The only Pis that ever went through any noticeable hardware revisions were the original Model B and the Pi2B. The issues on the Model B revolved around having (and getting rid of) polyfuses to limit the current draw for each USB port. The ultimate revision was to the Model B+. The Pi2B was revised to used a lower clocked version of the Pi3B SoC, hence the differences between the Pi2Bv1.1 and Pi2Bv1.2. On related hardware, the RPF 7" screen had the controller revised as backlight control (other than on or off) didn't work on the original version.
This is the 4th revision of the board and 2nd? version of the chip.Does the pi 4 suffer any design issues
Almost every problems fixed is fixed using software. Which is upgradeable in the field.
Depends where you live. I ordered one yesterday at 12:15 and it arrived 20 minutes ago.
While there is no point in rehashing the initial problems people had with the 3B and 3B+, from the general response on these forums the 4B appears to be the best designed and received Pi since the 2B. Even so, I have decided to wait until a 64-bit operating system is available, but I'm having trouble waiting.
The Model B went through at least 3 revisions of varying degrees of being noticed. Four if you count the Rev. 2.0 change from 256MB RAM to 512MB. Five if you also want to count the B+ as a "revision" of the Model B. The Pi2B was "revised" by swapping out the SoC in favor of the Pi3B SoC. As for the SoCs themselves...the only one that was "revised" was the change from the BCM2837A0 to the BCM2837B0 when the board also went from the Pi3B to the Pi3B+. Other than that, the various SoCs were, to a fair degree, independent of each other.
My extremely fuzzy crystal ball says that the most likely next products would be a CM4 and *maybe* a Pi4A. I wouldn't expect a Pi5B for at least 2 years, more likely 3, and possibly 4. A Pi5B will depend on finding a new SoC and pretty much all the low hanging fruit has been picked, plus a fair amount of the stuff higher up. There are very few things I can think of that might be both beneficial and *potentially* feasible. One of those isn't under control of the RPT. That would be further sharp drops in the price of DRAM making larger memory models feasible (though I'm really not sure what on Earth one would need--say--8GB RAM on a Pi for, but I'm sure someone out there thinks he needs it). The others are a faster version of the PCIe lane and adding at least one more such lane, even at the current speed. Those would both have minimal performance effects, though the CM Forum folks are already drooling over the prospect of having a raw PCIe lane exposed on a CM4, and some of them appear to be under a misaprehension that Pi4 SoC has more than one (from what I've read, it doesn't).Moonmarch wrote: ↑Thu Jul 04, 2019 8:11 amWhen you said the next PI4 revision, I assume you meant the next release of the RPI computers, well based on the RPI computers released in the past a new RPI computer should be released next year, supposedly a new product is released at least once a year on average now this does not mean the next RPI computer will replace the RPI4B.
The RPI computers in the past were released in several different form factors the original RPI computer being the largest, the main difference between the RPI computer models would be the price tag, and with every new release of the RPI computers you would expect to see overall faster computer performance with other miscellaneous improvements, the same as any other computer you can purchase at the store, tablets, phones, laptops, etc.
I would be shocked if it weren't. I expect it's been in at least a rough outline stage for a year or two by now.
Where's the fun in that?Let's wait until it comes out before speculating on it.
The Pi2B also had 4 cores and the SoC was replaced with the---as you note--Pi3 SoC, also with 4 cores. The progression is that each successive system has had more capable cores, even though the number didn't change. Four cores is kind of the "sweet spot" for this.Moonmarch wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 1:53 amI assumed the purpose of the smaller RPI computer designs was cheaper price point, which means you can purchase a larger quantity at a time, and lower power consumption, the RPI zero has 1 CPU core, the RPI3 has 4 cores, which is the reason why the RPI3/RPI4 computers can be considered desktop replacements, talking about the costs, the smaller RPI computers are more disposable, these computers will not have as many features in comparison to the standard RPI computer.
There are no indications of further developments for RPF screens. I *think* there may be an issue with the legacy parts of the VC6. On the VC4, the DSI connection can handle 800x600 (the 7" screen) and that's about it. If a larger screen were released, there would be major demand to increase the resolution. For smaller screens (e.g. 3.5") there are a myriad of them out there.A reason to wait to purchase a RPI4, people can wait for more accessories to be released, cases, heat sinks, touch screens, software releases, etc.
I know the feeling. I just ordered a 2GB because my 4GB order from June 24th still hasn't shipped (waiting for stock). PiShop.us has 2GB in stock, so hopefully I'll get that early next week.
Despite the package size, the BCM2837 (and the, basically discontinued, BCM2836) can't use PoP RAM because the actual chip inside is too big to provide space for the top connections. And PoP RAM is required for the Pi0/Pi0W because there simply isn't space on the board to put a separate RAM package--and you can't put it on the bottom because part of the cost savings in manufacturing is only soldering on one side. So until you can catch an ARMv7 or ARMv8 SoC that includes at least a VC4 AND is small enough to use PoP RAM an upgrade to the Pi0/Pi0W just isn't going to happen.Moonmarch wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 7:07 pmIf the RPI0/RPI0W upgraded to the armv7 CPU or the RPI3 CPU which is armv8, or at least receive a modified version of the CPU with less cores, lower price, lower power draw, then the RPI0 computer would be able to receive updates, because of compatibility with RPI2 or RPI3 software, until the older RPI models are phased out, the RPI0 series computers can continue to use older hardware from previous RPI computer releases, and still receive updates.
Who says you couldn't stack the BCM2837 on top of the RAM? Rather than the conventional arrangement on the Mk1 Raspberries.W. H. Heydt wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 8:02 pm
Despite the package size, the BCM2837 (and the, basically discontinued, BCM2836) can't use PoP RAM because the actual chip inside is too big to provide space for the top connections. And PoP RAM is required for the Pi0/Pi0W because there simply isn't space on the board to put a separate RAM package--and you can't put it on the bottom because part of the cost savings in manufacturing is only soldering on one side. So until you can catch an ARMv7 or ARMv8 SoC that includes at least a VC4 AND is small enough to use PoP RAM an upgrade to the Pi0/Pi0W just isn't going to happen.