Cooling The Raspberry Pi 4 With The Fan SHIM & FLIRC For Better Performance

[coder]

It is Brass. I have no other option.

From the sound of it, your solution works. I just mentioned that for future reference, should you have occasion to run across other boards with heatsinks that can be scavenged.

[mvdvarrier]

From the sound of it, your solution works. I just mentioned that for future reference, should you have occasion to run across other boards with heatsinks that can be scavenged.

Ok Thank you Sir.

[coder]

In the case of RK3399,

Not to stir things back up again, after this finally wound down, but do you realize that RK3399 is only dual-A72 + quad-A53, while the N2's S922X is quad-A73 + dual-A53?

I'm just asking, because I had forgotten the RK3399 only had two A72 cores.

And according to this, the A73 is about 35% faster, per clock (i.e. DMIPS/MHz), at least for integer workloads.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar..._ARMv8-A_cores


If you knew this, fine. If not, now you do. I'm not trying to change your mind - just wanted share this info for anyone who's interested.

[danmcgrew]

Not to stir things back up again, after this finally wound down, but do you realize that RK3399 is only dual-A72 + quad-A53, while the N2's S922X is quad-A73 + dual-A53?

I'm just asking, because I had forgotten the RK3399 only had two A72 cores.

And according to this, the A73 is about 35% faster, per clock (i.e. DMIPS/MHz), at least for integer workloads.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar..._ARMv8-A_cores


If you knew this, fine. If not, now you do. I'm not trying to change your mind - just wanted share this info for anyone who's interested.

Yep; knew that.

And I'm STILL going to buy a Pinebook Pro 14.1", 1080p IPS display Linux laptop--with full privacy controls AND a magnesium-alloy case; NOT PLASIC--for $199.95.


https://www.cnx-software.com/2019/07...-linux-laptop/

[tuxd3v]

Not to stir things back up again, after this finally wound down, but do you realize that RK3399 is only dual-A72 + quad-A53, while the N2's S922X is quad-A73 + dual-A53?

heheh, its ok
Yes the RK3399 is a dual core A72 @ 2 Ghz( it doesn't need to be a 4 core there..see bellow.. )..

And according to this, the A73 is about 35% faster, per clock (i.e. DMIPS/MHz), at least for integer workloads.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar..._ARMv8-A_cores

A73 its maybe a optimized A72,maybe for power..,
With barely to no difference in performance, or even slower than A72( I think A73 is slower..but could depend in what.. )

A72:
Instruction Decode Width: 3-wide
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 5 wide, with a dept of 15 pipelines( executes more instructions but maybe more latency?? )

A73:
Instruction Decode Width: 2-wide( can only decode 2 instructions at time.. )
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 4 wide, with a dept of 11-12 pipelines( executes less instructions but maybe less latency?? )

So,
A73 has a 33.33% slower decoder, a 25% less powerful dispatcher, also a considerable shorter pipeline depth, only 73.3% to 80% of A72..

The only thing A73 has( and his important..), is a $1 cache bigger( 64i + 32/64d) vs A72 $1(48i + 32d)
Also,
Since its pipeline depth is shorter is could also means that it could have less latency..

Maybe this 2 factors give him a small edge..,
But A72, seems to me, to be a more powerful core than A73,
At same time A73, seems to me, to use less power consumption( due to a shorter decoder/dispatcher, and also shorter pipeline.. )..

I don't know were those values come from( 4.72 vs ~6.35 DMIPS/Mhz ), and its a purely integer benchmark ONLY..
They can be challenged by other benchmarks people have been running( that supports my case, of A72 having a big performance per core.. ), you can see values between ~6.3 and ~7.4 DMIPS/Mhz for A72 there( depending on implementation.. )..

So that 4.72 DMIPS/Mhz value seems to be a marketing operation..
To be honest,
To me seems that ARM at the time, were worried about the media buzzing the power consumption of A72( people think that performance "came for free.." ),
And created a less capable CPU, but slightly more efficient( maybe?? ).. and since they are deployed in clusters of 4, they needed to consume less power...??

I am just guessing..

If you knew this, fine. If not, now you do. I'm not trying to change your mind - just wanted share this info for anyone who's interested.

