On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 11:36:08AM +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote: >On Aug 8, 2011, at 16:34, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
>> I think we need a good comparison / feature / selection page -- choose the requirements, then see the result:
>> USB 2.0 ports ports yes / no how many [ ] >> USB 3.0 ports ports yes / no how many [ ] >> Fast Ethernet ports yes / no how many [ ] >> Gigabit Ethports yes / no how many [ ] >> SATA I >> SATA II >> SATA III >> eSATA
>> and so on .....
>> At least this will help research on what board is best for specific requirements.\
to help us track what to use for Debian. Please feel free to extend / improve on the information there!
>Makes sense to me, would be quite useful for a number of projects >since the Fedora and Mandriva folks are also looking at creating or >updating their ARM ports.
The Mageia folks are targetting v5t (and softfp ABI) rather than v7 at this point - see discussion on the cross-distro list.
Cheers, -- Steve McIntyre steve.mcint...@linaro.org <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110809095527.GA3...@linaro.org
Right, so that's a half-size SATA SSD (JEDEC MO-297). Nice that they're using a standard form-factor with a connector. Would a full-size 2.5" drive fit? It looks like it might hit the USB connector.
Can you tell us what hdparm -T and hdparm -t report?
(What's the story with the case?)
Cheers, Phil
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/loom.20110809T160637-...@post.gmane.org
<spam_from_debian_...@chezphil.org> wrote: > I don't know what they've done on the Trimslice. My understanding of the Tegra > is that it doesn't have SATA but it does have PCIe, so in principle that could > be used with a controller chip to provide fast SATA.
single-lane PCI-e is still only gigabit, phil, and SATA-II is 3.0 gb/s. so it still really doesn't cut the mustard. you'd need a 4x PCI-e to meet the SATA-II specification, and that would mean you'd have a) lots of pins b) lots of heat. c) an expensive system.
you really really want a SoC that already has the required interfaces built-in. if they're built-in, you aren't driving some wires at mad speeds and wasting heat to do it.
l.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDyU7kDZmJOazkXpyF4zNgvpArtnE7LzdRq8=rS308m...@mail.gmail.com
<jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com> wrote: >> I think we need a good comparison / feature / selection page -- choose the requirements, then see the result:
>> USB 2.0 ports ports yes / no how many [ ] >> USB 3.0 ports ports yes / no how many [ ] >> Fast Ethernet ports yes / no how many [ ] >> Gigabit Ethports yes / no how many [ ] >> SATA I >> SATA II >> SATA III >> eSATA
>> and so on .....
>> At least this will help research on what board is best for specific requirements.\
make sure that power consumption (and rough price) are included. i think you'll find it's a big eye-opener right now, for anything that has ports over 1gbit (of any kind). translation: if you want an ARM processor, forget SATA-III, USB3, multi-lane PCI-e and multiple Gigabit Ethernet for at least another... 18-24 months, and even then you'll find they only come on systems with a 5 watt+ power budget. which aren't really "embedded" processors any more, really, are they.
l.
p.s. yes marvell have a spec for a multi-gigabit ethernet, multi-SATA-II, multi-PCI-e ARM processor. power requirements: TEN watts.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDx7CRAw0_VSkZoksha8J5LNSN50trXsk8x_kyZBFQh...@mail.gmail.com
On 09.08.2011 17:46, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> single-lane PCI-e is still only gigabit, phil, and SATA-II is 3.0 > gb/s. so it still really doesn't cut the mustard. you'd need a 4x > PCI-e to meet the SATA-II specification
There are many PCIe SATA controllers with x1 slot - Sil3132 based for example.
And even 1Gb/s gives you ~100MB/s which is more then most of ARM SoCs can achieve with storage.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4E424BF7....@linaro.org
> Right, so that's a half-size SATA SSD (JEDEC MO-297). Nice that they're using a > standard form-factor with a connector. Would a full-size 2.5" drive fit? It > looks like it might hit the USB connector.
I'm almost certain it wouldn't fit. I put one up next to the board and it overlaps the ethernet port and the usb ports.
> Can you tell us what hdparm -T and hdparm -t report?
$ sudo hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 66 MB in 3.05 seconds = 21.65 MB/sec
heh. Just a couple pieces of plexiglass with "TrimSlice" etched into it. The production cases are different.
