-
Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.
Risc Mini-PC
- Thread starter Ice Tea
- Start date
I haven't watched the video - but lots of RISC-V SBCs for cheaper, I've been meaning to get an Orange PI RV2 for a while for about same price as a Raspberry Pi. I really want to play with RISC-V but haven't had the time.
Assume this one is slightly more powerful/featureful?
Assume this one is slightly more powerful/featureful?
Last edited:
Comparing x86 to a very niche RISC-V architecture is never going to be a good comparison though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 18,160
- Location
- Chengdu
Such a shame about the ramageddon, as it'll definitely impact development of things like this.
On Taobao here, there have been quite a lot of riscv boards for sale over the last couple years, and even a laptop at one point (DC Roma). Need easy options for developers to get their hands on it for it to be viable!
Right now I'm not the target audience, but I love mini-PCs and would happily move to a low power laptop using these in the future (as long as the screen/trackpad and keyboard are still good).
On Taobao here, there have been quite a lot of riscv boards for sale over the last couple years, and even a laptop at one point (DC Roma). Need easy options for developers to get their hands on it for it to be viable!
Right now I'm not the target audience, but I love mini-PCs and would happily move to a low power laptop using these in the future (as long as the screen/trackpad and keyboard are still good).
I’d imagine it depends on what you’re doing with the system. The RISK chip certainly offers some advantages being a heterogeneous design.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 4,036
- Location
- Scotland
No Orange Pi RV2 is much weaker single core and multi core performance than Raspberry Pi 5.
Geekbench benchmarks
N100 Single core: 1191 Multi core: 2934
Raspberry Pi 5 Single core: 895 Multi core: 2110
Milk-V Jupiter 2 Single core: 342 Multi core: 1703
Orange Pi RV2 Single core: 119 Multi core: 520
Milk-V Jupiter 2 is bad value at £300, maybe it could be worth wait until 2027 to see how good Milk-V Jupiter 3 will be with next generation RISC-V X200 core CPU compare to Raspberry Pi 5 and 6.
Qualcomm will launch £250-£300 low cost laptop with Snapdragon C CPU in the next few months that is faster than Intel N250 in benchmarks.
Nobody is comparing benchmarks between a x86 SBC and a RISC-V one, completely pointless.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,047
- Location
- London
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 4,036
- Location
- Scotland
It not completely pointless, it is one of many industry standard benchmarks. AMD and tech reviewers used it to comparing x86, ARM and RISC-V CPU results. Geekbench have native RISC-V version but others apps like Cinebench and Passmark did not have native RISC-V versions yet.
Found KY X1 Orange Pi-RV2 in database.
Single core performance are closer to Celeron D which released 20 years ago in 2006, KY X1 Orange Pi-RV2 is slower than Core 2 Solo single thread and slower than Core 2 Quad Q6600 multi core thread.
You're missing my point - comparing x86 architecture performance to RISC-V architecture performance is 100% pointless. It's like comparing a Fiat Panda with a Lamborghini. Very different use cases. Very different development cycles, RISC-V has only been around since what 2010? So much less R&D time compared to since the 70s, backed by multi-billion pound companies different instruction set compared to x86. Different target applications. Huge compiler differences around optimisation, which is pretty key for performance. One of the huge benefits is RISC-V is open source.
Tech reviewers can use these pointless geekbench results all they want, they mean nothing to me. Embedded is where RISC-V will potentially shine, with it's open license people won't have to pay ARM, European HPC is doing a lot of pushing on RISC-V HPC Research to see if it can handle there, and the chances are things like your trains, washing machines, cars etc especially in Europe will end up rurnning RISC-V.
RISC-V fabrication to consumers is probably super-low, so you're not getting super-fast chips regularly or on a quick release cycle, because surprise surprise there's zero real profit in it at the moment.
If you want super-benchmark results and think you're getting whatever the latest AMD/Intel consumer chip is offering, RISC-V is not for you. For the same reason ARM wouldn't have been for anyone in that audience until Apple poured probably billions into their M series R&D.
Risc-v gets destroyed that's why
Doesn't the pi Pico 2 have risc-v cores to play with? And that costs like a fiver
Of course it does, that's why it's completely pointless. Comparing a multi billion pound historically amazingly funded commonplace tech versus RISC-V would be silly wouldn't it.