23 Sep
Blog

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 Review: Fast, But Flawed

Opened Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 sitting on the floor.

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4

RRP $ 2,095.00

"The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 is not a perfect performer, but there is a lot to like."

advantages

  • Excellent workmanship

  • Superior entry-level display

  • Solid performance

  • Good keyboard and touchpad

  • Very powerful configuration options

disadvantage

  • Performance was inconsistent

  • Battery life was average

Lenovo's most powerful non-workstation ThinkPad is the ThinkPad X1 Extreme, an earlier 15-inch laptop that served as a strong competitor to the Dell XPS 15 and other high-performance laptops in its class. The fastest components and the most aggressive thermal designs can be found in the ThinkPad X1 Extreme, something Lenovo took to extremes with the fourth generation.

Not only has the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 increased performance, but it has also joined the movement of the larger displays and features a slightly larger 16-inch 16:10 display, while at the same time being roughly the same size as the previous generation fits.

I tested a ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 with an Intel Core i7-11800H and Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060, which costs $ 2,095. You can also choose up to a Core i9-11950H with vPro and an RTX 3080, which further improves the laptop's theoretical performance and even outperforms the impressive Dell XPS 17 in terms of pure performance. As I found out in this review, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 is a fast premium notebook – but according to my tests it has some performance weaknesses that take away some of its clout.

draft

View of the lid of an opened Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 was 14.24 "x 9.67" x 0.72 "and weighed 3.75 pounds. The new Gen 4 model is 14.13 inches by 9.99 inches by 0.70 inches and weighs 3.99 pounds. Aside from adding a tiny bit of depth thanks to the taller display and a quarter pound of weight, Lenovo did what it set out to do: a 16:10 16-inch display the same size as the previous 15.6 – Pack inch display. Inch generation.

The thing is, it's still a lot bigger than the Dell XPS 15, which comes in at 13.57 "x 9.06" x 0.71 "and a slightly heavier 4.22 pounds. If you put the two next to each other, the ThinkPad looks huge in comparison. This is mainly due to the larger bezels of the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4, which also give it an old-school look with the modern, higher display. A new competitor, the MSI Creator Z16, also has a 16:10 16-inch display and measures 14.13 inches by 10.08 inches by 0.64 inches and weighs 5.07 pounds. Its bezels are a bit smaller than the ThinkPad's, but it's still deeper – just imagine.

All in all, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 looks like a large laptop, but it doesn't feel like it thanks to its light weight. It's made of an aluminum alloy on the lower chassis (with some plastic parts) and contains four layers of reinforced carbon fiber in the lid. I'm not sure how Lenovo kept the weight down without using a magnesium alloy, but they succeeded and the laptop sits comfortably in the hand. It has the usual soft-touch coating on the ThinkPad and is extremely comfortable to hold.

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 looks like a ThinkPad.

It's also pretty stiff, with just the slightest flexing of the lid if you try hard enough, and without giving way to the keyboard deck or the bottom of the case. The Dell XPS 15 is all around stiff, which makes it feel more solid, but there is no significant difference. The Gen 4 model is at least as robust as the Gen 3, making it one of the class leaders in terms of build quality – and it offers the usual MIL-STD 810g certification for robustness.

Aesthetically, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 looks like a ThinkPad. It is completely black with just a few red accents in the X1 logo on the lid, the red LED dot on the "i" in the ThinkPad logo, the red TrackPoint stud in the middle of the keyboard and accents on the edges of the TrackPoint buttons. My test device came with a display with WQXGA resolution (2,560 x 1,600), so the lid was simply black.

Choose one of the 4K + WQUXGA (3840 x 2400) displays and you get a carbon fiber fabric to add some pizzazz to the lid. Overall, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 has an attractive and bold look, and if you like the ThinkPad aesthetics, this is your one for sure. The XPS 15 looks more modern and slimmer overall, and overall more attractive, especially with the white fiberglass keyboard deck, but the ThinkPad aims at and achieves its own appearance.

The MSI Creator Z16 has a more straightforward aesthetic in the case. Nevertheless, it integrates RGB lighting into the keyboard, making it the exact opposite of the conservative ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4, at least when you open the lid and switch on the keyboard lighting.

Charging connector, 2 micro USB ports, HDMI port and headphone jack on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Hinges on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 Aptop.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 ports: SD card slot and 2 USB ports.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Connectivity remains a strength, with a proprietary power port (that supports a 230 watt power adapter), two USB-Cs with Thunderbolt 4 ports, a full-size HDMI 2.0 or 2.1 port (depending on the model), and a 3, 5mm audio jack on the left and two USB-A 3.2 Gen 1 ports and a full-size SD card reader on the right. Wireless connectivity is provided by the latest and fastest Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.2, and you can configure WWAN support through an optional nano-SIM slot.

power

Lenovo didn't mess around when developing the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4's performance profile. You can configure up to a Core i9-11950H with vPro in the CPU department and up to an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Max-Q in the GPU department. There is no other 15- or 16-inch laptop that I know of that is as powerful outside of slot machines.

My test device was equipped with a Core i7-11800H and an RTX 3060 and thus more powerful than the Dell XPS 15 and identical to the MSI Creator Z16. Unfortunately, Lenovo sent me a machine with only one 16 GB RAM stick installed, which limits the memory to single-channel performance. As we shall see, this had effects that were not immediately apparent.

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

In Geekbench 5, the ThinkPad does well enough, just behind the MSI Creator Z16 and the Dell XPS 15. It beats the MSI and Dell by a few in our Handbrake test, which encodes a 420 MB video as H.265 Seconds. And it was also clearly ahead of the XPS 15 and the Z16 in Cinebench R23. So far, so good. Only the Lenovo Legion 5 Pro with its Ryzen 7 5800H – a fast processor for compute-intensive tasks – stood out in our comparison group.

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 was in the midfield in PCMark 10, faster than the XPS 15, but slower than the Z16. It was able to keep up in the areas of essentials and productivity of the test, but lagged behind the MSI Creator Z16 in content creation (but before the Dell XPS 15). Again, according to the benchmarks reported so far, there were no red flags in terms of performance.

If you buy this laptop, make sure you tick Dual Channel RAM in the configurator.

However, when I switched to the Pugetbench benchmark running in Adobe Premiere Pro, things got a little strange. The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 achieved an extremely low value of 432 in this test, which uses both CPU and GPU. The Dell XPS 15 with Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Ti achieved 509 in standard mode (and 590 in performance mode), the MSI Creator Z16 was faster at 732, only reaching 54.5 compared to the 119.1 from MSI and 74.8 from Dell.

It turned out that the single-channel RAM caused such a low score in this benchmark. Lenovo tested an identical device with two 16 GB RAM sticks and dual-channel storage and gave it 642 points. To be honest, that's still low for the CPU and GPU, especially with 32 GB of RAM, well below the MSI Creator Z16 (also with 32 GB) and only a bit better than the XPS 15 in performance mode. But it's better than my test device. If you buy this laptop, make sure you tick Dual Channel RAM in the configurator.

I was happy with the performance of the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 until I hit the Pugetbench results. This laptop is intended for developers running CPU and GPU intensive applications like Premiere Pro, and the ThinkPad didn't do as well as I expected even when configured with faster RAM performance. I have no idea how well the Core i9 version might do, and you can increase the overall performance in these apps by opting for an RTX 3070 or 3080. The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 will likely be the fastest laptop in this comparison group when it is at full capacity. Note, however, that if configured similarly, it won't be the fastest laptop when compared to the competition. Note that if you choose to mirror, you can add a second solid-state drive (SSD) to the machine for additional storage or redundancy.

