Intel NUC5i7RYH Broadwell Mini PC With Iris Pro Graphics Tested

MojoKid writes: In addition to ushering in a wave of new notebooks and mobile devices, Intel's Broadwell microarchitecture has also found its way into a plethora of recently introduced small form factor systems like the company's NUC platform. The new NUC5i7RYH is a mini-PC packing a Core i7-5557U Broadwell processor with Iris Pro graphics, which makes it the most powerful NUC released to date. There's a 5th-gen Core i7 CPU inside (dual-core, quad-thread) that can turbo up to 3.4GHz, an Iris Pro 6100 series integrated graphics engine, support for dual-channel memory, M.2 and 2.5" SSDs, 802.1ac and USB 3.0. NUCs are generally barebones systems, so you have to build them up with a drive and memory before they can be used. The NUC5i7RYH is one of the slightly taller NUC systems that can accommodate both M.2 and 9.5mm 2.5 drives and all NUCs come with a power brick and VESA mount. With a low-power dual-core processor and on-die Iris Pro 6100-series graphics engine, the NUC5i7RYH won't offer the same kind of performance as systems equipped with higher-powered processors or discrete graphics cards, but for everyday computing tasks and casual gaming, it should fit the bill for users that want a low profile, out-of-the-way tiny PC.

Comments

Native Ads...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there a way to filter out native ads? They don't even seem to be putting a "paid content" label on them.

But can it run systemd?

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone must be running a porting effort surely?

Pass because the price point is too high

[randomErr]

For the price I could get a Mini-ITX form factor machine that isn't that much bigger, with better performance, and more features. If you need something small like that you maybe looking at an ARM based SBC.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[ChrisSlicks]

Competitive offerings are also considerably less than this NUC. $900 with some assembly required.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[Anonymous Coward]

For the price I could get a Mini-ITX form factor machine that isn't that much bigger, with better performance, and more features. If you need something small like that you maybe looking at an ARM based SBC.

Absolutely. I got a SFF unit from Dell that is only a little bigger, same class CPU, for $600 with ram and HDD. If you really need the size AND power you have to pay the price for the NUC. If you can sacrifice on either, get a little larger case from Dell for a lot less money or get an ARM unit for a TON less money.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Intel is lucky that Apple appears to have a barely concealed desire to kill the mac mini, and bootcamp. Otherwise it'd be tricky to imagine many NUCs moving at all.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[CastrTroy]

This thing has way more power and way better connectivity than an ARM SBC. Try finding an ARM SBC with USB 3, DisplayPort, Gigabit Ethernet, and M.2 SSD support. This thing is small enough that you could substitute it for a laptop if you just wanted a machine to bring between work and home. I know a lot of people who have work laptops who never use them except at a fixed desk anyway. Just plug in the peripherals at home or work. Not than I'm a big fan of working from home, but for some people this might actually work quite well for the task.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

Such as ? I checked last month in the perspective of updating my environment, and the competition isn't very broad for my requirements. Everything is centered to being able to drive a 4k@60Hz monitor (requiring DP1.2). Non-x86_64 is pretty much non-existant, and not supported by most proprietary software vendors. AMD offering is non-existant. Even Intel mini-itx ends up all cost included around the $750 of the NUC board ($500 for the board + cpu + psu + case, $100 SSD, $150 memory).

The other options I have is to only upgrade to 1440p and keep my existing hardware...

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

Non x86 is pretty much out of the question for any decent desktop.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

These dell sff units are *huge* !

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

FWIW, even Dell's USFF are huge beast...

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

Mini-ITX is absolutely colossal compared to the NUC. Even the Mac Mini is gigantic in comparison. On the other end, ARM is not even in the ballpark in performance. ARM definitely has its place, but it is not in the same class as the NUC.

By the time you buy your mini-ITX motherboard, case, and power supply you are paying more than an equivalent NUC. The 3i7 is cheap. And, unlike mini-ITX jammed-together nightmares, the NUCs are beautifully engineered systems that go together neatly.