Regards,
Jeremiah
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/64A5A336-9856-4AD2-941F-50518EB20...@jeremiahfoster.com
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Tim Small <t...@buttersideup.com> wrote: > On 09/08/11 16:46, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> single-lane PCI-e is still only gigabit
> AFAIK, single-lane "1st generation" PCIe is 2.5 gigabit, and "2nd > generation" is 5 gigabit. Also significant is the max-payload-size > capabilities of either end of the link (lspci -vv). A lot of consumer > stuff tends to be 128byte only, which adds overhead...
dang. then i'm glad i raised this - thanks tim. i was always under the impression it was 1gbits.
SATA-II 3gbits/sec isn't that far off of 2.5.
well, that just leaves power usage as a concern.
l.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDwLoYFeji16TgpXLQ84hT-uvrgY8-86wmeW6HOxfw...@mail.gmail.com
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote: > Are there any decent-looking Cortex A9 boards out or upcoming which > support ethernet and SATA? So far I've found:
> PandaBoard --- $180, ethernet, no SATA.
> Samsung Origen --- $250, no ethernet, no SATA.
> Igloo Snowball --- $209, ethernet, no SATA (but other than that a very > nice looking device).
> Trimslice --- $199, ethernet, may have SATA (they mention it a lot but > it's unclear whether there's an actual socket or not). Comes in a box!
> Anything else worth investigating?
ok... yes, i can ask.
question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and how much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 rather than dual-core.
the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to them that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers en-masse writing software based around the board etc. etc.
btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, 720mhz, 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major component cost with these embedded boards.
l.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDz5uXyMLp02w+a0L1Tchu9MNSwN06mCKGvtN2tY8Ys...@mail.gmail.com
On 09/08/11 16:46, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> single-lane PCI-e is still only gigabit
AFAIK, single-lane "1st generation" PCIe is 2.5 gigabit, and "2nd generation" is 5 gigabit. Also significant is the max-payload-size capabilities of either end of the link (lspci -vv). A lot of consumer stuff tends to be 128byte only, which adds overhead...
Tim.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4E42657F.6060...@buttersideup.com
> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote:
> > Are there any decent-looking Cortex A9 boards out or upcoming which > > support ethernet and SATA? So far I've found:
> > PandaBoard --- $180, ethernet, no SATA.
> > Samsung Origen --- $250, no ethernet, no SATA.
> > Igloo Snowball --- $209, ethernet, no SATA (but other than that a very > > nice looking device).
> > Trimslice --- $199, ethernet, may have SATA (they mention it a lot but > > it's unclear whether there's an actual socket or not). Comes in a box!
> > Anything else worth investigating?
> ok... yes, i can ask.
> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a > single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but > also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and how > much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces > as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 > rather than dual-core.
> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is > hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM > whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is > sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to them > that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers en-masse > writing software based around the board etc. etc.
> btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be > happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage > them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, 720mhz, > 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major > component cost with these embedded boards.
> l.
> -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: > http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDz5uXyMLp02w+a0L1Tchu9MNSwN06mCKGvtN2tY8Ys...@mail.gmail.com
<l...@lkcl.net> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote:
>> Are there any decent-looking Cortex A9 boards out or upcoming which >> support ethernet and SATA? So far I've found:
>> PandaBoard --- $180, ethernet, no SATA.
>> Samsung Origen --- $250, no ethernet, no SATA.
>> Igloo Snowball --- $209, ethernet, no SATA (but other than that a >> very >> nice looking device).
>> Trimslice --- $199, ethernet, may have SATA (they mention it a lot >> but >> it's unclear whether there's an actual socket or not). Comes in a >> box!
>> Anything else worth investigating?
> ok... yes, i can ask.
> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a > single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but > also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and > how > much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces > as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 > rather than dual-core.
> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is > hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM > whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is > sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to them > that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers > en-masse > writing software based around the board etc. etc.
> btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be > happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage > them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, 720mhz, > 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major > component cost with these embedded boards.
All that effort just to get native SATA? I really don't think it's worth it.
What use case do you have in mind? Most of my ARM systems, even for desktop use, get by really well on SD cards (SanDisk and Pretec if you have a choice) and USB sticks (I find the ones based on the Kingston controller handle random-writes particularly well), especially if you switch to using nilfs2 for non-root fs and write a few lines of shell for a cron job to handle killing/spawning nilfs_cleanerd.
Granted, it's in a box, but they are cheap and you can always dismantle it and put the board in whatever chassis is convenient for you.