Laptop 3DMark time spy Cinebench R23 Underdog Bench 5 Handbrake
(Seconds)		 PCMark 10 Fourteen days
(1080p epic)		 Civilization VI (1080p Ultra)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 (Core i7-11800H) 6691 1519/10497 1520/7353 99 6251 85 fps (1920 x 1200) Wouldn't run
Dell XPS 15 OLED 2021 (Core i7-11800H) 4540 1513/9979 1544/7692 101 6024 50 fps 73 fps
MSI Creator Z16 (Core i7-11800H) 6322 1444/9615 1540/7625 103 6486 59 fps (1920 x 1200) 92 fps
Dell XPS 17 (Core i7-11800H) 7039 1525/10145 1568/8801 n / A 6209 78 fps 104 fps
LG gram 16 (Core i7-1165G7) 1390 1394/4137 1573/5454 213 4827 13 fps n / A
Lenovo Legion 5 Pro (Ryzen7 5800H) 9175 1430/11195 1460/7227 99 n / A 101 fps 114 fps

Considering the RTX 3060 and the fast CPU, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 should be a good entry-level gaming device. That's how my tests went for the most part. Unfortunately, the ThinkPad Civilization VI would not run without a crash, so I am unable to report any results for this game. In Assassin's Creed Valhalla, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 hit 53 frames per second (fps) in 1080p and high graphics, much slower than the MSI Creator Z16's 82 fps, but that gap narrowed as I went up in resolution and graphics. At 1600p and ultra-high graphics, the ThinkPad managed 39 fps compared to 45 fps on the Z16.

I saw similar results with Battlefield V, where the ThinkPad achieved 69 fps at 1080p and medium graphics compared to the MSI at 81 fps. Then the ThinkPad was faster at 1600p and ultra graphics at 56 fps versus 43 fps. Finally, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 massacred the MSI Creator Z16 in Fortnite, reaching 85 fps at 1200p and epic graphics versus 59 fps. The same discrepancy was shown for the rest of the tested resolutions and graphics settings.

You will find that the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 is a competent, but not class-leading gaming laptop for modern titles at reasonable resolutions and graphics settings. You can probably play most games at 1600p with medium to high graphics, as long as you are willing to accept lower frame rates or turn things down a bit, and you get very playable performance. You may find some inconsistencies like I did, but overall you will be able to play along with your work.

advertisement

The display of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 laptop.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Lenovo offers several 16:10 16-inch displays for the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4, WQXGA (2,560 x 1,600) IPS, WQUXGA (3,840 x 2,400) with Dolby Vision and WQUXGA touch display with Dolby Vision. My test device equipped the entry-level WQXGA display, which is better for battery life, but not as sharp. When I used the laptop during the test, I found the display a delight, with lots of brightness and contrast, and colors that pop but didn't seem inaccurate. It's not an OLED, but it was excellent for an IPS display.

My colorimeter agreed. It's incredibly bright at 468 nits, well above our 300 nit threshold, which is better than the 385 nits of the MSI Creator Z16's IPS WQUXGA panel and the 381 nits of the Dell XPS 15's 3.5K OLED display The contrast of the ThinkPad was very good for an IPS display at 1,240: 1 (above our preferred contrast ratio of 1000: 1), whereas the MSI was disappointing at 800: 1 and the Dell was spectacular at 381,130: 1 (typically OLED) .

The ThinkPad also stood out among the entry-level IPS displays with a color width of 82% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB. You probably get better colors with the WQUXGA options, but those numbers are good enough that developers could use this display. The MSI was better with 91% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB, and thanks to its OLED technology, the Dell again did excellent with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB. The colors of the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 were also very accurate with a DeltaE of 0.81 (less than 1.0 is excellent), with MSI achieving 0.76 and Dell 0.46.

Loudspeaker on the right of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

The ThinkPad's two upward-facing speakers on either side of the keyboard produce a lot of volume when turned all the way up, and there was no distortion. The mids and highs were clear and there was a hint of bass. The Dell XPS 15's quad speakers are better, but the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4's audio system is sufficient for Netflix on its own. However, you will need headphones for the best quality music.

Keyboard and touchpad

Open the lid and you will find the typical ThinkPad keyboard. It has a lot of travel at 1.8mm, molded keys with large keycaps and good key spacing, and switches that are snappy and precise. It feels like most ThinkPad keyboards, and my only complaint is that the keys take more pressure than I want to press. I find it more tiring during long typing sessions than the lighter keyboard on the Specter range from HP or the Dell XPS 15, and I found that the keyboard on the ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 9 also has a lighter stroke than I preferred. If you don't mind, or maybe even prefer, a stiffer mechanism, then this keyboard will appeal to you.

The keyboard of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

The TrackPoint knob in the middle of the keyboard works well as usual, but the keys take up the same space on the touchpad. You'll be happy if you like this cursor control method, but I'd rather skip it and have a bigger touchpad. Speaking of which, the touchpad is a decent size, but nowhere near the massive version of the Dell XPS 15. It was sleek and responsive, with Microsoft Precision touchpad support, but I wish it was bigger given all the palm rest space.

Windows 10 Hello passwordless login is provided by a fingerprint reader built into the power button that works quickly and logs you in immediately when you turn on the device. There is an optional infrared camera for facial recognition that my test device did not have. There's also the Lenovo ThinkShutter physical webcam privacy slider, which is old-fashioned compared to some electronic versions you'll find on some other laptops like the HP Specter, but it works.

Close-up on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 webcam.Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Battery life

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 has a 90 watt hour battery, which is a lot. The 16-inch WQXGA display should have better battery life than the UHD + version, but the components aren't particularly energy efficient. In addition, except for the ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen 9, the battery life of the ThinkPad was disappointing and I wasn't expecting too much.

The ThinkPad managed just under 7.5 hours in our web browser test, well below the 10 hours we like to see. Nevertheless, the MSI Creator Z16 (also with a WQXGA display and 90 watt hour battery) only lasts 5.3 hours. The Dell XPS 15 with its 3.5K OLED display and 84 watt hours was more powerful with nine hours. In our video looping test, which played a local Full HD movie trailer, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 lasted just over nine hours, again better than the eight hours of the MSI, but behind the 11 hours of the XPS 15.

If you keep your workload low, you might make it by evening, but I wouldn't count on that.

I also ran the PCMark 10 Applications battery test, which is the best indicator of productivity battery life. The ThinkPad lasted 8.75 hours, a low score compared to the average laptop that lasted 10 hours or more in this test. The XPS 15 was worse at eight hours, and we didn't run the MSI through this test. In the PCMark 10 gaming battery test, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 managed just under 90 minutes, compared to the XPS 15 with three minutes less (again we did not run this test on the MSI Creator Z16). In my experience, this test shows how hard a laptop works on battery rather than absolute longevity, and the ThinkPad is one of those laptops that seem to maintain speed even when switched off.

Overall, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 was not a bad battery performance in view of the 16-inch WQXGA display and the high-end components. It's unlikely to get you through a full day of work on a single charge, and the Power Brick is pretty big to take with you, but that's the price you pay for so much power. If you keep your workload low, you might make it by evening, but I wouldn't count on that.