I have never seen a mini-ITX that had anything close to an acceptable cooling system. They were noisy and/or inadequate. I went through a phase where I built a number of mini-ITX systems, and none of them were ever anywhere near satisfactory.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[TeknoHog]

I have never seen a mini-ITX that had anything close to an acceptable cooling system. They were noisy and/or inadequate. I went through a phase where I built a number of mini-ITX systems, and none of them were ever anywhere near satisfactory.

I've assembled low-power, often fanless systems since early 2004. Some of these are considerably larger form factors than Mini-ITX. The point is that low power combined with relatively large casings enables better and quieter cooling. The trend of ever-smaller systems for stationary use is dumb if you need tiny, whiney fans to sustain it. "Laptop" components are great for their lower power consumption (often meaning higher efficiency), but I can still choose something better than laptop coolers.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

It's not as high as that. Here is one with all the pieces (including 16GB and M.2 SSD) all assembled and tested for $755. Same thing with the 5i5 is $630; 5i3 is even cheaper.

A Mac Mini with an i7, 16 GB and the cheapest available SSD is $1400. I just went to the Apple store to check. And the Mac Mini is 19.7x19.7 cm. The NUC is 11.5x11.1 cm. A whole different class. Even the original Mac Mini before it got pointlessly squashed down vertically and bloated horizontally was 15x15 - 17x17 cm. If I could find my old shell I would tell you, but it was definitely in that range. The present Mac Mini doesn't even use an external power brick you can toss on the floor under the desk. The main case is bloated to hold the whole power supply.

Maybe you could tell us just what is out there that IS competetive with the NUC?

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[slaker]

Any mITX rig with stock Intel cooling, a PicoPSU and an mSATA/m.2 SSD actually has plenty of room for airflow since the bulky metal boxes of hard disk and power supply are out of the way. I also find the Antec NSK150, which has a front-mounted PSU, to work well enough for mainstream desktops.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

Why do I think if we actually had the exact specs of your Dell it would be severely inferior to the NUC in various ways.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

I don't disagree in the main, except that the NUC cooling system is not "whiney".

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[ChunderDownunder]

I bought the fanless Atom-based NUC because it was silent and cheap ($100AU for the DE3815TYKHE kit on sale).

It's glacially slow by comparison to this model but then I didn't outlay $US500 and as you and the article state the i7 model requires a fan.

I'm expecting/hoping for model refreshes in the fanless NUC category based around Atom X5 (Cherry Trail) and Core M.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[ChunderDownunder]

'Whiney' or not, it's enough to be an annoyance. From the article:

While power consumption is relatively low versus a desktop system, it is high enough to require some decent cooling. When under load, the fan in the NUC5i7RYH can get quite loud. When idling or just doing basic tasks, the system is very quiet. But under load, it is clearly audible and is noisy enough to disrupt a home theater environment, etc.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[slaker]

You can get an entry-level Mac Mini, sure. It'll be physically larger and it'll be slower. You can also get slower Broadwell NUCs if you're actually price-sensitive enough to make that comparison. Figure that you'll pay $100 for 16GB RAM and $120 for an m.2 SSD + $25 for an Intel or Broadcom wireless card if you think you need one + whatever the barebones box costs ($300 for the Broadwell i3 up to $535 for the Broadwell i7). Apple's pricing on the Haswell Mac Minis is $500, $700, $1000 for an at-best 2.8GHz i5 with 8GB RAM or for a slug-like 1.4GHz ULV i5 with 4GB RAM and a magnetic drive on the low end.
To me it looks like the late 2014 Mac Minis lose out all the way around unless you're THAT hung up on getting OSX preinstalled or think Apple support is magic.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[TeknoHog]

the NUC cooling system is not "whiney".

