the heart of an upcoming automotive build project, though, and thought it deserved an opportunity to participate in today's round-up. The good news is that Zotac's Haswell-equipped replacement, the nano ID68 plus, should show up in the U.S. very soon. It sports a Core i5-4200U CPU with Intel HD 4600 graphics in the exact same chassis as the ID65 we're looking at today.

Fortunately, a mature market means that the Zbox nano ID65 Plus sells for under $550 on Amazon. It's not a stripped-down barebones system, either. Rather, it includes a 500 GB hard drive, 4 GB of DDR3-1600, and a Wi-Fi/Bluetooth card. Buy an operating system and hook up some peripherals and you're good to go. We settled on a $730 price tag with Windows 8.1 Professional.

Bundle And First Impression

Inside Zotac's packaging you'll find the Zbox nano itself, a VESA mounting plate, documentation, a driver CD, a wireless antenna, an AC adapter, power cord, and an S/PDIF-to-optical adapter. The system comes equipped with a 2.5" mechanical hard drive, but a SATA-to-dual-mSATA adapter is included too. This component is unique among the mini-PCs we're testing; it lets you add two mSATA-based drives and rope them together in a RAID array if you wish.

It's tempting to say the Zbox nano looks like a slightly larger NUC, given 5" x 5" x 1.8" measurements. But Zotac's form factor came first, so it's probably more accurate to say Intel's design takes after the Zbox. Compact size aside, you still get the signature power ring up top that lights up when the small system is on. It looks great in blue, just as it did in green on the original Zbox nano AD10.

A quick comparison shows that Intel's Haswell-based NUC is 4.6" x 4.4" x 1.4". So, while the Zbox is larger, the extra volume isn't going to make a ton of difference on your desktop or mounted to the back of your monitor. Zotac's solution is also about 12% heavier than Intel's revised platform.

Right up front, Zotac gives you an IR receiver, a memory card reader, two USB 2.0 ports, and two audio jacks. The microphone jack doubles as an S/PDIF output, which is compatible with the bundled S/PDIF-to-optical adapter.

Around back we find full-sized DisplayPort and HDMI outputs, four USB 3.0 ports, GbE connectivity, eSATA, AC power input, and an interface for the included Wi-Fi antenna. This is the only contender in our story leaning on an external antenna.

The bottom access plate is removable without a screwdriver; the large rubber feet are easily turned by hand. Only three of the four feet actually hold the Zbox's cover in place. 

The insides are completely unique from Intel's NUC or Gigabyte's Brix. I removed the 500 GB Samsung Spinpoint M8 disk drive and installed the dual-mSATA adapter for my picture. Really, the only disappointment is a single-channel memory architecture, which fails to fully utilize the Ivy Bridge controller. Most of our compute-intensive workloads aren't negatively affected, but a lack of bandwidth does hit graphics performance. At any rate, there's a 4 GB DDR3-1600 SO-DIMM already installed, along with an Intel Centrino 2230 802.11n/Bluetooth 4.0 wireless card.

Special Features And Livability

Less-compact dimensions compared to the NUC don't really bother me in a desktop environment. I'm more focused on the possibilities enabled by the Zbox nano's extra space inside. Do you want a 2.5" hard disk in a tiny PC? Do you want an mSATA-based RAID setup? Do you want to use both input and output audio jacks at the same time? How about an integrated memory card reader? Intel recently updated its NUC family with two models that are a little thicker and do accommodate 2.5" drives, but lack some of the other features.

I was intrigued with what the original Zbox nano offered back in 2011, but never fully appreciated Zotac's work until I worked on this comparison and dealt with the competition's limitations. Again, though, a lack of dual-channel memory support hurts an otherwise command performance. It's unfortunate that the Haswell-based models won't fix this.