Our opinion

The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 lives up to its title. It's the most powerful ThinkPad you can buy, and in a completely different class from most ThinkPads designed for standard productivity performance. Since you can configure it with a Core i9 and an RTX 3080 Max-Q, there is no other non-gaming laptop in the same class that can compete with bare specs.

At the same time, the performance is less than it should be, at least in the one benchmark that provides the best example of the laptop's performance in creative apps from practice. And its gaming performance is inconsistent. If you can live with these limitations, you'll love the look and feel and build quality, probably love the keyboard and touchpad, and even the entry-level display is excellent. You will just be a little unsure how the laptop will work in your given workflow.

Are there alternatives?

A solid alternative in terms of its aesthetics and build quality, the Dell XPS 15 offers good performance and a stunning 3.5K OLED display option. It's about the same price as configured, so you're sacrificing some performance for the XPS 15's superb design.

The MSI Creator Z16 is another option that has better performance in most tests (except for some games), but not as good battery life. With a similar configuration, it's more expensive at $ 2,549, but you get better Premiere Pro performance that creators will like.

After all, the Apple MacBook Pro 16 is a solid choice in the 16-inch class, but the Intel version won't keep up with the ThinkPad, especially if you configure the Lenovo to the maximum. The rumored M1X MacBook Pro might be worth considering, however.

How long it will take?

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 is well built and should be in use for years. The components are up to date and should keep Windows 10 (and 11) running. However, the 1 year warranty is very disappointing for this class of notebooks.

The one-year warranty is disappointing for such an expensive notebook, but it still offers on-site service.

Should you buy it?

Yes sir. If you're a ThinkPad fanatic and looking for the fastest model you can buy, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 4 won't disappoint. If you're not a ThinkPad fan, your decision will be a little tougher – but in the end, this is a viable option compared to the competition.

Editor's recommendations



13 Aug
Blog

Intel NUC 11 Extreme Review: A True Mini Gaming PC

Intel NUC 11 Extreme on a table.

Intel Beast Canyon NUC 11 Extreme in the test: A real mini gaming PC

RRP $ 1,180.00

"The NUC 11 Extreme is too expensive, but that still doesn't hold it back."

advantages

  • Keep calm

  • Solid processor performance

  • Full-size graphics card support

  • Excellent connectivity

disadvantage

  • Too expensive

  • Larger than previous NUCs

On my desk, where my gaming PC used to live, is an empty space that is now occupied by Intel's NUC 11 Extreme, also known as Beast Canyon. It's a barebones kit with welcome tradeoffs that balances desktop-like performance with a form factor smaller than a current game console.

It's too expensive, awkward compared to a full-size device, and a little too weak compared to a desktop chip. But I can't stop using the NUC 11 Extreme. It is an intelligently designed PC that only makes concessions when needed and exists in its own category.

That doesn't mean Beast Canyon is for everyone. It caters to a very specific market – those with an affinity for crafting who don't mind paying for interesting designs. That said, if you don't mind getting your hands dirty (and you have a spare graphics card) the NUC 11 Extreme is excellent.

design

The side of an Intel NUC 11 Extreme.

In 2012, Intel presented the concept of NUC or Next Unit of Computing for the first time. a graphics card). The heart of the PC is the compute element, which you can unplug like a graphics card.

The new NUC 11 Extreme is a tiny PC, but not as small as previous versions. The 8 liter chassis is 14.1 inches long, 7.1 inches high and 4.7 inches wide. The NUC 9 Extreme is larger at 8.5 inches, but much shorter and a little less wide. It also doesn't support full size graphics cards like Beast Canyon.

That is the compromise with Beast Canyon. It's larger than previous NUCs and other mini-PCs, but it supports a full-length graphics card. You can't have and eat your cake, and I'm pleased with the compromises Intel has made. As I will learn in the next few sections, the NUC 11 Extreme still beats its weight class despite its slightly larger size.

This becomes clear when you compare it to other small form factor options. The Cooler Master MasterBox NR200P is one of the smaller Mini-ITX cases that supports a full-size GPU and is still 10 liters larger than the NUC 11 Extreme. There are smaller NUC cases like the Razer Tomahawk, but this device has an older computing element and is more expensive than the NUC 11 Extreme.

The star of the show is a massive RGB skull on the front of the NUC 11 that connects to ambient RGB strips that illuminate the bottom of the case. Fortunately, you can tweak the LEDs and turn them off if you want. With the included NUC Software Studio you can control the skull and the front, right and left LEDs independently of each other.

Skull on the Intel NUC 11 Extreme.

It's a decent suite that lets you set a solid color or set standard RGB modes like strobe or breathing. You can also use the NUC Software Studio to monitor system temperature and usage, change your fan curve, and switch between processor performance modes.

While the NUC Software Studio offers a decent list of options, it's a little flawed. The software is easy to bounce around, but it would constantly get stuck for a second or two after I changed a setting. It's not a deal breaker, but the NUC Software Studio doesn't feel good.

For my tests, I stayed in balanced fan mode to see the curve Intel intended. There are a trio of 92mm fans under the top to keep everything cool, and they never got loud enough to bother me while testing (even on a Cinebench R23 loop). They make noise, but the NUC 11 Extreme is remarkably quiet given its size. The NUC 11 Extreme was silent when answering emails or hanging out online.

Connectivity

Intel could have reduced the number of ports on the NUC 11 Extreme, but didn't. As with many aspects of the kit, you give up surprisingly little when compared to a full-sized desktop. You are spoiled for port options with the NUC 11 Extreme, and in some ways it goes beyond some full-size PCs.

Front connectors on Intel NUC 11 Extreme.

On the front you have quick access to two USB 3.1 ports, a headphone / microphone combo jack and an SDXC card slot. This turned out to be sufficient in my tests, although I missed a USB-C port on the front. I often use an external Samsung T5 SSD to swap games between PCs and it would have been nice to just toss it in front of the case.

Instead, I had to plug it in at the back, but that wasn't a problem. Even in this small size, Intel manages to accommodate six USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports, 2.5G Ethernet and two Thunderbolt 4 ports on the back of the case. The motherboard also has an HDMI 2.0b output in case you want to use the integrated graphics.

Of course, HDMI out isn't all you have access to when you plug in a graphics card. It's only there to provide the built-in graphics option. So when you add a graphics card, you also have access to the ports it has. In the case of the RTX 3060 in my test device, this included a single HDMI and three DisplayPort outputs.

Back ports on Intel NUC 11 Extreme.

Compared to the NUC 9 Extreme, this device adds two more USB ports on the back and upgrades the Thunderbolt ports from Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 4. Even if you run out of ports – which is unlikely given the eight USB ports surrounding the case – you can always throw a Thunderbolt dock into the equation to further expand your connectivity.

For wireless connectivity, the NUC 11 Extreme contains Intel's AX201 chip, which offers dual-band Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.2.

Internals

Intel offers the NUC in two configurations: either with a Core i7-11700B or a Core i9-11900KB. As with all NUCs, you will need to bring your own graphics card, SSD, RAM, and operating system. Everything else you need is already in the compute element or in the housing. This includes a 650W 80+ Gold power supply and an Intel AX201 chip.

