Onda M2 Mini PC: Small, but Not Atom-Based

ONDA, a company known for its tablets, apparently decided not to stop at making those devices and set its sights on the small desktop computer market.
Today I’ll take a look at one of these devices.
As usual, there’ll be an inspection, tests, a teardown, and a few more hurdles along the way.

About a year ago, I posted a review of an interesting mini PC, the PIPO X7. It’s a pretty decent computer that I (well, not quite me) use at home.
But my needs gradually grew, and experience showed that while it’s perfectly usable for Photoshop and software development, these computers are really better suited to simpler tasks.

Just before New Year, I found out that ONDA had released a slightly more interesting device, so I decided to order one for a review—and to replace my old PIPO X7, which had served me faithfully all year without letting me down once.
I was really keen to try it out.

I wouldn’t say the ONDA M2 is anything new or revolutionary. It’s built around a processor that’s been on the market for about two years: the Celeron J1900, part of the previous generation of processors known as Bay Trail. In other words, it’s essentially from the same generation as the PIPO X7, X7S, X8, and X9.
But since Atom processors are firmly in the entry-level segment, I was hoping this computer would be better suited to the tasks I had in mind.

A brief digression: while preparing this review, I visited www.onda.cn.
The first surprise was that there’s no information about the ONDA M2 there, but there is an ad for the ONDA M3 that leads nowhere.
The second was that the company apparently decided to make not just small computers, but full-size motherboards and modern graphics cards as well.
I don’t know how things will go from here, but they’re taking the hardware side seriously—which is more than can be said for the website and tech support.

And now, the specifications.
Operating system: Windows 10 (I’ll say more about this below)
Processor: Intel Celeron J1900
Graphics: Intel® HD Graphics
Memory: 4GB RAM (DDR3L-1333) + 128GB SSD
Wireless: 802.11b/g/n WiFi 2.4GHz
LAN: Gigabit LAN
Bluetooth: BT 4.0
Display outputs: HDMI and VGA
External interfaces: 1x USB 3.0, 3x USB 2.0
Audio output: 3.5 mm jack
Memory card support: No
Dimensions: 140 x 140 x 30 mm (excluding feet, antenna, and connectors)
Weight: 520 g

First, a few photos of the packaging and unboxing. I’ll hide them under a spoiler, since they’re more for the record than for useful information.

What’s included:
1. Mini PC
2. Power supply
3. Power cable
4. WiFi antenna
5. Metal plate and screws for mounting to a monitor or wall.
6. Manual.


The manual is almost entirely in Chinese, so it’s not much use.
While preparing the materials, I noticed something rather amusing.
In the photos of the connector panels, not only is the computer upside down, but you can clearly see that the bottom cover has been removed and the feet are missing.
Apparently, the manual was put together in a huge hurry. I wouldn’t let mistakes like that slip into my reviews (though it did happen once), let alone a manual. It’s funny and sad at the same time.


Power supply.
It’s quite large; its dimensions are comparable to laptop power supplies. It’s a nice white color.
The power supply is rated for 12 V, 4 A, and stayed barely warm even under a heavy load. I don’t know why this computer needs an almost 50 W power supply, but it’s not a bad thing.
The connector for the computer is a standard 5.5/2.5 mm jack.
The included cable matches the color, which is nice, but it has a plug that I’m not even sure what to do with. Fortunately, the connector on the power supply is standard, so I just grabbed the first computer power cable I could find and plugged it in.


A wall/monitor mount, a couple of screws, and a Wi-Fi antenna.
I’ve reviewed a lot of mini PCs, but this is the first time I’ve come across one with a detachable antenna and a wall mount.


The computer is housed in a silver aluminum case. As I mentioned above, it feels heavy, so I weighed it out of curiosity: it comes in at about 520 g.


The front panel has a very minimalist design: two USB 2.0 ports, a power button, and a small hole for the power indicator LED.
You could argue that the power button would be more ergonomically placed farther from the ports, but I won’t. They probably wanted it right in the center.


The rear panel, on the other hand, is much more crowded.
Wi-Fi antenna connector.
Audio output.
USB 3.0 and 2.0 ports. Having at least one USB 3.0 port is already a plus.
Ethernet port. I count that as a plus, too.
VGA and HDMI ports. HDMI is now pretty much standard, while VGA is becoming a rarity. But having this particular port was one of the factors in choosing this mini PC, since I planned to connect it to an old monitor.
Power connector.


It’s hard to call this computer small, but it’s not exactly large either.
It’s definitely smaller than a case with a standard mini-ITX motherboard.


When I first chose this computer, I was 99% sure it had passive cooling. My reasoning was that the case was clearly aluminum and fairly large, so using it to dissipate heat seemed perfectly logical.
But the reality turned out to be a little different.
On the bottom, I found a large opening covered with a metal mesh, very much like speaker grille, along with a few smaller vents.
You could also see a fairly large heatsink and a fan inside.

To be honest, I was a little disappointed to find a fan. I wanted a completely silent option, but it is what it is. The one upside is that hopefully it won’t overheat—which is something I’m starting to have nightmares about.