Gordan
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/190a580051191de18b05b23fd3de8...@mail.shatteredsilicon.net
Gordan Bobic <gor...@bobich.net> writes: > On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:42:33 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > <l...@lkcl.net> wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote:
>>> Are there any decent-looking Cortex A9 boards out or upcoming which >>> support ethernet and SATA? So far I've found:
>>> PandaBoard --- $180, ethernet, no SATA.
>>> Samsung Origen --- $250, no ethernet, no SATA.
>>> Igloo Snowball --- $209, ethernet, no SATA (but other than that a >>> very >>> nice looking device).
>>> Trimslice --- $199, ethernet, may have SATA (they mention it a lot >>> but >>> it's unclear whether there's an actual socket or not). Comes in a >>> box!
>>> Anything else worth investigating?
>> ok... yes, i can ask.
>> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a >> single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but >> also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and >> how >> much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces >> as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 >> rather than dual-core.
>> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is >> hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM >> whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is >> sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to them >> that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers >> en-masse >> writing software based around the board etc. etc.
>> btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be >> happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage >> them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, 720mhz, >> 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major >> component cost with these embedded boards.
> All that effort just to get native SATA? I really don't think it's > worth it.
> What use case do you have in mind? Most of my ARM systems, even for > desktop use, get by really well on SD cards (SanDisk and Pretec if you > have a choice) and USB sticks (I find the ones based on the Kingston > controller handle random-writes particularly well), especially if you > switch to using nilfs2 for non-root fs and write a few lines of shell > for a cron job to handle killing/spawning nilfs_cleanerd.
guruplug is kirkwood so armv5t(e) so it can't be used for an armhf buildd (which requires armv7)
> Granted, it's in a box, but they are cheap and you can always
and noisy ...
Arnaud
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty9pcrbw....@lebrac.rtp-net.org
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Gordan Bobic <gor...@bobich.net> wrote: >> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a >> single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but >> also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and >> how >> much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces >> as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 >> rather than dual-core. > All that effort just to get native SATA? I really don't think it's > worth it.
it's fitting in with some existing plans that are already underway. so there's a window of opportunity for free software developers to take advantage of, that will likely be closed within a few weeks as they finalise and proceed with their plans.
512mb RAM (DDR2 800mhz mind you), 1.2ghz Marvell Kirkwood (not Cortex A9, which was david's question - kirkwoods are pretty damn good though, having an ARM "compatible" instruction set and had superscalar out-of-order execution well before Cortex A9s ever had it).
eSATA-II, 3gb/sec and _two_ gigabit ethernets, no less. whoopee-doo. ahh, are these the little boxes that massively overheat if you start using them for anything beyond a toy, by chance? :)
so, there you go, david - get one of those and a fire extinguisher :)
l.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDznL7Qp-hqP8emq69bZ5PC62gHfEgx7jcq7pRXAd_...@mail.gmail.com
<luke.leigh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Gordan Bobic <gor...@bobich.net> > wrote:
>>> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a >>> single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but >>> also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and >>> how >>> much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / >>> interfaces >>> as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 >>> rather than dual-core.
>> All that effort just to get native SATA? I really don't think it's >> worth it.
> it's fitting in with some existing plans that are already underway. > so there's a window of opportunity for free software developers to > take advantage of, that will likely be closed within a few weeks as > they finalise and proceed with their plans.
> 512mb RAM (DDR2 800mhz mind you), 1.2ghz Marvell Kirkwood (not > Cortex > A9, which was david's question - kirkwoods are pretty damn good > though, having an ARM "compatible" instruction set and had > superscalar > out-of-order execution well before Cortex A9s ever had it).
> eSATA-II, 3gb/sec and _two_ gigabit ethernets, no less. > whoopee-doo. > ahh, are these the little boxes that massively overheat if you start > using them for anything beyond a toy, by chance? :)
> so, there you go, david - get one of those and a fire extinguisher > :)
The overheating is muchly exaggerated. The white ones - same CPU/ARM, but no eSATA plumbed in (you can solder it on, though), have no fan in them. I have one, and it's regularly used for a few days' worth of compiling jobs at a time, and yes, it gets quite warm, but after over a year of hammering it hasn't failed. The ones I linked above have a fan and I am not aware of any PSU failure issues due to heat.
Anyway, glad I could save you a lot of effort in finding suitable hardware. :)
Gordan
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/06d48d964fdad82775f183142c793...@mail.shatteredsilicon.net
>> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:42:33 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> <l...@lkcl.net> wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 1:35 PM, David Given <d...@cowlark.com> wrote:
>>>> Are there any decent-looking Cortex A9 boards out or upcoming >>>> which >>>> support ethernet and SATA? So far I've found:
>>>> PandaBoard --- $180, ethernet, no SATA.