Central processor Intel Core i9-11900KB or Intel Core i7-11700B
GPU Support for full-size dual-slot GPU or Intel UHD 750
Storage Up to 64 GB dual-channel SO-DIMM DDR4
storage Up to two PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs, up to two PCIe 3.0 M.2 SSDs
Power supply 650W 80+ gold
USB ports Up to 12, including eight
Thunderbolt ports Two Thunderbolt 4
Networking 2.5G Ethernet, dual band WiFi 6
Bluetooth Bluetooth 5.2
Ports Headphone / microphone connection, SDXC reader, HDMI 2.0b

My test device was equipped with the Core i9-11900KB computing element, a souped-up laptop chip that is part of the 10 nm Tiger Lake family. In short, it should not be confused with the desktop Core i9-11900K, which is built by Intel using the 14 nm process and requires more than twice the performance.

The Core i9-11900KB is a 65W chip, but it is still equipped with eight cores and 16 threads and can accelerate up to 4.9 GHz based on Intel specifications. My chip never reached this speed during the test, but it got close at just over 4.8 GHz. The slightly cheaper Core i7-11700B still comes with eight cores and 16 threads, but with a slightly lower clock rate.

Both chips come with integrated graphics, but I was disappointed to find that they use Intel UHD graphics, not Iris Xe like many Tiger Lake mobile chips. As I'll get into in a moment, if you're going to get any decent gaming performance out of Beast Canyon, you need a discrete GPU.

Otherwise, the NUC 11 Extreme supports whatever you can get it to do. This includes up to 64 GB of dual-channel DDR4 laptop memory (SO-DIMM), a dual-slot graphics card and up to four M.2 SSDs, one of which you have to install in the computing element.

Opening everything is a breeze. There's some nice attention to detail here from Intel, including the tiny captive screws on the backplate, a handy door to unlock the compute element, and an SSD slot on the bottom so you can quickly upgrade your storage.

Intel NUC 11 Extreme with no GPU installed.

Once you've removed the side panels, the NUC 11 Extreme opens and offers unprecedented access in this small form. The top cover with three fans can be folded up so that you have all parts of the case free. And there's not much going on inside.

Most of the PC is in the compute element, so you have a small specially designed motherboard, power supply, compute element, and GPU if you have one installed. The NUC 11 Extreme has exactly what it needs, reducing the fat that often comes with small builds.

It's not without its problems, however. The latch for the PCIe slot of the graphics card can hardly be reached when the card is installed. I had to slide the back end of a screwdriver between the GPU and the computing element to open it, and you need to remove the GPU before you can get to the computing element.

Support for full-size graphics cards should also be marked with a large asterisk. It's true that you can plug a full-length dual-slot GPU into the NUC 11 Extreme, but that's about it. That doesn't take into account the additional modular power cables that have to share the space with the rear end of the GPU.

The NUC 11 Extreme has exactly what it needs, reducing the fat that often comes with small builds.

However, dual slot is the limit. If your cooler protrudes even slightly beyond the dual-slot mark, it will not fit into the NUC 11 Extreme. Nvidia Founder's Edition cards could also be a problem. The RTX 3080, for example, has a fan on both sides. In this case, a fan would sit directly on the back of the power supply unit.

Overall, though, this is the most enjoyable small form factor experience I've ever had. I have a few minor issues with the graphics card slot and the extra cables, but these are easy to miss with Intel's clear focus on the building experience. The NUC 11 Extreme is still an argument for barebones, small PCs.

The most disappointing part of the NUC 11 Extreme is that you can't buy it all. Adding RAM, SSD, and Windows is easy, but Beast Canyon really shines with an installed GPU. And adding the price of an expensive graphics card to the NUC 11 Extreme's already high price tag is a tough sell.

But the premium makes sense. Something like the NUC 11 Extreme cannot be built with off-the-shelf parts. However, if you're willing to shop around and have a mini-ITX graphics card, there are options like the Velka 3 that are actually smaller than the NUC 11 Extreme.

Processor power

To get back to the raw power of Beast Canyon, it's more powerful than I expected. The Core i9-11900KB isn't quite on par with a full desktop piece, but it doesn't have to be in such a small package. There's a little compromise, but it's much smaller than it should be given the size of Beast Canyon.

I started testing with PCMark 10, which gives a good overview of performance on a long list of tasks. The NUC 11 Extreme achieved an overall score of 7,520, which is just below the MSI Aegis RS 10 – a mid-tower desktop with a full-size Core i9-10900K. He also beat the flagship Tiger Lake in the HP Elite Dragonfly Max with almost 3,000 more points.

Computing element in Intel NUC 11 Extreme.

PCMark 10 is also demanding. The processor reached a maximum temperature of 93 degrees Celsius during the benchmark, but never clocked down. Even when it was struck, my i9-11900KB continued to climb slightly above 4.8 GHz.

Next up was Cinebench R23, which pushes processors to their limits by forcing them to render a complex 3D image. Here the Core i9-11900KB achieved a single-core score of 1,636 and a multi-core score of 11,424. The multi-core score is in the upper range, but a desktop Core i9-10900K can still beat it by around 30%. Every other Tiger Lake chip doesn't even come close, however.

The Core i9-11900KB even beats the desktop Core i9-10900K by around 23% in the single-core test. While Cinebench performed strongly, it did reveal some weaknesses in Intel's design. According to HWiNFO64, the Core i9-11900KB reached its maximum operating temperature of 100 degrees Celsius before it clocked down to 3.4 GHz. Even with a solid cooling solution, the NUC 11 Extreme is prone to throttling when it's pushed to the limit.

GeekBench 5 is nowhere near as demanding and the NUC 11 Extreme has once again proven its strengths. Similar to PCMark 10, the Core i9-11900KB beats the desktop Core i9-10900K in the single-core test and just under second place in the multi-core test. It also shot way ahead of the NUC 9 Extreme, beating the older device by about 23%.

It's a competent counterpoint to a desktop chip and outperforms all of the other Tiger Lake offerings available.

Handbrake told a similar story. The NUC 11 Extreme reduced our coding time of the Elysium trailer by 13 seconds compared to the NUC 9 Extreme. However, Handbrake showed that the Core i9-11900KB is still essentially a mobile part. Compared to the desktop Core i9-10900K, the chip was a full 30 seconds slower.

Finally, I reached out to PugetBench for Premiere Pro to see how the NUC 11 Extreme would handle video editing. This type of machine seems perfect for the job and my results confirm it. Overall, it scores above a desktop Core i9-10900K, which is configured with an RTX 3060 and 32 GB of RAM. However, this is mainly due to the smooth playback performance, as the NUC 11 Extreme lagged behind the desktop in terms of export and GPU values.

With the NUC 11 Extreme you don't get the full performance of a desktop chip, but with less than half the wattage, that shouldn't come as a surprise. It's a competent counterpoint to a desktop chip and outperforms all of the other Tiger Lake offerings available. Heat was an issue in Cinebench, but this benchmark is a bit of a stress test. There should be no throttling for most tasks.

Gaming performance

I only did a few gaming tests with the NUC 11 Extreme as it doesn't actually come with a graphics card. Your performance will depend on what you put into it. Nevertheless, I wanted to get an overview of how the RTX 3060 would behave in my test device compared to one in a full desktop. And good for Intel, there is practically no difference.

The NUC 11 Extreme averaged exactly the same frame rate in Fortnite at 1080p Epic settings as a desktop configured with a Core i9-10900K and RTX 3060. Up to 1440p, only three frames separated the NUC 11 Extreme from the desktop, with the NUC averaging 83 fps (frames per second) and the desktop averaging 86 fps.