Zotac Zbox Nano ID65 Plus
Chipset
Intel HM77 Express
CPU
Intel Core i7-3537U, Dual-Core, Hyper-Threaded, 2 GHz (3.1 GHz Peak Turbo Boost), 4 MB Shared L3 Cache
Graphics
Intel HD Graphics 4000, 350 MHz - 1.2 GHz
Graphics Memory
Shared with system memory
System Memory
1 x 4 GB Samsung PC3-12800, DDR3-1600, 11-11-11-28-1T
Hard Drive
Samsung Spinpoint M8 500 GB, 8 MB Cache, 5400 RPM, SATA 3 Gb/s
(includes adapter for 2 x mSATA SSD drives, optional RAID)
Optical Drive
N/A
Operating System
Not Included
Included Peripherals
Not Included
Internal Interfaces
Memory Support
Single-Channel, 1 x DDR3/L/-RS SO-DIMM slot, 1.35/1.5 V, 1333/1600 MT/s, 8 GB Max
Mini-PCIe
One slot (occupied by included wireless card)
mSATA
Two slots (with mSATA adapter)
Mass Storage Controllers
Chipset SATA
1 x SATA 3Gb/s, (used with included 2.5" hard drive)
(bundle includes 2.5" SATA-to-2 x mSATA SSD adapter)
I/O Panel Connectors
DVI
Not Included
VGA
Not Included
HDMI
1
DisplayPort
1
Thunderbolt
Not Included
MHSL Input
Not Included
USB
2 x USB 2.0, 2 x USB 3.0
Memory Card Reader
MS/PRO, SD, xD, MMC
Network
1
eSATA
1
Digital Audio out
S/PDIF jack/HDMI
Analog Audio
Two front
IR Sensor
Yes
Ethernet & Wireless
LAN
Integrated Gigabit
Wi-Fi
2T2R Single-Band Intel Centrino 2230 802.11n mini-PCIe card
Bluetooth
Bluetooth 4.0 (Intel Centrino 2230 Wi-Fi Combo card)
Audio
HD Audio Codec
Analog and S/PDIF: Realtek ALC892
HDMI: Intel Display Audio
Audio Channels
7.1+2 Channel HD Audio Codec with Content Protection
Physical Specifications
Size
127 x 127 x 45 mm
(5” x 5” x 1.77”)
Weight
537 g (1.18 lbs)
Price
As tested: $709.98 (with Windows 8.1 Pro x64)

Hardware: $570 (Amazon)
Display all 50 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 9 Hide
    outlw6669 , January 30, 2014 12:31 AM
    Not a single AMD based SFF PC?
    I am disappoint, this would be a great area for AMD to show their competitiveness.
  • 8 Hide
    ta152h , January 30, 2014 12:50 AM
    @outlw6669I built one based on the A6 5200, and it's perfect for what I need it for. It's low power, more than fast enough for what 99% of the people do, quiet, and inexpensive. I'm a little surprised they didn't choose something based on the Jaguar for that reason, but it might just be a situation where nothing with one was sent to them for review. Certainly this is a poor representation, without both Jaguar and Bay Trail missing. I got to the first page, read what they had, looked at the cases, and moved on. Reading about different versions of Ivy Bridge and Haswell and how they compare to each other is profoundly uninteresting.
  • 3 Hide
    m32 , January 30, 2014 2:04 AM
    I wouldn't mind having a small system like this. Maybe Mid-Year when everyone's CPU/APUs are out, I'll have the chance to make a smart buy. Thanks for the article. :) 
  • 0 Hide
    blackmagnum , January 30, 2014 2:39 AM
    Buy a laptop and hook a screen to it; no compromises.
  • 1 Hide
    mesab66 , January 30, 2014 2:47 AM
    It is interesting that by going slightly larger with the enclosure space (still keeping within cube/rectangle/media player shape) opens up the possibility of so much more power....dedicated gfx, full cpu, etc etc., and, can be cheaper to build - depending on the users requirements.......of course, at the cost of power requirements, etc. I'm thinking most folk would ideally chose a slightly larger form factor for living room/media pc duties.On the other hand, if constraints are tight (form factor in this article) and the end user's requirements match, then these options are worth considering.
  • 3 Hide
    mesab66 , January 30, 2014 2:56 AM
    Maybe Tom's could do some options on Media PC/HTPC builds for a future article?
  • 0 Hide
    s997863 , January 30, 2014 3:38 AM
    Power. I don't care about no power. Where's the love for the old games? If I want to play some of the classics which just don't emulate properly, I have to hunt for a heavy old Pentium3 box and try to get it working. How about a cheap mini PC with miniaturized legacy hardware for full compatibility to dual-boot win98 & XP, with gameports, VGA & S-Video, PS/2 & USB, IDE & SATA external ribbon & power connectors, & a turbo button for choosing between 2 processors 200MHz & 3GHz?
  • 1 Hide
    elgranchuchu , January 30, 2014 5:51 AM
    this was exactly was i was looking for deploying php software
  • 2 Hide
    vertexx , January 30, 2014 6:01 AM
    I am a huge fan of compact systems. Almost everything I have built has been ITX. But I've had a hard time with the NUC form factor. As a desktop, I think it's actually too small. One of those boxes would get lost on my desk, continuously being pushed around by other clutter. Now, if I had a hutch with an optimally sized cubby, that might be a different story.