I believe you, considering for example that laptop coolers are surprisingly nice these days. However, I think of it as a matter of principle, and a question of long-term reliability. A tiny package is generally designed to run hotter, it's not just about the CPU, but also poor air circulation among other components, which contributes to long-term heat damage. The reliability of the fan itself is another long-term issue; it's probably going to get more whiney over time. Such a tight packaging can be a good compromise for portables where space is limited and it's not constantly run at full steam, but I don't see it making that much sense at a fixed location. OTOH, I also doubt that many people care about anything long-term any more :-/

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

That's what I meant about 'barely concealed desire to kill the mac mini'. Time was when Apple considered the mini to be a strategically valuable product, both for replacing the emac as a school computer lab staple and for converting former PC user households. Not coincidentally, that's the time when they were actually pretty aggressively priced, unless you counted best-buy shelf crap that managed to be massively larger and still noisier.

Now, they'd really prefer that schools sling ipads and households either buy imacs(or, in either case, just go with laptops). Their tepid updates, uncompetitive pricing, and frankly painful lower end configurations reflect this. They haven't yet gotten to the point where they can kill them off; but they sure don't care much.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

Without a dBa @ distance measurement, with comparisons to other equipment using the same measuring equipment, "quite loud" is not really a useful characterization. Even then the dBa level alone doesn't tell you all you need to know about the acousic objectionability factor. My good old AOpen MP945 with GMA950 graphics (exactly the same size as the good, original Mac Mini) idles and even does useful light work in silence in a quiet residential room with nobody else in the house to make any noise, and without any radio or TV or air conditioner running. Even all out, it is plenty tame, on the good side of laptop noise. The cooling system in a dynamite design.

But my AOpen GP7A with the power hogging NVidia graphics, even sitting idle, periodically roars like a bastard as some random daemon makes a quick tiny demand. When it is really working it sounds like a freight train or jet plane taking off, and oven-like air is rushing out of it.

The NUC takes even less power than the MP945. Certainly the 5i3 is damn quiet. I expect the 5i7 isn't all that noisy. I'm pretty certain it is a damn sight quieter than that GP7A.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[Cajun Hell]

Intel is lucky that Apple appears to have a barely concealed desire to kill the mac mini,

You could just as easily say "Gigabyte is lucky that Intel appears to have a barely concealed desire to kill the NUC."

I guess this is progress. People used to argue about which vendors offer the best values, but now they argue about which vendors hate themselves and their users to the least suicidal degree. Instead of "Apple sucks," it's now "Apple hates itself, second only to how much they hate you, the customer." Instead of "Intel's machines are a bit expensive compared to the OEMs who use the same Intel CPUs," it's "Intel sure is lucky that they aren't the most self-loathing computer builder out there," and so on.

I always knew psychology played a big role in branding, but now we're admitting it even to ourselves, while we buy their stuff. It just goes to show that whoever said "knowing is half the battle," was wrong.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

I share those kind of concerns in general. The AOpen MP945 was an example of using an excellently engineered cooling system. There basically was nothing else in the box besides the CPU that made any appreciable heat. Mine was very quiet and never degraded. The NUC from what I've heard has similarly great thermal engineering. But when the cooling system on anything like this degrades or fails, you're going to have to try to find and pay for the expensive custom part. You can't just slap a new commodity fan in there.

Interestingly, my AOpens have held up better than anything else I've had. An endless train of motherboards have succumbed to capacitor failure, but none of my AOpens.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

The i3, i5, and i7 all require fans. Anything that size that takes more than a watt or two requires a fan.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[fnj]

The DE3815TYKHE is also substantially bigger than the NUC. Roughly twice the size. Increased size confers better passive cooling.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

I'd all likely slaps one of these on my NUC: http://www.akasa.com.tw/update... (and it's still be cheaper and smaller than a mac mini)

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[tlhIngan]

Mini-ITX is absolutely colossal compared to the NUC. Even the Mac Mini is gigantic in comparison

Not so much once you consider the Mac Mini has the power supply built in, versus the power brick that comes with the NUC. The NUC is physically smaller, (though taller) but coupled with the power supply the size almost the same.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[slaker]

I don't really understand why Apple wants to sell iMacs. They're a huge PITA to service, cost a fortune to ship and aren't particularly more capable than Mac Minis.If there were an Apple product line with a definite justification to end, it would be that one.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Depends, what are you using the NUC for?