Intel NUC 11 has opened.

That was also the case in Civilization VI, where the NUC averaged 141 fps at 1080p Ultra and the desktop 143 fps. At 1440p with the same settings, the two machines were within a frame of each other. The NUC 11 Extreme's side panel gives the GPU a lot of headroom, and based on my limited testing, cards should work about as well as they would in a desktop.

When you order a NUC, you won't get this performance without adding a graphics card. The UHD graphics in the Core i9-11900KB are pitifully slow for games. They are available, but a bit not an option. In fact, I couldn't complete my 1440p tests because the built-in graphics just wouldn't hold up.

3DMark Time Spy showed how big the difference is. With the RTX 3060 installed, the NUC 11 Extreme achieved a total of 8,953 points. Without a GPU, the device only scored 828 points, less than a tenth of what the RTX 3060 could achieve. Even in Fortnite, I couldn't go over the 1080p High settings as the integrated GPU only averaged 15 fps.

Civilization VI was slightly better at 1080p with medium settings, but even then the UHD graphics only averaged 23 fps. The built-in graphics are not suitable for gaming unless you are ready to shut down to 720p and run on low settings, and even then, some games may have problems.

You should clearly add a GPU to the NUC 11 Extreme. The built-in graphics aren't very good, but the good news is that between a full-sized desktop and the NUC 11, you're practically not giving up when it comes to GPU performance. The design of the chassis allows a lot of air inside, so most cards should hold up.

Our opinion

The NUC 11 Extreme is excellent – as long as you can handle its high price. The kit starts at $ 1,150 for the i7-11700B, and that doesn't include an operating system, RAM, an SSD, or, more critically, a graphics card. Add those in and you're looking at a machine that easily costs over $ 2,000 without a high-end GPU.

It's way too expensive, but that's the point. You already know if the NUC 11 Extreme is right for you. It is not a machine trying to get a certain price or offer a certain value. Instead, it offers an excellent, small form factor design, a unique way to design a computer, and performance that even full-size desktops are a race for their money.

If you've looked at the NUC jealously, it will meet your expectations – provided you have a graphics card to plug in.

Are there alternatives?

There are other mini PCs out there, but nothing compares to the NUC 11 Extreme. Unless you're looking for a boutique case and configuring your own rig, there is no other machine that packs as much power as the NUC 11 Extreme in this small case. Most Mini-ITX cases are not only larger, but also more difficult to use.

That said, you can save some money by building your own machine if you're okay with a slightly larger case or if you can settle for a mini-ITX GPU.

How long it will take?

The whole point of a NUC is that you can upgrade it with a new computing element over time. Assuming Intel continues to ship them, you can use the NUC 11 Extreme until the power supply fails.

Should you buy it?

Yes, as long as you know what you're getting yourself into. The NUC 11 Extreme is not just a mini PC. So, if you're looking for something to set up and forget, a machine like the M1 Mac Mini is probably better.

Editor's recommendations



30 Oct
Blog

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3: The Same, Only Faster

Lenovo Thinkpad X1 extreme Gen 3 review

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3: The same, just faster

"The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is particularly fast because of its components and strikes against laptops with faster processors."

  • Gorgeous OLED display with the best HDR

  • Great keyboard and touchpad

  • Solid build quality

  • Excellent performance

  • Disappointing battery life

  • Expensive

The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 2 made my list of favorite laptops that I checked for digital trends – and for good reason. It was fast, well built, and featured an outstanding OLED display. Now Lenovo has released the third generation model of the laptop and increased the performance to 11.

Lenovo equips this new model with 45-watt CPUs of the 10th generation from Intel to replace the 9th generation options of the previous version. My ThinkPad x1 Extreme Gen 3 tester wasn't quite as well equipped as my Gen 2 model – it has a Core i7-10850H with vPro this time around compared to a Core i9-9880H – but it still had 32GB of RAM and so on beautiful OLED display.

Note that the Core i9-10885H is still an option and the GPU has been upgraded from an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q to a GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q. The price? A whopping $ 2,404, though this starts at a retail price of $ 4,007. That's a lot of money. Does Lenovo's Gen 3 design still deserve my recommendation?

design

My test device still has a carbon fiber lid, which is part of the optional 4K display. Not only does this add structural integrity, but it also looks more noticeable. The bottom of the case is made of aluminum, with the usual soft-coated ThinkPad plastic for the keyboard deck, making it extremely comfortable to use.

In other words, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is outwardly identical to the Gen 2. There is nothing wrong with that. No need to mess around with a good thing as the ThinkPad X1 Extreme has the same ThinkPad aesthetic as always. It's all black with just a few red accents, including the iconic blinking LED above the “i” in ThinkPad on the lid, the TrackPoint nubbin, and the edges of the TrackPoint buttons.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

ThinkPad fans will be very satisfied. It's not as modern as the new Dell XPS 15, however, as the ThinkPad has fairly large bezels. The XPS 15 has tiny bezels that disappear around the 16:10 aspect ratio. The HP Specter x360 15 is at the other end of the aesthetic spectrum. Its gem-cut design calls for attention, while the ThinkPad likes to sit quietly in the shade.

The build quality of the laptop is consistently first class, with a lid that doesn't warp under pressure, very little keyboard flex and a lower case that doesn't bend or twist. It exudes strength and endurance and inspires confidence that it can withstand a blow. My only complaint is that the hinge is stiff and requires two hands to break it open. However, there is no premium laptop that feels more durable than the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is 0.72 inches thin, almost identical to the 0.71 inch of the XPS 15 and slightly thinner than the 0.79 inch of the Specter x360 15. The ThinkPad weighs 4.0 with the touch display Pounds (3.75 pounds with a non-touch display) compared to the Dell's 4.5 pounds and the HP's 4.23 pounds.

Connectivity remains a strength: a proprietary power port (135 watts), two USB-C ports with Thunderbolt 3, and a full-size HDMI 2.0 port on the left. On the right side you'll find two USB-A 3.2 ports and a full-size SD card reader (a welcome touch for creative professionals). The wireless connection is provided via Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1.

I will also find that the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is upgradeable. The back cover is relatively easy to remove. You can swap out the RAM and use a second SSD slot.

performance

I can't directly compare Gen 3 to Gen 2 due to the differences between the CPU and GPU, but the Dell XPS 15 and HP Specter x360 15 are good comparison devices. The XPS 15 we tested ran with a Core i7-10875H, an 8-core CPU compared to the 6-core Core i7-10850H in the ThinkPad X1 Extreme. The Specter x360 15 is equipped with a 6-core Core i7-10750H, which is clocked a little lower than the CPU of the ThinkPad.

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 ran as expected or better. In Geekbench 5, for example, 1,299 points were achieved in the single-core test and 6,372 points in the multi-core test. The XPS 15 scored 1,314 and 7,549 points, while the Specter x360 15 scored 1,237 and 5013 points, respectively.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

In our handbrake test, which encodes a 420 MB video in H.265, the ThinkPad took a little more than two minutes. That was surprisingly close to the XPS 15, which ended up only nine seconds faster despite two more cores and four more threads. The Specter x360 15 was finished in just over 2.5 minutes, making the ThinkPad significantly faster than the difference in clock speed suggests.

In Cinebench 20, the ThinkPad achieved 486 points in the single-core test and 2,888 points in the multi-core test. The XPS 15 was much faster with 488 and 3582 respectively, while the Specter x360 15 held its own against the ThinkPad with 469 and 2523. In this test, Dell's additional cores seem key.

