Beelink AP42, another Apollo Lake N4200 mini PC

The reason I bought it was a warning from GearBest that my points might expire at the end of March. I later found out there was no need to worry, but at the time I hated the thought of losing almost $50 worth of accumulated points, and this deal came along.
At the time I bought it, the store price was $180; after applying my points, it cost me a little over $130. The current price is shown in the title, but they probably raised it because the item is temporarily out of stock.

Since I've already reviewed a computer with this processor, I won't make this review too long.
This computer is essentially a hybrid of two models: the Voyo V1 and the Beelink BT7. The first is similar in terms of the processor used, while the second is similar in manufacturer and design.

Specifications
Operating system: Windows 10
Processor: Intel Pentium N4200, 1.1 GHz (2.5 GHz in turbo mode)
Graphics: Intel® HD Graphics 505
Memory: 4 GB
SATA — 1 x M.2
Flash storage — 64 GB eMMC
LAN — Gigabit LAN
Wi-Fi — 2.4/5 GHz
Display: HDMI
External interfaces: 3x USB 3.0, SD card slot
Audio output — 3.5 mm jack
Dimensions: 119 x 119 x 20
Weight: 340 g

As always, I'll start with the packaging, but I'll tuck it away under a spoiler.


The package is quite good.
1. Beelink AP42 computer
2. Power supply
3. 1 m HDMI cable
4. 30 cm HDMI cable
5. VESA mount
6. Manual


The manual basically just describes the computer's ports and buttons.


The package is exactly the same as the Beelink BT7..
1. Two HDMI cables: the long one for desktop use, the short one for use with the bracket.
2. VESA bracket for mounting the computer to a monitor/TV.
3,4. This time the power supply is actually a little less powerful: 12 V, but 1.5 A instead of 2.


Even the computer's design is almost unchanged: a square aluminum box in a pleasant dark gray color.


At the moment, this is probably the most compact solution based on the Apollo Lake N4200.
The Voyo is the same size, but thicker.


The front panel is practically bare, with just a hole for the power indicator LED. The LED itself is somewhere deep inside, and when the computer is on, you can barely see it. Taking a photo of it is out of the question.


The configuration and port layout are very similar to the Beelink BT7.
1. Two USB 3.0 ports on the side, along with an SD card reader
2. On the back: power button, power input, another USB 3.0 port, HDMI output, analog audio output, and a reset button hole.
3, 4. The external WiFi antenna has “moved” to the side panel. You can swivel it 180 degrees while using the computer, making it easier to position behind a monitor.

Important differences: the Voyo V1 had no antenna; instead, it had an external WiFi adapter that occupied one of the USB ports. The Voyo V1 also used miniHDMI, which meant you needed a less common cable and reduced reliability.


An overall view showing how all the ports and the antenna are positioned relative to each other.


They added a number of ventilation holes on the bottom. The BT7 didn't have any, but it did have active cooling.


Next, a brief look at the software and a few tests.
Since this model uses flash memory only, it has just one drive, with about 46 GB free when you first turn it on.
The Voyo V1 had two drives, eMMC and SSD.


The partition layout is standard for Windows systems.


Windows 10 Home is preinstalled. There were no activation issues. I had a few minor difficulties switching the interface to Russian, but they were easy enough to resolve with a quick internet search. If needed, I'll add a brief guide.


This time I downloaded a newer version of CPU-Z, which recognizes the Apollo Lake N4200, so it provides a little more information.
But I ran the performance test using the older version, since the new one gave a slightly different result.
The Voyo V1 scored 763/2390 here, compared with 764/2450 for the model under review.


Although this has eMMC memory, I tested it as if it were a regular SSD anyway and got some very nice results: around 280 MB/s read and 110 MB/s write. That's an excellent result for eMMC. Seeing this, I was already almost 100% sure whose memory I'd find inside :)


I also tested it with a more conventional utility. Strangely, the results here are noticeably different.


Since I collect statistics on different computer models with eMMC memory, I use the same software version for all of them.
In this case, the test results are more like those from AS SSD benchmark.


For comparison, here's the Voyo V1 result.


And here's the summary table
CHUWI HiBox
Beelink BT7
Pipo X10
Pipo X9
Pipo X7
Pipo X7S
MeeGoPad T02
Pocket P1
Vensmile W10
Teclast X98 Pro
MeeGoPad T03
Wintel Pro CX-W8


The USB 3.0 and built-in card reader tests also went smoothly; both work at normal speeds.
1. A high-speed card inserted into the card reader via an adapter
2. The same card, but using an external card reader.
3. A hard drive with a linear read speed of around 100 MB/s—everything looks good.


The Wi-Fi sensitivity is disappointing, though, despite the external antenna :(
I usually "see" 50–52 access points in this test. The Voyo saw 31, and this one sees just 22. To be fair, the 5 GHz band works and my router is visible, but connecting to it under these conditions is impossible.


A quick test. This time I put everything into a single screenshot. The bottom graph shows an attempt to run the test immediately after connecting to the router, followed by three tests with two runs each, listed from bottom to top.
1. 2.4 GHz, router in the same room, but not in direct line of sight, about 5 m away.
2. 2.4 GHz, about 1 m from the router.
3. 5 GHz, not in direct line of sight (a small obstruction), about 2.5 m from the router.

