Sound Tests - Subjective Listening

The Realtek ALC202A is a sound codec that we've had very little experience with, but for most tasks, sound quality was average. On our 2.1 setup, sound quality was roughly on par with other Realtek codecs, but not as clear, nor as loud as a discreet soundcard. On 5.1 surround headphones, which were limited to 2-channels, the differences between this codec and higher end ones became apparent. There was no distortion or crackling, but the sound of explosions did not have the depth we prefer when compared to other sound solutions.

For day-to-day use, the quality is fine, but it isn't suited for those of you looking for an immersive audio experience. For gamers, I'd strongly suggest looking into a sound card replacement.

Sound Tests - Performance in Gaming

We fired up UT2003 and ran through the Inferno demo and collected numbers at 640x480 and 1024x768.

At the lowest resolution, we see the CPU take the hardest hit, losing over 23 frames per second with the onboard sound enabled. A loss of 13 frames occurs at 1024x768, which points to the sound codec still putting a burden on the processor. While gameplay is still quite good in terms of speed, we've already touched on the fact that the sound quality would be better with a dedicated sound card, and probably tax the CPU much less as well.

Network Performance

We used to test the networking speed, and Windows Task Manager for CPU usage. We copied our Quake 3 Arena folder, totaling 488MB to and from the FIC Condor, to our ASUS P5AD2 Premium machine. We also performed the same test with the folder zipped to 461MB.

Both systems were connected via a CAT-5E crossover cable, which should prevent any bottlenecks that would arise with our standard 10/100 router.

Small Files Test - 488MB Total

	Time to Copy	Ave Transfer mB/sec	CPU %
Upload	0:54.5	9.33	12
Download	0:59.2	10.72	12

Large File Test - 461MB Total

	Time to Copy	Ave Transfer mB/sec	CPU %
Upload	0:45.4	8.28	9
Download	0:47.2	9.48	11

For both compressed and uncompressed, upload times were a bit lower in each case. Actual download rates were higher though, but so was CPU usage.

Cooling Performance

Given the lack of active cooling, we had some worries about the cooling performance of the Condor. While the CPU was one concern, the hard drive was another as there was no active cooling mechanism at all for it.

	Temperature in °C
CPU	51
HDD	46

Based on previous results in standard cases, CPU temperatures were about 5°C higher than average. The HDD was a scorcher though, but we ended up placing an 80mm Panaflo fan in the spare 3.5" bay and directed the airflow towards the HDD. There's no way to secure the fan (we just taped it there), and nowhere for the fan to draw in outside air, but with the fan in place, temperatures dropped by a significant 4°C.

While we would always like to see better cooling performance, with the PSU, CPU fan, X800 Pro and Panaflo fan spinning away, the sound levels were quite low. The system was audible from 6 feet away, but barely so. While the Condor was idle, we could barely hear the system until we sat down to use it.

Final Words

While I wouldn't go so far as to call the Condor "A Gamer's Best Friend", there are some highlights with FIC's current Intel SFF. Based on today's results, we can see that in terms of application (save for CDex) and gaming performance, the Condor does quite well when compared to Shuttle's system. Stability of the box was very solid, which is to be expected since you're limited in what you can do to tweak it. Under full load, the system runs quite warm, but remained reliable throughout testing. We also found the Condor to be extremely quiet, and the owner of the comparison Shuttle unit commented that he didn't even realize it was on while it was idling.

In terms of usability, the Condor is extremely easy to work with, save for a couple problems we've had installing an AGP card. Due to the orientation of the PSU, and the wires coming out of it, we needed to physically slide these cables out of the way to install our X800 Pro. We also found it cumbersome working with the motherboard when the Condor was in an upright position, though unlocking the hinge tabs resolved this inconvenience. Otherwise, the system was a breeze to work with, and we were up and running in no time.

Once the box was setup, we were met with our main issue with the Condor, which is the lack of options for user tweaks in the BIOS. While the lines between "gamer" and "enthusiast" are often blurred, we do think no BIOS overclocking options is unacceptable for the target audience of the Condor. The motherboard, being an Intel branded one, also does not offer Performance Acceleration Technology, hence the large differences in scores between the Condor and i875P board. While we can't fault FIC for the motherboard's limitations, we can ding them for their motherboard choice. Hopefully their next versions of the Condor is more tweaker friendly.

Our next issue is the relatively meager 200W power supply. While our X800 Pro worked just fine, we're not sure the same can be said with the NVIDIA 6800 Ultra which demands a 380W PSU. On the plus side, just like the CPU fan, the PSU does run near silent. Finally, while this is a minor thing, the online support is something we think FIC should work on. At the time of this writing, there are drivers and manuals for the Condor available for download, but getting to them is not very intuitive. From experience, it's tough to find updated drivers on their site on a regular basis, and feel that they need to improve their support in this area.

Since we've gone over the usability, we're going to have to say that overall, we were pleased with the design of the Condor's chassis. It is easy to work with, while still remaining compact. The "tower" design allows for a larger motherboard, and hence, more expansion options. For gamers, the case is light enough to be carried in a strong duffle bag, and while we weren't thrilled with the motherboard, there's room for an AGP card and two more expansion cards (one of which should be a sound card).

FIC put together a nice little barebone PC, but missed on some important features that enthusiasts have come to expect. While it's no slouch in gaming, it does not stand out in the performance department which is a shame as the design itself was well thought out. A change in motherboard and PSU selection is certainly in order, and hopefully FIC thinks about this with their next Condor revision. For those of you looking for a solid SFF PC, we can certainly recommend the Condor as it was reliable, easy to use, and performs well, which bodes well for gamers. However, those of you who prefer plenty of BIOS tweaking options, the Condor will let you down in that respect.

Pros: Good performance, easy to assemble a system, better than average expansion options. Quiet.

Cons: No BIOS tweaks possible. Mere 200W PSU. Poor onboard audio.

Bottom Line: While the Condor isn't the ideal choice from an enthusiast perspective, it does have a lot of attributes that make the unit attractive. The only real knocks against it, especially from a gamer perspective, is the lack of BIOS tweaking options and rather small 200W PSU.

If you have any comments, be sure to hit us up in our forums.

HOME