It's worth noting that AMD's Ryzen 4000 chips also compete well with Intel's 45-watt CPUs. For example, the Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 with the Ryzen 7 4800U took just two seconds longer to complete the handbrake test than the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3, and it scored 482 and 3,255 in Cinebench 20 – it beat the ThinkPad and competed with that XPS 15.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Finally, I ran the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 through our Premiere Pro review, which rendered a two-minute 4K video. It took four minutes and 52 seconds to complete. The XPS 15 finished in five minutes and the Specter x360 15 took more than seven minutes to complete the test. The ThinkPad excelled here and beat the XPS 15 despite the slower CPU and GPU (the XPS 15 uses the non-Max-Q version of the GTX 1650 Ti). My working theory is that Lenovo outperformed Dell in developing a thermal design that can sustain the combined CPU and GPU performance over a long period of time.

In short, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is a fast laptop that can meet the demands of the most demanding creative. If your needs lead to more mundane productivity tasks, this is excessive – but is it ever a bad thing to have too much power? I do not believe that.

Play

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 can also handle games and competes strongly with the XPS 15 and Specter x360 15. In the 3DMark Time Spy test, the ThinkPad scored 3572 points, compared to the XPS 15 with 3860 and the Specter x360 15 with 2963 Points.

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 achieved Civilization VI with an average of 124 frames per second (FPS) with 1080p and medium graphics and 68 FPS with ultra graphics. The XPS 15 managed 114 FPS and 64 FPS, respectively, while the Specter x360 15 ran at 89 FPS and 60 FPS. Again, the ThinkPad outperformed its weight class, beating a laptop with a faster CPU and GPU in a game that relies on both to get the best performance. The same applies to 4K, where the ThinkPad averaged 66 FPS with medium graphics and 36 FPS with ultra graphics, compared to the XPS 15 with 51 FPS and 30 FPS and the Specter x360 15 with 55 FPS and 30 FPS.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

In Fortnite, the ThinkPad averaged 83 FPS with 1080p and medium graphics and 60 FPS with epic graphics. The XPS 15 achieved 74 FPS and 60 FPS, respectively, and the Specter x360 15 achieved 67 FPS and 47 FPS. Each of these laptops fell below 30 FPS at 4K, so I don't need to report the results at that resolution. Fortnite stays best at 1080p on laptops with discrete GPUs in the mid-range.

Next up is Assassin's Creed Odyssey, where the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 reached 52 FPS at 1080p and medium graphics and 30 FPS at ultra-high graphics. The XPS 15 achieved 47 FPS and 26 FPS, respectively, while the Specter x360 15 achieved 40 FPS and 25 FPS. Again, none of the machines exceeded 30 FPS at 4K. It's noteworthy to see that the X1 Extreme Gen 3 averages 30 FPS at ultra high in this game as Odyssey is extremely demanding.

In Battlefield V, the XPS 15 took the lead at 60 FPS at 1080p and medium graphics and 50 FPS at ultra graphics, while the ThinkPad was at 56 FPS and 44 FPS, respectively, and the Specter x360 15 managed 55 GPS and 44 FPS. Once again, 4K was south of at least 30 FPS that we consider playable.

Overall, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 offers very good performance for a laptop in this category. The fact that it outperformed the XPS 15 in all but one game is impressive. While 4K gaming is not recommended, you'll be happy to use modern 1080p titles with the right graphics settings. Those looking for better gaming performance must consider a gaming laptop.

display

I love OLED displays. They are bright, colorful and without contrast. The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3's OLED is no different, although it isn't the best OLED display we've tested.

The display of this ThinkPad is not as bright as some OLED panels and reaches 369 nits compared to the 426 nits of the HP Specter x360 15. Both laptops have anti-reflective glass, so that the HP looks a bit brighter. Additionally, the contrast on the Specter was 426,180: 1 compared to 369,390: 1 on the ThinkPad – a meaningless difference in real world usage, but a significant numerical difference nonetheless.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Dell's XPS 15 doesn't use OLED and instead opts for a more traditional IPS display. The brightness was 442 nits, and the contrast ratio reached 1480: 1 (which is excellent for an IPS display). The contrast gap isn't as noticeable in real life as the numbers suggest. Still, the OLED panel in the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is superior to the Dell XPS 15 when you are viewing movies or high quality photos in a dark room.

Note that according to the specs, Lenovo increases the brightness when running high dynamic range (HDR) content. I noticed this in my tests.

The color gamut is another area in which the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 fell short. It covered 100% of sRGB and 96% of AdobeRGB. This is comparable to the Specter at 100% and 98% and the XPS 15 at 100% of both color bars. It's not a huge difference, but for a creative professional looking for the best AdobeRGB support, these few percentage points might matter.

However, the ThinkPad's color turned out to be accurate with a DeltaE of 0.91 (lower is better in this benchmark). The XPS 15 was 0.65 and the Specter x360 15 was 1.21. All three displays work fine, but the XPS 15's excellent accuracy makes it instantly ready for color-critical work.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

None of this should detract from the ThinkPad's display. It's great in practice. Movies and pictures have a high-contrast, vivid look that slopes off the screen, and the darkest scenes in HDR are clear thanks to the panel's support for Dolby Vision. As with the Gen 2 model, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is one of the best devices you can find for watching Netflix in HDR, and it's way better than the other laptops I didn't enable for Dolby Vision.

If OLED isn't your thing, Lenovo has three alternative display options. There are two full HD options with 300 or 500 nits and a 4K IPS panel with 600 nits to choose from. We generally assume they all perform well for their respective prices, but OLED is our favorite.

Audio was a strong point as two downward facing speakers pumped out lots of volume without distortion. The mids and highs were clear and there was even a hint of bass. You can watch Netflix and YouTube videos fine alone or with a few friends, but good headphones are recommended for music as usual.

Keyboard and touchpad

ThinkPad fans are picky about their keyboards, but the X1 Extreme Gen 3 should satisfy. It has nicely shaped keycaps that are just the right size with excellent clearance. Personally, I find the mechanism a bit stiff, but it gives a lot of feedback and a very precise ground effect. If, like me, you like a lighter touch, the HP Specter keyboard might be more your style. However, if you want more feedback while you type, the ThinkPad's keyboard is for you. Oh, and it's leak proof if that matters to you.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

The usual TrackPoint node is in the middle of the keyboard and works as expected. However, it forces a pair of buttons, which takes away some space from the touchpad. Speaking of which, the touchpad is a glass-covered Microsoft Precision touchpad that's great for swiping and using Windows 10's multi-touch gestures.

The display on this model is touch sensitive and precise and responsive. Fortunately, it has an anti-wipe coating that resists fingerprints. In this respect, this corresponds to the display of the HP Specter x360 15.

Windows 10 Hello support is provided by a fast and responsive fingerprint reader and an infrared camera with facial recognition support. There is a privacy lock that deactivates the latter. As a result, you may want to configure both methods to log on without a password.

Battery life

Here you pay the price for all this performance and the power-hungry OLED display. Simply put, the battery life of this ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 configuration isn't a forte.

In our demanding Basemark Web benchmark test, the ThinkPad managed about 3.5 hours, which is not terrible for a 45 watt CPU. The XPS 15 lasted 16 minutes less, while the Specter x360 15 didn't even last three hours.

