5 ms·

I have measured performance for my compute heavy use case. Four cores with Neon are way higher performance. (The Rpi1 was slower, but the BBBW is up against th

by jwatte 10y ago

I have measured performance for my compute heavy use case. Four cores with Neon are way higher performance. (The Rpi1 was slower, but the BBBW is up against the Pi3, and previous ones against Pi2.)

bsder 10y ago
> I have measured performance for my compute heavy use case. Four cores with Neon are way higher performance. Um, sure, but if that's your benchmark, you'd want an ODROID-C2 instead, no? The problem I have with the RPi3 is that it's rare that I am CPU bound (and there are better choices if I am), while I am far more often I/O bound. And the RPi I/O system (Still hanging Ethernet off the USB? Only one PWM pin? Really?) is sub-par. However, to each their own. The level of choice is wonderful from the perspective of someone who had to fight making a board at $200 4 years ago that didn't even reach near the level of the initial RPi.
- FullyFunctional 10y ago
  I agree, but my anecdata: I'm _often_ IO bound (storage and network) and the ODROID-C2's eMCC & GbE blows the RPi 3 out of the water.
- jwatte 10y ago
  Yes, the ODROID is interesting, too. If I want raw performance, I actually want some form of the Jetson. Even adding a Teensy3 over USB or serial for the cases where I really need bit twiddling, the RPi3+Teensy3 system came out ahead for me. (Mainly, robotics control, some computer vision.) The onboard camera/GPU integration of the Pi3 is great for me, too. And if I want absolute-lowest-price, CHIP is still where it's at, unless I can stretch as low as the ESP8266, but then we're no longer in the same category. So, anyway, I'm not particularly excited about yet another beaglebone that's two or three times too expensive for what it is, in singles. Others have differing needs/opinions.