I tried setting it to half speed (600MHz) and the boot time was 7.14 seconds. It may be they have a very slow SD card, or they are using an old version of Rasbian. The latest version "Jessie" with systemd is much faster, it aggressively runs the startup stuff in parallel.sergioaav wrote:I found weird 50 seconds for booting. Also weird not being able to play a video on the internet without lag and the time to open a webpage. I thought that maybe they're were using a Pi with downclock to make their hardware look better.
Except for programming I don't do much of what you want. A tiny compilation:-sergioaav wrote:Can you tell me about run times of some of the software that you use? Just so I can have an idea for what I want to run.
Obviously big builds take longer. Remember the Pi has four cores and so "make" can compile up to four programs at the same time.[email protected]:~ $ time gcc hello.c -o hello
The Pi was originally designed as a toy for children to learn programming. A large number of Pis are also being used by hobbyists for do-it-yourself home automation and robotics projects. Note, however that even the newest model Pi doesn't perform web browsing, word processing, video editing and spreadsheets as well as a 7 year old Intel compatible PC. It is also a bit difficult, though not impossible, to operate a Pi without access to a traditional computer for downloading the sdcard image and later backing it up.sergioaav wrote:My curiosity about this is because I live in brazil and the pi here isn't cheap as it is in other countries. I estimated that my project is gonna cost something around 1000,00 in brazilian currency. So, I need to do a good choice of hardware.
That is weird, it shouldn't take that long. They must have had a horribly slow SD card, or some kind of boot hang up (trouble connecting to a network with wait for network enabled?). Although in the video it looked like the Pi3 booted in 7.8 seconds.sergioaav wrote:...
I found weird 50 seconds for booting.
That, however, is not so weird. The Pi3 is a mobile CPU, so it's less powerful than a desktop CPU. Also, Raspbian is not yet optimized for the Pi3. Previous Pi generations were 32-bit, so Raspbian is based on 32-bit architecture, while the Pi3 has a 64-bit processor. It would be faster with a 64-bit OS. And finally, the Broadcom GPU is a closed system, meaning the Raspberry Pi foundation does not have the documentation needed to write proper graphics drivers for it, so web based graphics are mostly processed by the ARM core and not the GPU.sergioaav wrote:Also weird not being able to play a video on the internet without lag and the time to open a webpage. I thought that maybe they're were using a Pi with downclock to make their hardware look better.
I know the Udoo is a much different hardware than the Pi. I mostly used this video because of the run times of the Pi. I know the Udoo will be more powerfull than the Pi, but the performance that was showed for the Pi scared me a little bit.HawaiianPi wrote: So what you are seeing in that video is an Intel based product running on a more optimized OS with proper graphics drivers, vs a 64-bit ARM based mobile processor running on a 32-bit OS without proper (OS integrated) graphics support.
Not quite the case. The RPF does have all the GPU documentation (and employs quite a few of the people who designed the GPU), and the guy writing the new 3D drivers works for Broadcom anyway, so has access to everything. There are also standard drivers for all the HW acceleration, OpenMAX, OpenGLES, OpenVG etc. So you can have access to all that stuff.HawaiianPi wrote: That, however, is not so weird. The Pi3 is a mobile CPU, so it's less powerful than a desktop CPU. Also, Raspbian is not yet optimized for the Pi3. Previous Pi generations were 32-bit, so Raspbian is based on 32-bit architecture, while the Pi3 has a 64-bit processor. It would be faster with a 64-bit OS. And finally, the Broadcom GPU is a closed system, meaning the Raspberry Pi foundation does not have the documentation needed to write proper graphics drivers for it, so web based graphics are mostly processed by the ARM core and not the GPU.
There is an accelerated video player for Raspbian (based on Broadcom's VideoCore API), but it's mostly for stand-alone media playback. There has been some work on better integrating Omxplayer into Raspbian, but that integration is not included in Raspbian by default. Even something as simple as double-clicking on a video to play it with Omxplayer is something you have to set up yourself (really don't understand why they don't include that by default).
There is a phrase in English, "out of the frying pan and into the fire." This basically means there is nothing so bad that it can't be made worse. Given the alternatives, your original idea of a Pi 3 might be the best option.sergioaav wrote:From what I saw, I'm now thinking on Banana Pi M3, Odroid C2, Odroid XU4 or Cubieboard 5. The Odroid C2 is available here in Brazil for the same price of a Raspberry Pi 3. For the other ones, I have to import. The Cubieboard 5 is interesting for me because of the SATA connection.
Yes, one downside of the boards I've mentioned is the community and help to develop projects.ejolson wrote: While the boards you mention each have 2GB RAM, the up-to-date kernel and software of the Pi 3 may be more important, especially when combined with the helpful user community.
Here are a few observations: The Odroid models have ARMv8 cores similar to the Pi 3 but include heatsinks. The Cubieboard 5 and Banana Pi M3 have slower ARMv7 cores. Neither include heatsinks. The built-in SATA on the Cubieboard 5 is no different than connecting an external USB drive to any of the other boards.
Those results are difficult to interpret. Why is the Banana Pi M3 the fastest with blowfish while slowest with the Poison pressure solver?sergioaav wrote:benchmarks I saw is this: https://www.loverpi.com/blogs/news/9525 ... s-for-sbcs