As you can see, there are no speed issues, but as I mentioned above, the sensitivity is a problem. If the router is in the same room as the computer or an adjacent one, everything will be fine. If it's farther away, the speed will drop noticeably.


And of course, the benchmarks—what would a review be without them?
First, Cinebench in two versions.
The Voyo scored 10.30/1.69 and 11.86/132 in the respective test versions; the unit under review did slightly better.


In 3DMark 2006, the result is almost identical to the Voyo's (3487) and slightly higher than the BT7's (3238).


In the newer version of 3DMark, the difference is also within the test's margin of error: 329 for the unit under review versus 317 for the Voyo.


And of course, the temperature tests—these are really what a review of this kind of hardware comes down to. I think it's no secret that mini PCs and TV boxes often suffer from overheating. TV boxes tend to fare a little better, but mini PCs often need modifications and upgrades.
These tests were especially interesting to me, though, because this computer is similar to the Voyo V1, but has passive cooling and a smaller case.

First, I ran LinX for 20 passes, which took about half an hour. The temperature shot up to 89 degrees, then stayed at 75–80.
The first result is the highest because Turbo mode kicks in and the processor runs at 2.5 GHz. It can't sustain that frequency for long, though, and quickly drops to 1.55–1.60 GHz.
In any case, you can see that performance stays at the same level throughout, which means there is no overheating or thermal throttling. More precisely, the automatic controls keep the processor operating correctly. By the way, the Voyo V1 delivered exactly the same performance, but with active cooling!


I didn't stop at half measures and went straight to a heavy-duty test: OCCT for an hour using its most demanding test, which runs both the GPU and the mathematical test at the same time. This is an extreme stress test designed to check reliability; workloads like this don't occur in real-world use.

The results are practically identical to the Voyo V1: about the same performance and temperature. The Voyo reached 75–78, while this one reached 79–80.


Another run a little later.


And now for an external temperature check.
The case temperature is around 40 degrees. The power supply warmed up more noticeably, but there's a small caveat: it felt only warm to the touch. That's because plastic is almost transparent to infrared radiation, so I was essentially measuring an average of the case temperature and the temperature of the internal components.
In any case, I can say that both the computer and the power supply passed this test quite well.



Now let's try to figure out how it achieved these results.
Peel off the four rubber feet, remove the four self-tapping screws, and take off the bottom cover.


The bottom cover contacts the circuit board through a thermal pad about 2.5 mm thick. This doesn't lower the overall temperature, but it does add a little thermal inertia during periodic heavy loads.


The board is secured inside with three self-tapping screws, and there are almost no components on this side.


When I tried to remove the board from the case, it was extremely difficult to get out. At one point, I thought the manufacturer had routed heat to the case and that I was peeling off a rubber pad that had stuck to it.
But it turned out to be simpler: inside, we have the same case as the Beelink BT7, along with a large heatsink.


It all looks good—even the phrase “Only beautiful airplanes fly well” came to mind.


One important difference from the “Atom” computers is that this one has an M.2 slot for an SSD. The Beelink BT7 also had a slot, by the way, but it was implemented using a separate controller. Here, it connects directly to the processor.


These are the dimensions for installing an SSD. I don't have an M.2 SSD, so I took a photo just in case.


They made a little “house” for the LED, though I didn't understand why they did that in this case.
What's more, when I was removing the board from the case, I nudged this “house” with my finger. Since I hadn't seen what I'd done, my first thought was, “Well, that's it, the cat's dead—sooner or later I was bound to break something while taking it apart.” But once I saw what had happened, I relaxed right away :)


And now I've reached the heatsink. Yes, it's a proper aluminum heatsink, with proper fins—not some odd cast heatsink made from an unknown alloy. It also has a black finish, which slightly improves cooling in this case, since there's almost no airflow inside. The heatsink takes up nearly all the free space in the case.

What can I say? This time they got it right—or almost right, perhaps. Either way, it's better than the previous versions. I'd suggest the manufacturer add more ventilation holes; that would make things even better.


But we didn't come here just to admire the heatsink—we also want to see what's underneath it, and maybe even try to improve things.


Heat is transferred to the heatsink through 1.5–1.6 mm-thick thermal pads. They carry heat away from the processor, the PWM controller, and... the memory.
Of course, in this case nobody is actually cooling the memory; there's simply an extra pad to keep the heatsink from tilting, nothing more.
The photo shows only two of the three pads; the third one stayed on the processor.


Judging by the circuit board, it looks like we can expect some kind of “Pro” or “Ultra” version with 8 GB of RAM, since there's room on the board for a couple more chips. I think enthusiasts will want to try soldering on a couple of chips themselves, but I wouldn't do that.


The layout of the connectors and buttons is one thing that has remained almost unchanged. The same configuration is also used in the Chuwi HiBox.


There is one small difference, though. On the Beelink BT7, there was room for another slot or module between the USB ports and the memory card slot; here, there's space for some kind of chip.


