On 12/25/2015 11:18 AM, Troy Dawson wrote: > Hi, > Have you looked at the pcduino3 nano lite. > $15 and it looks like it meets all your specs. > > http://www.amazon.com/pcDuino-pcDuino3-Nano-Lite/dp/B00ZEPZGQO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1451059734&sr=8-1&keywords=pcduino3+nano+lite > > It has everything in the kernel and uboot and works with Fedora 23 > with no modifications. > I've got Yor Linux armv7 build working on it, so I'm quite certain it > will work with CentOS arm build, but I have not tested it. > > There are two downsides to this board. > 1 - the sata (and power cable) are sold separately I looked at this when it was earlier mentioned here and did not see a sata on it, so dropped it. can you point me to the sata board? I would have to see how it compares to the Cubieboard2. > 2 - It has the worst name I can think of. It is kind of funky. > > > On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 5:33 AM, Robert Moskowitz <rgm at htt-consult.com > <mailto:rgm at htt-consult.com>> wrote: > > The features that have attracted me to ARMv7 are: > > 1) Power consumption > > My ROI on power savings was 15 mo. with the Cubieboards over my > current Intel SFF boxes. And along with that is lower UPS > requirements and heating. I have 5 boards, plus drives powered > from one USB power supply. > > 2) Board size > > With boards the same or smaller than a 25" drive, I truly have an > appliance that can be placed anywhere. > > Now there are few ARMv7 boards that meet my exacting requirements: > 1 or 2 MB ram (depending on appl), 2+ core, and SATA interface. > > If all I have is USB, then I get the USB/SATA adapter cost and > powering thrown into the equation. Also a board that has been > moved into the mainline kernel and distro support. RPi stands out > as being a pain. 4-port LAN features require kernel customization. > > I was talking with one manufacture that was meeting my main req at > $15/board. But they went for a mass-market target and dropped the > DIY one. I will be talking to them again next month. But their > board is not in the general sunxi effort. Yet. > > > On 12/25/2015 01:33 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote: > > The big problems I have with the majority of the development > boards are: > > 1) Memory > On 32-bit ARM, the RAM was always limited to 4GB, which would > be find if there were a significant number of devices > available that ship with 4GB of RAM (minus the various > necessary memory holes). But that simply isn't the case. I can > think of hundreds of devices with <= 1GB of RAM. I can think > of only about 4 with 3-4GB of RAM (of which at least 2 are > deprecated and unavailable), including ARMv8 which is not > limited to 4GB. And two of those four are laptops. > > 2) Memory Type > We've been being told since forever that the main reason why > ARM devices don't come with DIMM sockets is because they are > 32-bit and DIMMs have 64 data lines. Well, with ARMv8 we have > those 64 data lines, and yet there are precious few devices > available featuring DIMM sockets for memory. There are in fact > probably more dev boards in SODIMM form factor than there are > those featuring DIMM memory sockets. > > 3) Board Form Factor > There are painfully few ARM boards in *TX form factor. Off the > top of my head I can think of a total of 5, of which one is > positively ancient and probably no longer available (Atmel, > IIRC), one is deprecated, the manufacturer of the 3rd appears > to have gone bust, one is on the underpowered side (VIA APC) > and the 5th is exorbitantly expensive (at €800 there is no > incentive at all to buy an ARM board instead of a much more > powerful, more fully featured and better supported Xeon board). > > Worse, these variously deficient devices aren't exactly cheap, > either (well, apart from the Raspberry Pis). I find the lack > of supply of boards with sensible features quite thoroughly > baffling, especially since the rock bottom features (if they > cut any more corners they'd be perfect spheres) don't match > the relatively high prices. > > Instead of leveraging decades of industry standardization on > the basics such as memory sockets, form factor (including > power supplies), almost every ARM board manufacturer seems to > be intent on reinventing their own wheels, and doing a pretty > poor job of it, even though these problems have been > thoroughly solved for decades. > > Not that I think any manufacturers are listening... > > Gordan > > On 24/12/15 21:20, Robert Moskowitz wrote: > > > > On 12/23/2015 07:45 PM, miniNodes Info wrote: > > 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. > > > No sata for all that power. > And draws a lot more power too. > > I will continue to wait to see what the Cubietruck plus > will be and how > much. They put out the blog on it back in July. And then > Hans will > have to get one to make the uboot for it... > > > They also offer a 1gb RAM version as well: > <http://www.lenovator.com/product/86.html>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 > > > > Even less in terms of interfaces. > > > The URL for the PINE64 board is simply > <http://pine64.com>http://pine64.com. That product is > still being > developed and funded via Kickstarter, so there is no > general > availability on that one quite yet. > > > So, for now, I will stay with the armv7. > > > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev at centos.org <mailto:Arm-dev at centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Arm-dev mailing list > Arm-dev at centos.org <mailto:Arm-dev at centos.org> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20151225/0f2b7df2/attachment-0006.html>