Games? For 200 bucks you can buy a PS3 that plays mostly the same games, has a BluRay player and plays digital media. For 400 bucks you can get a PS4 which has a better GPU.

For anything else, depending on how much horsepower you need. If you're rendering video or editing RAW photos or audio, sure, it's probably unbeatable for size/power consumption.

Anything else though, we're at a stage where things are pretty much Good Enough.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

My impression is that Apple's industrial design people believe cables, physical buttons, and anything that requires a hole in the shell of the product to be intrinsically filthy and sinful.

The mac mini, which has among the fewest integrated peripherals of any current Apple product, wantonly incites users to plug their filthy cables into the various ports cut into the perfection of the aluminium body. The iMac, by contrast, can be used in relative purity(with bluetooth peripherals) marred only by a power cable that is discretely hidden as such a shame should be.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[Sechr Nibw]

Anecdotal, but here's my experience. I had a 5i5 for about a month (then returned it in anticipation of the 5i7, which I got two weeks ago). The 5i5 didn't really get loud, even under heavy load, which was very nice. The 5i7 will wind up and whine whenever Plex has a new video to transcode, which it seems to decide to do at random times (read: when trying to get to sleep). In the same room this will become an issue, but it is fine in the next room over. However, I don't know that I would really recommend the 5i7 as an HTPC, as the volume would get annoying while watching a movie or TV show. The 5i5 should be able to handle all that, anyway.

(The main reason I got the 5i7 instead of the 5i5 was that I want to try to Hackintosh it at some point. There is a MacBook [Air?] with the same CPU/GPU as the 5i7, so it should be supported, there isn't one with the same CPU/GPU as the 5i5.)

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

The external PSU is actually good, because it is easy to replace if it dies, as it is generally the weak link in electronics. Just buy a new one with the same output and roughly the same power, and you can continue to enjoy your device.

Re:Pass because the price point is too high

[x0ra]

let me know about your hackintosh experiment, I'm interested.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[Agripa]

The present Mac Mini doesn't even use an external power brick you can toss on the floor under the desk. The main case is bloated to hold the whole power supply.

While I prefer integrated power supplies they are invariably the limiting factor as far as reliability and what wears out first. If the power supply is an internal ATX format or an external power brick that allows the possibility of replacing it inexpensively; anything else is a waste of money.

Re: Pass because the price point is too high

[ThePhilips]

Intel is lucky that Apple appears to have a barely concealed desire to kill the mac mini, and bootcamp.

Many Intel NUCs also require hacks to install on them anything non-Windows (for example Linux).

My point being: Intel NUCs are also not very friendly to the alternative OSs.

6100 is Iris Graphics NOT Iris Pro

[Anonymous Coward]

Very important difference. Mistake made all though the article and in summary.

Fail

[edxwelch]

The selling point of the Iris Pro is that it should be able to play AAA games at medium presets, but it's crippled by the low TDP and other iGPUs thrash it in benchmarks.
But then you would expect it to be virtually silent, because of the low TDP, but it's actually quite noisy.
Then, there's the price. Iris Pro has always come with a high price, because eDRAM is expensive to manufacture. That's one of the reasons why the previous generation Iris Pro had so few design wins.

Re:Fail

[DigiShaman]

Or you could get a dedicated console for less, that performs better at games, and runs a version of Windows; like, the Xbox One! Though personally, I'm into big-rig gaming so whatev.

Re:Fail

[x0ra]

The fan is the only downside of this system, though, 30W should be pretty easily dissipated by third-party cases.

Re:Fail

[Anonymous Coward]

I googled around a bit and it seems that the Iris Pro 6100 is roughly equivalent to a US$ 60-70 discrete gfx card... which puts in a position where it has too much performance for a HTPC application and too low performance for any acceptable AAA gaming.