There’s also a sticker on the bottom with a brief (very brief) list of the specs, model, and memory and storage capacities.
The bracket is a little odd. It’s designed to attach to a wall or monitor, with mounting holes spaced 75–100 mm apart.
Then you screw the two included screws into the computer case until they stop, and use them to hang the computer on the bracket.
Unfortunately, the package includes no other mounting hardware besides those two screws, so you’ll have to find screws to attach the bracket to your monitor yourself.
The computer can be mounted with the ports facing either up or sideways.


There isn't much to see on the outside, so it's time to take a look at the software.
I connected a monitor via VGA and used a wireless keyboard and a wired mouse.


The usual BIOS splash screen, OS boot, and desktop.
The computer originally came with Windows 10 installed.


I was pleasantly surprised by how quickly it booted the first time.
A clean OS boot took less than 15–18 seconds. I recorded a video to prove it.


I added a small note to the computer's specifications about the operating system listed in the description and on the product page.
Here's the catch: technically, the computer really does come with Windows 10. It's there, it boots, and it works. But when I tried to activate it out of habit, I got this message.
A little later, I wondered how a full-fledged computer costing around $200 could come with a licensed OS, let alone the PRO version.
Of course, this is what you might call a demo version.
Elsewhere on the product page, it said DOS (Windows 7, 8.1, 10), which, while not entirely accurate either, is much more correct.

So, consider the computer to be sold without an operating system.


The drive was originally partitioned a little differently, with an 800 MB recovery image partition. Why have a recovery image for a system that can't be activated? I have no idea.
While preparing this review, I made the mistake of starting a system recovery without saving screenshots of all the tests and other things, so I had to run all the tests again :(((
The screenshot below shows the drive after installing Windows 7; the recovery partition has disappeared without a trace, which is probably for the best.


Since this processor is already fairly well known, and there are plenty of tests online, I'll hide some of my own test results under a spoiler.
The tests also include information on temperatures, which is directly relevant to this particular computer design.


Phew, now we can move on to the teardown.
I wanted to take this computer apart as soon as I got it, but I make a point of not doing that until after testing. As soon as I’d finished all the tests (at least the main ones), I grabbed a screwdriver.
I realize there’s nothing radically new in there, but it’s always interesting to take a look.
That’s probably why a teardown is a regular feature of my reviews—I just enjoy it :)


Since I had to install Windows 7 during testing, I'll briefly explain why I did it.
First, about reinstalling the OS.
Initially, I wanted to create a disk image using Acronis, but ran into a problem.
When I launched the program from a bootable USB drive, I got as far as the screen where you choose what to do: launch Acronis or continue booting (the standard first Acronis boot screen).
I selected the option I needed, the working environment loaded, and that was it—I couldn't do anything else.
The problem wasn't the USB drive or Acronis itself. The computer simply cut power to the USB ports, and there was nothing more I could do.
I could have tried connecting the drive to a regular computer, but it was easier to say goodbye to Windows 10 and its image (which disappeared after the reinstall).
A second minor problem was that the monitor connected to the VGA output wouldn't work during Windows 7 setup, displaying an invalid mode message.
The problem was solved by switching the monitor to the HDMI output.

That was it—no more problems. I installed 64-bit Windows 7, found all the necessary drivers (link to Yandex Disk), and everything worked without a hitch.


Although I ultimately couldn't get Wi-Fi working, I did get USB 3.0 working.
I connected an external hard drive and easily got speeds above 100 MB/s. It was a small victory, but a victory nonetheless.
I never managed to get this port working properly in Windows 10. I even tried checking the pins for continuity, but they were all fine—the problem was with the drivers.
I realize there may be working drivers out there, but I couldn't find them, despite searching for a long time.
By the way, I suspect USB 3.0 wasn't working on the computer in my previous review for the same reason. I'm curious how this works on other computers with Atom 8300–8700 processors.
I also measured the SSD speed in Windows 7, but didn't find much difference.


The next step was to try starting a hard drive connected to the internal SATA port.
The board has not only a connector for the SATA cable, but also a power connector for the drive, labeled JSATA (on the left in the photo).
The connector has four pins, arranged as follows —
5 V
Ground
Ground
12 V.


I put together this setup.
I'll say right away: without cutting the heatsink, there's no way to fit a drive in this case.
To install the drive, you'll have to either cut the heatsink or move it toward the rear panel.


The first boot—and the second, for that matter—ended with a blue screen.
Then I remembered that Windows XP was installed on this drive. I went into the BIOS and saw that, for some reason, it had decided to boot from the new drive.
I changed the setting, and there were no further problems.
While I was there, I also noticed an option in the BIOS for the hard drive operating mode, IDE or AHCI, and thought it might come in handy.


Windows detected the drive without any problems.