    VESA mounted on the back of a monitor, these look really clunky, and I'd rather go with an AIO kit using the thin mini-ITX form factor where I have more control over processor choice.

    I'd be more excited if this technology and form factor were applied in a more interchangeable system with a standardized GPU socket. I really like what ASRock and Gigabyte have done with their compact systems. They're not as compact, but having something a little more substantial on my desk is a good thing, and they pack a lot of punch. I just wish the standards were developed to allow builders to replicate that feat - pipe dream, I know.

    One thing is for sure, AMD needs to develop it's own equivalent of the NUC and thin Mini-ITX. The success of it's Kaveri line I think would be helped out by innovation in form factor.
  • 5 Hide
    axehead15 , January 30, 2014 6:03 AM
    I think you should compare the Mac Mini to these, that way we can see how it adds up.
  • 3 Hide
    Onus , January 30, 2014 6:35 AM
    It would take a unique set of requirements for any of these devices to make sense, particularly compared to competition. With the possible exception of the ASRock unit, the price is outrageous. If you don't have room by your TV for a [much more powerful and versatile] mini-ITX system, for the difference in cost you can replace your TV stand or component rack instead.

    These are essentially for gadget-freaks with more money than sense.
  • 0 Hide
    bloodroses75 , January 30, 2014 6:40 AM
    Interesting concept for these machines, price to performance is not worth it yet though. Buying an Inwin (or other brand) mini-itx case with power supply and building your own machine from the ground up is a much better deal.As with Intel, the i7s are only dual core? I'd be personally upset if I bought one and realized that after plugging it in. They should have kept a standard with their naming, like on their desktops:p entium= dual core, no HTi3= dual core, HTi5= quad core, no HTi7= quad core, HTand yes, I realize Intel did release an i5 that was only dual core with HT and thought it was a complete rip-off too.
  • 0 Hide
    MajinCry , January 30, 2014 7:18 AM
    Why did people vote down s997863? I'd kill for a mini pc that could actually play NWN 1 and/or the horde of DOS games.
  • 2 Hide
    cleeve , January 30, 2014 7:27 AM
    Quote:
    Why did people vote down s997863? I'd kill for a mini pc that could actually play NWN 1 and/or the horde of DOS games.


    I'm pretty sure any of these will fit the bill for old windows games like NWN 1.

    DOS based stuff has its own challenges, I don't know enough about dosbox emulators but I suspect these are more than powerful enough.

  • 0 Hide
    Bolts Romano , January 30, 2014 7:27 AM
    Thank you for the article, at least now I know some other brands never heard before. It is quite a surprise the price is hitting the same level as a notebook or mac mini price range or lower (remember this mini pc does not come w OS)
  • 0 Hide
    burkhartmj , January 30, 2014 7:37 AM
    these devices are super cool, but it's hard to ignore the fact that one can generally get better performance out of a fully configurable and upgradable ITX form factor for the same price. For niche use cases, these would be incredibly helpful, but I don't see them becoming particularly mainstream.
  • -1 Hide
    MajinCry , January 30, 2014 8:42 AM
    Quote:


    I'm pretty sure any of these will fit the bill for old windows games like NWN 1.

    DOS based stuff has its own challenges, I don't know enough about dosbox emulators but I suspect these are more than powerful enough.



    On the contrary, there are plenty of performance issues with old games when using new hardware. My 6670 and 7850 play NWN 1 piss-poorly with my 965 BE, por ejemplo.

    Intel's IGPUs fare no better nor do NVidia's GPUs. Speaking from experience.
  • 1 Hide
    lockhrt999 , January 30, 2014 8:58 AM
    Why some i7 are dual cores?
  • 0 Hide
    Croc Ography , January 30, 2014 9:23 AM
    Huge fail for the ASRock... Tom's Hardware is not reading their own listed specs:"Audio Channels: 7.1+2 Channel HD Audio Codec with Content Protection and DTS Connect support" -- this means that if you burn your own Blurays or DVD's to PLEX or BMC and any of them have Cinavia on them you will not be able to play them from this HTPC.Therefore this device is useless.
  • 0 Hide
    tntom , January 30, 2014 10:36 AM
    Great article! Thank you! Thank you! I hope this segment becomes more competitive and brings the prices down. Right now the prices are too inflated. All of these have more than enough CPU but except for the Asrock are lacking in GPU performance.Please update with the Brix A8 APU and Iris Pro 5200 when you finish testing them out.
Display more comments