In our web browser test, which is the best indicator of overall productivity longevity, the ThinkPad just exceeded 5.5 hours, which is 80 minutes less than the XPS 15 and 32 minutes less than the Specter x360 15. And in our video test, which is repeated over a Full HD Avengers trailer, the ThinkPad was 6.5 hours, 50 minutes less than the XPS 15, and 11 minutes longer than the Specter x360 15.

These aren't great results, but they are expected. If you want longer battery life, go for one of the Full HD display options. Otherwise you should be prepared to carry the Power Brick around.

Our opinion

Lenovo kept the best of the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 2 and made it faster. That makes the Gen 3 model an incremental, yet meaningful, upgrade that simply improves on what was already an excellent 15-inch laptop.

Granted, it's most appealing to ThinkPad fans, and there's nothing wrong with that. If you are looking for a laptop that is as powerful as any other in its class, the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is a great choice.

Are there alternatives?

The Dell XPS 15 is the ThinkPad's most obvious competitor. They are both powerful, thin, and light, and well-built 15-inch machines that appeal to the same type of users. The XPS 15 gives you a 16:10 display and a more modern look and feel, but the ThinkPad has the better performance.

If you're a 2-in-1 gamer, the Specter x360 15 is an excellent choice. It's not that fast, but it has a sleeker look, a slightly better OLED display (unless you're watching Netflix in HDR), and the flexibility of a 2-in-1 device. The Specter is also several hundred dollars cheaper, though it isn't as powerfully configurable as the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3.

Finally, you might consider the HP Envy 15, a 15-inch laptop that offers lots of power for little money. It can't quite compete with the ThinkPad, but it has a great OLED display of its own and costs hundreds of dollars less.

How long it will take?

The ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 is extremely durable, well configured and will provide many years of productive service. We'd like more than a year of warranty at these prices, but Lenovo offers a variety of warranty upgrade options.

Should you buy it?

Yes. Not only is the ThinkPad X1 Extreme Gen 3 the most powerful ThinkPad you can buy, it's also one of the most powerful 15-inch consumer laptops out there.

Editor's recommendations




15 Apr
Blog

Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit Ghost Canyon Review: All Potential

Intel Ghost Canyon

Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit "Ghost Canyon" test: all possibilities

"Intel's NUC 9 Extreme Kit is a unique vision of computing, but far from perfect."

  • Extremely small

  • Modular structure with upgrade potential

  • Excellent connectivity, including Thunderbolt 3

  • Upgrades are more difficult than expected

  • Loud fan

I built a plywood computer case earlier this year. With a height of 9 inches and a depth of 5.5 inches, it is an extremely small system. I spent a good thirty hours researching, designing, and optimizing the case that now houses my main desktop PC. It was an enjoyable and rewarding project.

But I could have just waited for the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit.

The NUC 9 Extreme kit I received for review had an Intel Core i9-9980HK processor, 16 GB RAM, an Nvidia RTX 2070 graphics card from Asus and two solid-state hard drives: One Kingston 2 TB Drive paired with a 380 GB Intel Optane ride. Note that the NUC 9 Extreme Kit usually does not contain any memory, memory or a graphics card.

With these components, it is way ahead of my personal desktop with a Ryzen 5 3500 processor and the GTX 1650 Super from Nvidia. However, the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit ($ 1,700) is slightly smaller. It is a few tenths of an inch less deep and tall and almost two inches narrower.

No system I've reviewed offers more performance per square inch. The latest NUC is a fascinating, unique and ultimately faulty experiment in compact gaming PCs.

Design and ports

Oddly enough, the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit basically looks like a NUC. I find it strange because I expected a more drastic redesign given the performance gap. Nevertheless, it has the same square, round appearance as previous NUC devices.

NUC fans might be surprised by its mass, which is many times higher than that of any previous device in the NUC range. However, most people will think the system is tiny. Its volume is approximately 5 liters. In comparison, the XPS Special Edition desktop from Dell – our top desktop for most people – takes up almost 25 liters of space.

Intel Ghost CanyonIntel NUC 9 Extreme Kit (left) and home-made plywood desktop (right) Matthew Smith / Digital Trends

That's a big difference. Though larger than in the past, the NUC 9 is small enough to be stowed almost anywhere you want. Place it on your desktop, on a shelf, or even in a closet (if you can guarantee adequate airflow). It is important that it remains small enough to be easily used as a home theater PC.

The NUC 9 has an industrial appearance that does not communicate its unique approach. Apart from the skull logo that is used on other game-oriented NUC devices, there is nothing in this PC to indicate performance. Personally, I don't mind. I will do the job every day of the week.

The excellent selection of ports speaks for the dual approach of the NUC 9.

And it works. At the front, the NUC 9 offers two USB-A 3.1 connections, a combined headphone / microphone connection and an SDXC card reader. On the back you will find four more USB-A 3.1 ports, two Gigabit LAN ports, DisplayPort, HDMI 2.0 and DVI. There are also two Thunderbolt 3 ports, a rare thing that is still unusual on PC desktops.

It is an excellent selection of ports that speak for the dual purpose of the NUC 9. It can hold a graphics card for games, but can also serve as a small workstation for a videographer, photographer, streamer, or other creator. The wired connectivity is rounded off by the support of Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.

Internals and upgrades

The NUC 9 Extreme Kit would be fascinating if it were “just” a powerful, pint-sized PC, but there's more to it than that. It contains the Intel Compute Element, which is a working PC that is pressed onto a PCI Express card that is smaller than most graphics cards. The compute element houses the processor, memory and hard drive – although the NUC 9 Extreme Kit is only supplied with the processor. You must purchase the storage and hard drive separately.

Intel's focus for the compute element is on upgradeability and customization. In theory, this step offers NUC 9 owners an excellent upgrade path. The processor, RAM, hard drive, graphics card and power supply can be replaced.

I could even say it's better than a regular desktop because you don't have to worry about replacing the motherboard. By exchanging the computing element, you can also update your port selection, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.

That is the pitch. Does it work in practice?

Intel Ghost CanyonWorking with these connections is cumbersome Matthew Smith / Digital Trends

I was disappointed to find that the modular structure of the NUC 9 was difficult. Opening the case is easy enough. Simply remove two screws and slide the top back. However, the adapted compute element is decorated with numerous connections at unfavorable angles. These must be carefully removed.

In my experience, gamers who want to upgrade a rig are afraid because they don't want to break an expensive PC. The NUC 9 does not solve this problem.

Intel Ghost CanyonComputing element (closed) Matthew Smith / Digital Trends

As soon as the connections are removed and one last screw is loosened, the Compute Element slides freely like any other PCI Express card. The element is a plastic cover on a circuit board that contains the processor, memory (in the form of two SODIMMs) and solid-state memory.

The processor cannot be removed while memory and memory can be replaced. It is a mobile chip that, like other NUC devices, is permanently connected. That is why the compute element is important. You cannot replace the processor without them. This means that at least a processor upgrade is possible.

Intel Ghost CanyonCalculate item (open) Matthew Smith / Digital Trends

What computer elements will be available and how much will they cost? Intel's roadmap is not precise. However, the company has promised that future Compute Elements will be backward compatible. Intel plans new Compute Element models for 2021 and 2022. Partner companies will also sell standalone Compute Element upgrades.

Personally, I tend to believe Intel's plan. The company has supported the NUC line for years, even though it only makes up part of its overall business.