Since casual gaming nowadays is mostly done in mobile platforms, I guess today's Iris Pro greatest problem is lack of a market.

Re:Fail

[edxwelch]

Not the only downside. You are paying $200 more for Iris Pro

Sounds like a great Hackintosh. Is it?

[azav]

Would be a nice low cost machine to develop for the Mac or iOS.

Can it run Mac OS?

Re:Sounds like a great Hackintosh. Is it?

[Anonymous Coward]

for its price i'd rather buy a used Mac

Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[drinkypoo]

Well, Intel has really and truly done it, they've made their processor naming scheme completely inscrutable. I cannot tell at all which processors are faster than which other processors without becoming an expert on benchmark scores.

Also, five hundred bucks for that? It's just not worth it to make it quite that small. I just built an Athlon 64 X2 4000+ for less than $100 and it's less than twice the size and has only one fan. I'm sure that i7 is considerably more powerful, but not $435 more powerful.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[x0ra]

You are comparing a 2015 system with a 2005 one... I doubt your system can drive 4k@60Hz, USB3 connectivity or even SATA M2.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[drinkypoo]

You are comparing a 2015 system with a 2005 one...

Correct. You won't want to use either one for gaming, so it's an apt comparison.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[fnj]

And a million times the power drain and heat.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[Anonymous Coward]

You might want to check CPUMark scores for those...

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4000+
Intel Core i7-5557U

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[drinkypoo]

My CPU cost $20. How much is an i7-5557U? I'm talking a complete system vs. barebones here. Pretty sure I got a shitload more for my money. With the right low-profile GPU you can handle that 4k, if you actually have a 4k TV.

Nobody who cares about the price has a 4k TV.

Nobody who has a 4k TV needs this NUC.

Pricing themselves out of the market again. Will be bought for receptionists and trade shows.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, five hundred bucks for that? It's just not worth it to make it quite that small. I just built a..

..completely different system for completely different uses.

You just compared an economy car to a glass of fresh orange juice, explaining the fresh orange juice costs too much.

You might be right that the fresh orange juice isn't correctly priced, but your economy car's relative price is irrelevant.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[x0ra]

I wouldn't use this NUC for gaming. I'd use it to drive my main working environment, that is a main 28" 4k display (running at 60Hz) and a side 23" 1080p display. The only app running on this machine would be Chrome, and terminals connecting to my current machines, where the bulk of my actual work would happen. Then I could move the full-ATX tower away from me.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[x0ra]

I do. I don't care about graphic performance, but I do care about screen real-estate, so 4k on such a small form-factor is awesome.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[Anonymous Coward]

The naming convention being obscure is the whole point; they want you to waste money by assuming a pricier processor with a bigger number equals a faster and better processor.

To make matters more complicated, even benchmarks aren't as useful as real world use cases. Raw numbers can give you an idea of potential, but since Intel and AMD have both been optimizing their CPUs for benchmarks since the 90s, those metrics are vastly overrated when it comes to determining true effectiveness.

Like in many things consumerwise, nothing replaces independent research.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[OdinOdin_]

i7-5557U

i7 = i7 class
5xxx = 5th generation
557 = the higher the number the faster/better feature set
U = the market segment feature set

I guess AMD folks find it difficult to understand, hence that is why they buy AMD.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[Vegemeister]

The machine from 2005 isn't even enough for web browsing, though.

Re:Too Expensive, i7 naming sucks ass

[toddestan]

5xxx = 5th generation

Except for those 4th generation six-core chips that also get a 5xxx number, because if you have enough cores you get bumped up a generation or something.

557 = the higher the number the faster/better feature set

Something like that. There's some similar 6xx chips. They are slower and have a lower end GPU, but include Intel vPro, Intel TXT, and Intel TSX-NI. So uhhh.... I guess those features mean a higher model number despite the slower speed. Well, except the 58xx and 59xx chips don't have them, so uhhh fuck it I don't know.

Re:Sounds like a great Hackintosh. Is it?