The fan connector is still there, but the WiFi module is clearly different.


There's also room for a VGA connector, but there's no converter chip on the board. I think they may also release an expanded version of this computer.
The processor itself has no VGA output; this is usually implemented with a DisplayPort-to-VGA converter.


Now, a closer look at the components.
1. Intel Pentium N4200 processor (SoC)
2. RAM with somewhat unusual markings. As far as I know, Elpida no longer makes memory, though I could be wrong.
3. As expected, the eMMC is made by Samsung, which is a big plus.
4. Processor power controller.
5. Peripheral power controller, most likely for USB.
6. A small transistor near the power connector.


1. Intel WiFi module. It uses two antennas, which explains the high data transfer speed in the test, but its sensitivity is disappointing.
2. RTL8111G Gigabit Ethernet chip made by Realtek.
3. ALC 269 audio chip, also from Realtek.
4. They cut costs on the HDMI output protection. The same cost-cutting is also evident near the USB ports. Unsoldered spots are visible.


And here's the general description from the manufacturer.


As I said, there are far fewer components on the underside: the BIOS flash memory and two transistors.
The transistors are located under the peripheral power converter, so they are most likely simply split up, with two on top and two on the bottom.


The battery is glued in place, but connected via a plug. To the right you can see where the bottom cover makes contact with the circuit board. A soft, electrically conductive material is used for this.


And as I mentioned above, I decided to modify the computer after all.
The modification was very simple in this case. I just replaced the thermal pad that transfers heat away from the processor. I don't have any copper plates, so I had to use a 1 mm-thick aluminum one. In practice, I found that you only need a tiny amount of thermal paste, since tightening the screws compresses the plate to about 1 mm thick.


Of course, after the modification I ran some additional temperature tests.
Running LinX showed a significant drop in temperature, to a maximum of 67 degrees after a half-hour test. Interestingly, performance didn't change at all, which suggests that the cooling was already doing its job before the modification.


A one-hour OCCT test also showed a temperature drop of about 8–9 degrees.
You can enlarge the images in the review by clicking on them.


You might ask: what's the point of the modification if performance doesn't improve?
It's simple: summer is coming, and nobody needs those “extra” 10 degrees. The computer now has that 10-degree margin in reserve in case the ambient temperature rises.

Since the amount of heat generated hasn't changed, the case temperature has remained practically the same, with a difference of about 1 degree.
These and the previous thermal images were taken under load, right at the end of the OCCT test (54 minutes).


The BIOS settings are almost completely stripped down: you can choose what to boot from, set a password, and that's it... Everything fits into four screenshots.
What a shame :(


Finally, here's a summary table of the computer tests with different processors.


Now for the summary.
Pros
No fan, completely silent.
No overheating
Fast WiFi, with 5 GHz support
Fast eMMC flash memory
M.2 slot for installing an SSD
Good performance
VESA adapter included.
Well-built.

Cons
No way to increase the RAM, at least not easily.
WiFi sensitivity isn't great

My opinion. As strange as it may sound, Beelink managed to make a computer with an Apollo Lake N4200 processor and no active cooling without it overheating.
I was also pleased to see an SSD slot. The Voyo V1 had one too, and there was even the theoretical option of installing a regular hard drive, if only they'd included the cable for it...
There is a “fly in the ointment,” though: you can't upgrade the RAM, although 4 GB is enough for most tasks. Let's not get into extreme use cases like having 25 YouTube tabs open, playing 4K video at the same time, and working in Photoshop. For everyday use, 4 GB is still enough.
As for WiFi, if you live in a one- or two-room apartment, or a larger one with the router in the middle, it'll work fine. If you try to get a signal across the full length of a large apartment, it probably won't work, and you're better off using a cable.

In short, in my personal opinion, this little machine turned out well.
That's all for now. As always, I look forward to your questions in the comments.

A small note: the review title links to the computer I bought. It's currently out of stock, probably temporarily. As an alternative, I can recommend a similar model that’s available nearby. It’s a little less powerful, but costs just $160: Beelink AP34 with an N3450 processor.

To put things in perspective, here’s a table showing all the Apollo Lake SoCs:
Pentium J4205: 4/4, 2 MB L2, 1.5/2.6 GHz, HD 505 graphics (18 EU, 250–800 MHz), TDP 10 W
Celeron J3455: 4/4, 2 MB L2, 1.5/2.3 GHz, HD 500 graphics (12 EU, 250–750 MHz), TDP 10 W
Celeron J3355: 2/2, 2 MB L2, 2.0/2.5 GHz, HD 500 graphics (12 EU, 250–700 MHz), TDP 10 W
Pentium N4200: 4/4, 2 MB L2, 1.1/2.5 GHz, HD 505 graphics (18 EU, 200–750 MHz), TDP 6 W
Celeron N3450: 4/4, 2 MB L2, 1.1/2.2 GHz, HD 500 graphics (12 EU, 200–700 MHz), TDP 6 W
Celeron N3350: 2/2, 2 MB L2, 1.1/2.4 GHz, HD 500 graphics (12 EU, 200–650 MHz), TDP 6 W