I expect processor options to be limited compared to a standard desktop, but it might make sense to swap flexibility for simplicity and size. The subtle differences between processors are not relevant to most people, including most enthusiasts. If Intel (or partners) can simply offer a Core i5, i7 and i9 computing element for every future generation of mobile processors, I think that's appropriate. And I'm convinced that Intel will do it.

Processor power

As mentioned earlier, the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit I received had an Intel Core i9-9980HK processor, 16 GB of memory, and an Nusidia RTX 2070 graphics card built by Asus. The Core i9-9980HK is not the most modern processor since it was launched almost a year ago. Still, it's a top-notch option in the Intel range of mobile chips, which offers eight cores, 16 threads, and a maximum turbo boost frequency of 5 GHz.

The i9-9980HK ran as expected. Geekbench 5 achieved a single-core score of 1,232 and a multi-core score of 7,312. These numbers are in the baseball stadium of the Core i9-9980HK laptops we tested. The Apple MacBook Pro 16 was a little slower and the Acer ConceptD 9 a little faster. Remember that while the NUC 9 is a desktop, its processor is a mobile component.

While the i9-9980HK performs well in Geekbench 5, the latest AMD components express it. We recently tested the Asus Zephyrus G14 with AMD's new Ryzen 9 4900HS. It was competitive with the NUC 9 in the single core and won in the multi core. This is not good for the Intel i9-9980HK. The Asus Zephyrus G14 is a small gaming notebook. So you wouldn't expect the NUC 9 to beat it, but its victory is clear.

Other benchmarks tell a similar story. Our handbrake benchmark, which uses popular video encoding software to transcode a 4K movie trailer, was completed on the NUC 9 in 114 seconds. That is hardly in front of the Acer ConceptD 9, but behind the Asus Zephyrus G14. The Core i9-9980HK also falls behind the Intel Core i9-9900K, a processor for desktops.

I saw a Cinebench R20 of 3,348 from NUC 9. This is also slightly above most laptops with the same chip, but not at the top of the class.

I don't think this processor performance will lower it in 2020 – not at a retail price of $ 1,700.

It's worth noting that the Core i9-9980HK isn't a problem despite these mixed results. It easily defeats the currently available mobile processors of the Intel Core i7 H series. It also easily defeats previous NUC desktops. This is a fast processor capable of handling heavy workloads like 4K content creation or high resolution photo editing. It will shame the majority of laptops and keep up with some mid-tower desktops.

However, I don't think this processor performance will affect 2020 – not at a retail price of $ 1,700 excluding RAM, hard drive, and graphics card that aren't included in the kit.

Gaming performance

As already mentioned, the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit does not contain a graphics card. You have to get one yourself so that your mileage varies depending on the graphics card you bought. The NUC 9 can be used for dual-wide graphics cards with a length of up to 20 cm. My test device came with an Asus RTX 2070 that fits into the NUC 9, so I tried it out.

I started with 3DMark, where the NUC 9 had a fire strike score of 17,932 and a time spy score of 8,350. This is exactly what I would expect from an Nvidia RTX 2070 desktop packaging. The RTX 2070 Super is slightly faster and achieves 10,136 points in a testbed desktop packing Intel Core i9-9900K. The desktop class RTX 2070 of the NUC 9, however, easily defeats any laptop incarnation of the RTX 2070 we tested.

Fortnite was a breeze. An average of 141 frames per second with a resolution of 1080p and epic details as well as 90 frames per second with a resolution of 1440p and epic details were generated. These numbers are not surprising for a desktop that packs Nvidia's RTX 2070, but they easily outperform laptops with RTX 2070 hardware. The Razer Blade 15 with Nvidia RTX 2070 Max-Q only reaches 72 frames per second under the same conditions. The small size of the NUC 9 clearly doesn't hold it back.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey, our most demanding game benchmark, slowed down the NUC 9 – but only with a resolution of 1440p.

Civilization VI performed exceptionally well. It averaged 120 fps at 1080p and Ultra Detail with 2x MSAA turned on and still 100 fps at 1440p and the same settings. These numbers place a large gap between the NUC 9 and laptops with Nvidia RTX 2070 hardware.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey, our most demanding game benchmark, slowed down the NUC 9 – but only with a resolution of 1440p. The NUC 9 averaged a very respectable 57 fps at 1080p and ultra high details, but only reached 47 fps at 1440p and ultra high. While the NUC once again outperforms laptops with RTX 2070 hardware, it falls slightly behind our testbed desktop with an RTX 2060 Super, which averaged 51 fps at 1440p and ultra high.

Since the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit doesn't come with a GPU, the main question is: does the CPU hold the system in any way? I think the answer is definitely "no". The Core i9-9980HK is a powerful processor with a strong balance between single-core and multi-core performance. However, it is not the new sharpness and is currently surpassed by newer processors that have just been launched by Intel and AMD.

Heat and fan noise

The NUC 9 Extreme Kit has a lot to offer, but its performance is not without consequences. Packing a large amount of hardware in a small space can make cooling difficult, and the NUC 9 encounters this problem.

Intel Ghost CanyonMatthew Smith / Digital Trends

Fan noise is the real problem. The NUC 9 has several small fans, including those in the power supply and in the processor itself. These fans sometimes have to spin quickly, which inevitably makes a racket. Even worse, the mesh side panels of the NUC 9 do not isolate the sound.

This results in a loud little desktop. The fans of the NUC 9 often race in action and sound at maximum speed ready to drown out your robot vacuum. The fans are unpredictable and hard and bounce between high and low speed states.

Price and availability

The NUC 9 Extreme Kit is expected to retail for $ 1,700 when it arrives at Intel's channel partners next month. Intel also has retail Core i5 and i7 models for $ 1,050 and $ 1,250, respectively. These will arrive within three months.

Our opinion

The Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit is an experiment that is promising but not quite working. The compute element is a fascinating way to give a very small desktop upgradability. Unfortunately, it's not as intuitive as I hoped.

The NUC 9 Extreme Kit is also held up by its sky-high retail price of $ 1,700 – without memory, memory, or a graphics card, all of which must be purchased separately.

Is there a better alternative?

It depends on what you're looking for.

The unique modular design of the NUC 9 Extreme Kit leaves it out without direct competitors. However, you can also combine it with other small PCs such as the Apple Mac Mini or smaller incarnations of the Lenovo ThinkCentre and the HP Z Workstations. The Intel NUC 9 could be a compelling little workstation due to its excellent port selection and promises of future upgrades, although I'm not sure if its processor performance is competitively priced. It's a great mobile chip, but in some systems you can find standard desktop components at a comparable price.

The NUC 9 is simply too expensive as a gaming desktop. A system configured like the one I tested would set you back between $ 2,400 and $ 2,800, depending on the exact components you purchase and the sales you may be able to make. That is simply too much for the service offered. With an RTX 2070 Super, you can easily grab a desktop for that price, and it doesn't have to be much bigger. The Origin Chronos and Falcon Northwest Tiki are less well known alternatives.

How long it will take?

Like most high-performance desktops, the Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit remains useful for many years. It will easily take a decade or more, although after a few years it will obviously fade compared to new hardware.

Intel grants a 3-year standard warranty on NUC hardware. That's unusual. Most competitors only give a 1 year warranty.

Should you buy one?

No. The Intel NUC 9 Extreme Kit, as it exists today, works better as a thought experiment than an everyday desktop.

Editor's recommendations