>>>> Samsung Origen --- $250, no ethernet, no SATA.
>>>> Igloo Snowball --- $209, ethernet, no SATA (but other than that a >>>> very >>>> nice looking device).
>>>> Trimslice --- $199, ethernet, may have SATA (they mention it a lot >>>> but >>>> it's unclear whether there's an actual socket or not). Comes in a >>>> box!
>>>> Anything else worth investigating?
>>> ok... yes, i can ask.
>>> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a >>> single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but >>> also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and >>> how >>> much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / >>> interfaces >>> as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 >>> rather than dual-core.
>>> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but >>> is >>> hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM >>> whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is >>> sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to >>> them >>> that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers >>> en-masse >>> writing software based around the board etc. etc.
>>> btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be >>> happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage >>> them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, >>> 720mhz, >>> 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major >>> component cost with these embedded boards.
>> All that effort just to get native SATA? I really don't think it's >> worth it.
>> What use case do you have in mind? Most of my ARM systems, even for >> desktop use, get by really well on SD cards (SanDisk and Pretec if >> you >> have a choice) and USB sticks (I find the ones based on the Kingston >> controller handle random-writes particularly well), especially if >> you >> switch to using nilfs2 for non-root fs and write a few lines of >> shell >> for a cron job to handle killing/spawning nilfs_cleanerd.
No fan, thus silent, but you will have to solder on the eSATA connector.
Gordan
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/f3825ad9a6e81e5f665f5a41e4eb6...@mail.shatteredsilicon.net
> The overheating is muchly exaggerated. The white ones - same CPU/ARM, > but no eSATA plumbed in (you can solder it on, though), have no fan in > them. I have one, and it's regularly used for a few days' worth of > compiling jobs at a time, and yes, it gets quite warm, but after over a > year of hammering it hasn't failed. The ones I linked above have a fan > and I am not aware of any PSU failure issues due to heat.
Actually, I've got a Sheevaplug. (I even tried Bitcoin mining on it once: I got 0.1 khashes per second...)
It's *almost* excellent. What's wrong with it is that the USB chipset is a bit dodgy and under heavy loads will produce sporadic failures and other weirdnesses, such as devices dropping off the bus, I/O errors, etc. Recently the whole device has started locking up every couple of weeks as the root filesystem vanishes. (I have a firm rumour from Some Guy I Met At A Party that this is a chronic issue with the Marvell USB chipset.)
I've looked at the GuruPlug, which would be ideal except for the heat and noise problems, and I've looked at the DreamPlug, which is slightly less ideal but expensive. Currently the SheevaPlug SATA is the most suited for my purposes out of that family.
But given that the Kirkwood chipset is quite slow (it's a descendent of the StrongARM family), and Cortex devices are now just as cheap if not cheaper and quite a lot more powerful, I'm interested in upgrading to one of them. Right now the iMX53 looks my best bet, though I'm really hankering after an A9...
PS. *Please* don't cc me if you're mailing the list! I don't need two copies! What happened to 'reply to list' buttons in mailers?
-- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ "I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my │ telephone; my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out │ how to use my telephone." --- Bjarne Stroustrup
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:42:33PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> ok... yes, i can ask.
> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a > single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but > also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and how > much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces > as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 > rather than dual-core.
I would think a 1GHz single core Cortex A8 with 1GB ram and SATA 1 would be preferable to 512MB ram and 200MHz less speed. Not sure how the A8 and A9 cores compare though. Not having enough ram always sucks. SATA 1 is still plenty for most harddisks these days. 100Mbit ethernet is OK in general, even though gigabit is always nice.
> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is > hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM > whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is > sufficient interest in purchasing it. i've already explained to them > that there are benefits to them i.e. Free Software Developers en-masse > writing software based around the board etc. etc.
Personally if I was buying one (and I am thinking of doing that), the choice between the i.MX53 with 1GB ram versus something with 512MB ram, I would get the i.MX53.
> btw when responding please don't take the piss on a price you'd be > happy to pay! apart from anything it has to be enough to encourage > them to go ahead with the board. the beagleboard price (A8, 720mhz, > 512mb) is a fair guide. unlike x86 systems the CPU isn't the major > component cost with these embedded boards.
