The Lenovator HiKey board Jim mentioned can be found here: http://www.lenovator.com/product/90.html That is a 2gb RAM, 8gb eMMC, 8-core ARM64 board. They also offer a 1gb RAM version as well: http://www.lenovator.com/product/86.html Also worth mentioning, the Qualcomm Dragonboard 410c finally has been restocked and has availability now, located here: https://www.arrow.com/en/products/dragonboard410c/arrow-development-tools#page-1 The URL for the PINE64 board is simply http://pine64.com. That product is still being developed and funded via Kickstarter, so there is no general availability on that one quite yet. -David > To: arm-dev at centos.org > From: rgm at htt-consult.com > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 18:41:46 -0500 > Subject: Re: [Arm-dev] List of 64-bit hardware for testing? > > > > On 12/23/2015 06:28 PM, Jim Perrin wrote: > > > > On 12/23/2015 05:01 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > >> I've been lurking for a while hoping to see someone call out some > >> specs, but I don't recall seeing them. My apologies in advance of this > >> is a redundant question. > >> > >> I'm interested in inexpensive hardware to test for arm64/aarch64, but > >> I'm having trouble finding them. > > Everyone is. It's not as widely available as I'd like yet. > > > >> For example, [1] lists a X-C1 Basic dev board, but its $1495 USD [2] > >> (add $1000 USD for the Plus kit). Another example is the AMD Opteron > >> A1100 dev kit at $3000 USD [6]. As another example, I purchased both > >> an HTC 510 Desire and a Samsung Galaxy Core-Prime because both were > >> supposed to be 64-bit ARMv8 [3,4]. But after the press release and > >> conversion to the US market, they arrived as 32-bit ARMv7. > >> > >> First question... Does Cent maintain a list of inexpensive hardware > >> for testing? If so, would someone point me to it? I understand the > >> list is subjective and it will become stale over time. That's a > >> different problem (and a problem I wish I had). > > > > Not really. As the arm64 maintainer I can share the list of what I have > > for testing, and what I would recommend for cheap. > > > > > > What we build/test against currently: > > > > 1. APM mustang board, which you've already listed above. > > 2. AMD Seattle board, which you've also listed above. > > 3. Cavium ThunderX. > > > > These are mostly server platforms and aren't cheap for the home user. > > > > What I'd recommend: > > > > Keep an eye on 96boards.com. They have a Hikey, and will soon have a > > Huskey board which should work ootb. These are both far less expensive. > > > > Lenovator offers a Hikey with more ram and a larger emmc. It's roughly > > $100 (US). > > Interesting. Can you provide a URL for this board and such. A > Cubietruck is ~$90. So this is a very interesting data point. > > > > > Gigabyte's MP30-AR0 board (based on APM's mustang) should work with > > CentOS OOTB as well, and will hopefully be reasonably priced. > > > > Soon I'll have a pine64 board as well. I'm hoping to be able to add that > > to the list of things we support. > > > >> Second question... Or, is it possible to get SSH access to one of the > >> machines provided by Applied Micro or AMD [1,6]? GNU has a compile > >> farm (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm) I can test with, and I'm > >> wondering if Cent does the same. > > > > Sadly, no. We don't have enough to offer up ssh access. We will be > > adding an aarch64/arm64 box to the community build service though, so > > you would be able to build against the platform, but no direct ssh access. > > > > > >> Last question... Has anyone tried using the Android TV boxes [5] for > >> testing? They appear to be inexpensive (around $100 USD) and some > >> appear to be ARMv8 with multiple 64-bit cores (Cortex-A53 and > >> Cortex-A57). > > I haven't, but keep in mind not all ARM is created equal. We've built > > things up to target the server standards, SBBR and SBSA. The TL;DR there > > for most folks is "boots via UEFI". Lots of the lower end boxen like the > > Android TV are using uboot with custom kernel support, etc. This means > > that the userspace should work, but actually booting the box would be > > questionable, depending on if the vendor's done something funky with the > > kernel, uboot, etc. > > > >> (Its definitely like Perrin said, "Hardware really is the best sort of > >> gift..." [6]). > > It absolutely is, and I'm hoping it becomes more generally available > > early in 2016. I'd love to have a larger community who can engage and > > participate. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/arm-dev/attachments/20151223/74f01bfa/attachment-0006.html>