[x0ra]

Hackintosh are notoriously hard to install Intel HD graphics, and Yosemite killed support for third-party SSD (at least, the usage of TRIM), but with enough patience, that should be workable. Honestly, that's something I'd try should I get one of these NUC.

Not Iris Pro

[Narishma]

The Core i7 5557U has an Iris 6100 GPU without the eDRAM L4 cache, unlike Iris Pro.

race to the bottom

[slashmydots]

Gee, that's 36.7% slower than a mobile i7 CPU that came out 2 years ago! Good job, Intel. Keep direct-soldering underclocked garbage onto flimsy computers that nobody wants or needs for any use ever. Maybe it's because they're calling it an i7 even though it's a dual core and isn't an i7. It even has "support for dual-channel memory." What a leap in computing technology! If I wanted a small form factor PC, I'd get a slim micro-ATX case and put a board with a Pentium haswell CPU in it for a lot less money.

Re:race to the bottom

[x0ra]

Which 2-years old mobile i7 are you talking about ?

Re:race to the bottom

[Anonymous Coward]

Thermal envelope.

And AMD fans wonder why their favorite chipmaker is in the shitter.

Re:race to the bottom

[x0ra]

btw, did the 2 years-old mobile i7 handle 4k@60Hz, USB3.0, M.2 SSD in a 30W footprint ?

Re:race to the bottom

[Anonymous Coward]

"Iris Pro 6100-series graphics engine"

That's code for Crappy Intel Pro graphics, right? :)

Re:race to the bottom

[slashmydots]

Oh, my bad, it's THREE years old.
http://ark.intel.com/products/...

Re:race to the bottom

[slashmydots]

Neither of them can run actual content at 4K at 60FPS but considering the CPU I referenced could do triple monitors so that's got to be about the same amount of pixels. It's 45W but rarely gets there. M.2 is pointless and this chipset does do PCI-E 3.0 and USB 3.0 and SATA III, which is what people actually use.

Re:race to the bottom

[ChunderDownunder]

Sure is but if you want a small box for gaming, a 'steam machine' from various vendors will come with nvidia graphics.

Re:race to the bottom

[x0ra]

Define "Actual content", for me, 4K is merely a matter of screen real estate, not playing.

Would like to see a dual-NIC NUC

[swb]

It would be kind of interesting to build a VMware cluster out of these.

Re:Would like to see a dual-NIC NUC

[Anonymous Coward]

With only 2 cores per box that's going to be expensive from every angle. These seem to be aimed as filling some thin-client niche, but a lack of reasonable standard video and other connectors make them a poor fit for that as well.

I wonder if I asked Intel where these are used successfully if they would have an answer.

These systems have soldered down wifi cards &

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only can't you replace the card, but they're dependent on non-free software.

Fanless NUC

[WheezyJoe]

Logic Supply ML100G-30. Pricier, but silent.

Re:These systems have soldered down wifi cards &am

[x0ra]

Every single wifi chipset is running non-free software, though, most of the time you are hidden that fact. I guess ignorance is bliss...

Great for a Plex back-end

[Red Herring]

I have one of these that I use as my media server... headless Plex back end, general home storage and home automation web server, etc. Runs CentOS 6 beautifully (Gigabit wired connection, so don't care about lack of wireless drivers). Using a 256GB M.2 SSD as the local storage, with a few multi-TB USB3 drives for the media storage.

The nice things is that the CPU is that it's beefy enough to do transcode of several shows at the same time as my wife, myself, and kids all watch different shows on Rokus, iPads, and other computers via Plex. At the same time it can pull OTA recorded shows from my Tablo, do a transcode, put them in the media storage, and serve them back out without a hiccup. Try that with an Atom or an ARM.

Iris Pro

[Anonymous Coward]

All documentation I've found show that this isn't Iris Pro, rather it's a Intel Iris Graphics 6100.

Gotta luv search and replace

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder what motivated TFA's author to remove "pro" from the beginning of words? "cessor" == "processor"; "blem" == "problem"; etc...