The performance is certainly disappointing, but that's not the computer's fault—it's the old, slow drive, which had spent several years in a laptop.
I also tried connecting an old SSD, hoping it might come back to life, but it looks like it's finally dead :((((


The next experiment was to see how the computer performed without a fan.
By the way, the fan has a three-wire connection, but the connector on the board has four pins.
I can't say for sure whether the fan speed is adjusted automatically, but I got the impression that about half a minute after startup, the computer runs more quietly than it does at first.
The BIOS has a setting for the fan's maximum speed. It's set to 60% by default, with a minimum of 40%; I set it to that, and ran all the tests in this mode.
But 0% is always better than 40, so I disconnected the fan completely.
There is no fan monitoring, so it booted without any problems.


I ran two sets of tests to check the temperatures.
I started 3DMark, then LinX, and immediately repeated the test once more.


The temperature only reached 86 degrees at the end of the fourth test.
That's with the fan disconnected, the case closed, and the computer sitting upright as intended.
I could have improved things a little by removing the cover from the heatsink that directs airflow toward the ventilation openings. I think that might have lowered the temperature by 5–6 degrees.
But even so, it's clear that after about 50 minutes of testing, I couldn't overheat the processor.
Now the main thing is to make sure the ONDA developers don't see this and decide to “optimize” the design :)


Since I kept experimenting with the computer while writing the review, the story of the Wi-Fi problem took an unexpected turn.
Someone brought me a Dlink Dir-320 router, a fairly well-known model. The computer connected to it without any problems, even though it was also using WPA2-PSK.
After seeing that, I tried connecting to my Chinese home router again. Ten seconds later, the connection was established.
As they say, I don't get it.


Testing showed that if I turn on the computer and try to connect to my router right away, it fails in 90% of cases. If I connect to the Dlink first, the connection to my home router then succeeds in 90% of cases.
How does that make sense, and who's to blame?
As I expected, the speed turned out to be pretty good.
The first screenshot was taken at my desk, where most devices sometimes can't even see my router. There are four reinforced-concrete walls, two of them load-bearing, plus another wall made of foam concrete.
The second screenshot was taken at my usual test spot, in the same room, about 12 meters from the router. There's no direct line of sight, and there are reinforced-concrete walls, but there's a doorway, so the connection is better.


That wraps up the tests. Time to sum up the results and the teardown.
First, the hardware: I have no complaints here.
The overall build quality, the motherboard's build quality, the design itself, stable operation, and low temperatures.
The one letdown is a little fan noise, but if you want, you can try to «mod» the device and turn the fan off altogether. You could also nitpick the slightly misaligned power connector opening, but that really would be nitpicking.

I have almost no complaints about the software, partly because the device is technically sold without an operating system, so the only things to discuss are the BIOS and its settings.
Still, you'll have to install an operating system, so I'll comment on that too.
The software-related issues were:
USB power shuts off when launching Acronis.
The strange Wi-Fi issue, though now I suspect it's a compatibility problem with my router, specifically on the software side.
I could get USB 3.0 working only in Windows 7. I've uploaded the necessary drivers to Yandex Disk.

The pros, in my opinion:
Not especially fast, but a stable platform
Full internal interfaces: SATA, MiniPCI-E, SO-DIMM.
Good cooling. Even under sustained maximum load, I couldn't get the processor above 66 degrees.
No peripherals «hanging off» the USB ports, as some computers do these days.
A USB 3.0 port
Two video outputs, digital HDMI and analog VGA, and you can connect two monitors.
Upgradeable—for example, you can install a larger SSD or 5 GHz Wi-Fi.
No problems installing Windows 7.

But this device has its downsides too.
First, active cooling. That's always a downside because it means noise, dust, and fan wear. But in practice, it looks like there's a chance you can remove the fan altogether.
Performance isn't very high, especially in games. I was able to play the old Far Cry without any problems at 1920x1080 with high quality settings, but I'm afraid that's about the limit. On the other hand, this box is better suited to work in Photoshop and browsing the internet with lots of tabs open. Thankfully, 4 GB of RAM is much better than 2.
The Wi-Fi situation is still unclear, but I suspect some kind of tricky incompatibility with my router.
The price is relatively high, though that depends on your perspective.

My take: I've already shared my thoughts above. It's a decent computer, and for a first attempt, it's actually pretty good. We'll see how the company develops in this area. I'm already curious to get my hands on the new M3 version.
The processor is obviously outdated—it's been on the market for about 2 years, which is a long time. On the other hand, it's a proven chip, and apparently the manufacturer didn't want to take a risk and went with this option.
At the same time, advances in application software mean you don't need to replace your «hardware» as often as you used to, and this is more than enough for most home and office tasks.
Video playback is no problem either: it handles 1080p and 4K, but for 4K you'll need to find the right player. The familiar MPClassic doesn't enable hardware acceleration, so playback starts to stutter noticeably. That said, I've seen successful 4K tests on this processor.
I first came across these processors about 2 years ago, when I needed to build a small video surveillance system with IP cameras. All those systems have been running without problems for the past two years.

I think that's everything. I hope you find this review useful. I tried to be as objective as possible. If you don't think I was, or if I missed something, leave a comment and we can discuss it.

The product was provided by the store for review.