-- Len Sorensen
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110810163337.GI8...@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl <at> lkcl.net> writes:
> question (for everyone): if there existed a board which used a > single-core 800mhz Cortex A9, maximum hard limit of 512mb RAM, but > also had SATA-II and 10/100 Ethernet, would it be of interest, and how > much would you pay for it? similar spec / design / size / interfaces > as the pandaboard, origen etc. just with a single-core Cortex A9 > rather than dual-core.
> the CPU i have in mind is the AML-8726-M (which is fantastic but is > hardware-limited to 512mb RAM) and i am in contact with an ODM/OEM > whom i believe i could persuade to create such a board if there is > sufficient interest in purchasing it.
This sort of question should always be considered in the context of the lead time, i.e. "in 9 months time when TI and NVidia and Freescale (etc.) have announced their next generation chips and boards, would you still be interested in a board with an 800 MHz Coretex A9, 512 MB RAM etc.?".
Looking at the various things I have done over the last few years:
- I have had a couple of "NFS server"-like projects, where respectable network and disk I/O speeds have been most important. (I can't agree with Gordan Bobic's claim that SD cards are good enough for most applications.) Your proposed board doesn't quite suit that because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
- I have done a couple of "display" applications, where video output in various formats and respectable software support for that has been most important. Today, almost everyone (including this AML chip with Mali graphics) is in the same boat: there is good hardware and good drivers, but the drivers are all non-free. If someone wants to stand out in that market they know what they have to do. (These projects have also benefited from lots of RAM.)
- I have done a couple of commercial projects where a fast interface to some custom (e.g. FPGA) logic was most important. I think PCIe is probably the only realistic choice for that today. The AML chip doesn't help for this.
So to be honest, I would not expect a board based on that chip to be much use to me. But I know I'm far from typical of anything...
Cheers, Phil
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/loom.20110810T193526-...@post.gmane.org
<spam_from_debian_...@chezphil.org> wrote: > Hi Luke,
wotcha mr endecott
> This sort of question should always be considered in the context of the lead > time, i.e. "in 9 months time when TI and NVidia and Freescale (etc.) have > announced their next generation chips and boards, would you still be interested > in a board with an 800 MHz Coretex A9, 512 MB RAM etc.?".
hell no... unless it was either a) available in 4-6 weeks b) was part of a kit that could be upgraded c) was price-reduced massively to reflect the lower amount of RAM and CPU speed.
a) _could_ happen b) could also happen (see links below for examples) c) ain't gonna happen, fact.
links to stuff wot is modularly upgradeably spiffing:
> Looking at the various things I have done over the last few years:
> - I have had a couple of "NFS server"-like projects, where respectable network > and disk I/O speeds have been most important. (I can't agree with Gordan > Bobic's claim that SD cards are good enough for most applications.) Your > proposed board doesn't quite suit that because it doesn't have gigabit ethernet.
whoops :)
> - I have done a couple of "display" applications, where video output in various > formats and respectable software support for that has been most important. > Today, almost everyone (including this AML chip with Mali graphics) is in the > same boat: there is good hardware and good drivers, but the drivers are all > non-free. If someone wants to stand out in that market they know what they have > to do.
yes. stop censoring people on forum.arm.com who point this out, for a start. (yes, ARM employees who are on this list: your colleagues responsible for forum.arm.com are censoring people who call for the MediaTek-licensed MALI hardware to be openly documented just like AMD / ATI are doing).
> - I have done a couple of commercial projects where a fast interface to some > custom (e.g. FPGA) logic was most important. I think PCIe is probably the only > realistic choice for that today. The AML chip doesn't help for this.
it doesn't. so.. let's hope AML's next version has that...
> So to be honest, I would not expect a board based on that chip to be much use to > me. But I know I'm far from typical of anything...
well, the point is to find something that covers the needs of the people who actually will write the software. duh.
marvell tried (and are behind the times, restrict things to NDAs and so on).
TI bless 'em keep trying (but focus on mass-volume hand-helds, which don't obviously have PCI-e or gigabit ethernet!)
Freescale try (but always seem to be 18 months behind)
Samsung go for mass-market and won't speak to mere mortals...
it really is quite ridiculous that the very people who could help these bloody companies to lessen the absolutely critical burden of development (software) are excluded because these CPU manufacturers aren't creating SoCs that are of interest to us! madness...
l.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-REQU...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDyTFEb3ximGHW3HfCbFhiWg44A88rGmRDbOYnMhTjV...@mail.gmail.com
