The ASRock NUC BOX-1165G7 is a damn good mini-PC in terms of performance. Its 4-core, 8-thread Tiger Lake CPU boasts Iris Xe Graphics, which is a huge step up compared to Intel's previous integrated graphics processors and even capable of some casual gaming. That said, the unit still trails the ASRock 4X4 BOX-4800U with its Ryzen 4800U and Vega 8 IGP in many tests. While the performance difference is minimal in some situations where thread count isn't as critical, it does lose out to the 8-core, 16-thread CPU in multi-threaded workloads. Essentially, the status quo that Intel is better in lightly threaded tasks and AMD in multi-threaded tasks holds true. That said, I think the biggest surprise is that while the i7-1165G7 manages to keep up, going from 16 GB to 32 GB memory results in some wild performance swings. Differences were enough to lead to a large amount of retesting, which didn't change the results. In some situations, 16 GB proved superior, while in others, especially 3DMark and Unigine Superposition, the 32 GB setup dominated to where it even beat out the Ryzen 7 4800U and its Vega 8 IGP, which was a bit of a shock. Considering the memory operates at the same speeds and timings, the density and sub-timings are likely playing a role here. It shows that memory performance remains quite important, and that while more is usually better, such is not always the case.

During our old-school emulation tests, everything proceeded smoothly until I tested PS2 emulation, where I noticed some performance issues. While the 4X4 BOX-4800U was able to handle the three test games without issue, the Intel Tiger Lake unit had a few issues with Metal Gear Solid 3. Performance during cutscenes was rather terrible, but the gameplay was alright. While still playable, it had issues holding Metal Gear Solid 3 to 60 FPS. Meanwhile, Suikoden IV and Onimusha played just fine. This means the majority of PS2 titles should be playable, but some titles won't quite operate well enough. Considering the overall performance on offer, I feel these issues stem from the Intel graphics drivers needing some more work, as other tests show that the performance on offer with Intel's Iris Xe Graphics should be more than enough. Thus, the drivers most likely lack the optimization for these situations, which isn't really surprising.

Build quality was very good, with no real issues coming to mind. Accessing the internals was easy, and even a complete teardown for cleaning purposes is no problem. ASRock also made sure to provide some level of upgradeability, and while not on the same level as larger Mini-ITX systems or traditional desktops, it is still quite good. Users have two SO-DIMM slots with a maximum capacity of 64 GB, an M.2 slot for NVMe or SATA SSDs, and a single 2.5-inch bay for a SATA HDD or SSD. That alone allows for a good deal of customization, which alleviates the issue of its high price tag somewhat because you are not left with a measly 4 GB of RAM or 64 GB of eMMC storage. Still, at nearly $600, the system is a touch expensive, and as configured, it balloons out to roughly $790–$870, which doesn't include the OS. While the price can be lowered further still with less memory and another SSD, overall savings won't be all that great. However, sticking with 16 GB of memory and swapping to a different SSD should make $770 before the OS possible, and you could also go with Linux.

Depending on how you set it up, temperatures do get quite high on this system. ASRock's BIOS is simplistic, but this time around, it does have a couple of useful options with its CPU performance settings Normal and Performance and CPU fan profiles Automatic, Set Temp Target, and Full-On. During testing, I noticed no real change between Normal and Performance during daily tasks; however, it did impact fan noise. The only time I saw a major difference was when testing unrealistic workloads, as is the case in our AIDA64 stress tests. Either way, I find the best solution is to set the CPU to Performance and the fan to Automatic. Everything was stable, temperatures were reasonable, and while noise was a problem under insane loads, it was fairly quiet in day to day tasks.

At idle, the system typically stayed below 35 dBA, and peaked at around 44 dBA under regular loads, be it regular tests or games. AIDA64 did result in a peak noise reading of 52 dBA at 30 cm. As for clock speeds, the CPU stayed above its base clock in all the situations we tested. In the AIDA64 stress test with the CPU, FPU, memory, and cache being stressed, the CPU averaged 3.2 GHz, with temperature hitting the 100°C throttle point. In the same test with FPU unchecked, the CPU was able to stretch its legs to 3.6 GHz with a peak temperature of 95°C. Stressing CPU and GPU fully resulted in an average CPU clock of 2.9 GHz with a maximum temperature of 80°C. As for power usage, the system at idle consumed 12 watts, averaged 35–45 watts under typical load, and peaked at 65 watts. I would have liked to see ASRock make the system slightly taller, with the heatsink a bit beefier so the CPU can truly deliver its best-possible performance. I test in a controlled environment, so I imagine performance will likely drop in comparison at higher ambient temperature, which is something to keep in mind.

While the I/O is a bit limited, ASRock does offer great flexibility to make up for it. The USB 3.2 Type-C ports on the front can be used as DisplayPort 1.4 outputs, allowing users to connect up to four displays at 4K resolution and 60 Hz. The rear I/O is a step up from the 4x4 BOX-4800U, with the NUC BOX-1165G7 offering two USB 3.2 Type-A ports vs. the AMD system's two USB 2.0 ports. The inclusion of dual LAN is also nice since it's possible to set the system up as a PF sense box as well. Not to mention that it can easily be used as an HTPC or home office system because of its performance. Honestly, this system is rather versatile, capable of filling many roles, it just doesn't have the appeal of a proper laptop or desktop. However, if ASRock would add a Thunderbolt 3 port or better, I could see these units being great for those wanting a power-dense system with the option of adding improved GPU performance when necessary.

While a touch expensive for my taste, the ASRock NUC BOX-1165G7 is an excellent system overall that does offer a decent amount of performance in a small form factor. Add in solid I/O and features such as its 4x 4K display outputs and it should prove an interesting option for various niche markets. As such, I do recommend it.