I didn't saw earlier that information, but yes, I do saw people comparing them in the ARM own forums and such, here and there..
And it seems that the difference between them is maybe efficiency..

But here,
You need to be correct, because a real comparison would make sense, in same node size.. example 16 nm..
In this way, you could sort out any doubts..

I am also not trying to change your mind, or anybody else one.., just wanted to share this info for anyone who's interested.

[danmcgrew]

heheh, its ok
Yes the RK3399 is a dual core A72 @ 2 Ghz( it doesn't need to be a 4 core there..see bellow.. )..
A73 its maybe a optimized A72,maybe for power..,
With barely to no difference in performance, or even slower than A72( I think A73 is slower..but could depend in what.. )
A72:
Instruction Decode Width: 3-wide
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 5 wide, with a dept of 15 pipelines( executes more instructions but maybe more latency?? )
A73:
Instruction Decode Width: 2-wide( can only decode 2 instructions at time.. )
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 4 wide, with a dept of 11-12 pipelines( executes less instructions but maybe less latency?? )
So,
A73 has a 33.33% slower decoder, a 25% less powerful dispatcher, also a considerable shorter pipeline depth, only 73.3% to 80% of A72..
The only thing A73 has( and his important..), is a $1 cache bigger( 64i + 32/64d) vs A72 $1(48i + 32d)
Also,
Since its pipeline depth is shorter is could also means that it could have less latency..
Maybe this 2 factors give him a small edge..,
But A72, seems to me, to be a more powerful core than A73,
At same time A73, seems to me, to use less power consumption( due to a shorter decoder/dispatcher, and also shorter pipeline.. )..
I don't know were those values come from( 4.72 vs ~6.35 DMIPS/Mhz ), and its a purely integer benchmark ONLY..
They can be challenged by other benchmarks people have been running( that supports my case, of A72 having a big performance per core.. ), you can see values between ~6.3 and ~7.4 DMIPS/Mhz for A72 there( depending on implementation.. )..
So that 4.72 DMIPS/Mhz value seems to be a marketing operation..
To be honest,
To me seems that ARM at the time, were worried about the media buzzing the power consumption of A72( people think that performance "came for free.." ),
And created a less capable CPU, but slightly more efficient( maybe?? ).. and since they are deployed in clusters of 4, they needed to consume less power...??
I am just guessing..
I didn't saw earlier that information, but yes, I do saw people comparing them in the ARM own forums and such, here and there..
And it seems that the difference between them is maybe efficiency..
But here,
You need to be correct, because a real comparison would make sense, in same node size.. example 16 nm..
In this way, you could sort out any doubts..
I am also not trying to change your mind, or anybody else one.., just wanted to share this info for anyone who's interested.

Thanks, guys.

You both are making my decision--and indeed, ANYone's decision--to buy the RK3399-based Pinebook Pro look like a stroke of genius.

https://www.pine64.org/pinebook-pro/

[tuxd3v]

And I'm STILL going to buy a Pinebook Pro 14.1", 1080p IPS display Linux laptop--with full privacy controls AND a magnesium-alloy case; NOT PLASIC--for $199.95.

Pinebook-pro,
Is a very very attractive option, hard to refuse!

• 2 Powerful Big Cortex A72, for a performance scheme( when power cord is plugged in), were they can take priority.
• 4 efficient A53, for low power Consumption scheme( when on Battery only ), were they can take priority, and use the A72 for demanding situations only..

Its a very, very good solution indeed!!

Thanks, guys.
You both are making my decision--and indeed, ANYone's decision--to buy the RK3399-based Pinebook Pro look like a stroke of genius.

Well,
I will also have mine!!

[Tomin]

https://www.pine64.org/pinebook-pro/

These (from Store page):

Warranty: 30 days
Small numbers (1-3) of stuck or dead pixels are a characteristic of LCD screens. These are normal and should not be considered a defect.

don't strike me very professional. I mean I understand that this is small volume production from a small manufacturer with probably quite slim margins but still I prefer to buy more expensive purchases from places where I can get proper consumer protection. Of course, for a toy that's probably good enough.

And sure, 1-3 dead pixels is fairly normal for a used product after some time and is probably not covered by warranty but for a new product I think it really should be none. Maybe I'm used to too good.

[coder]

A72:
Instruction Decode Width: 3-wide
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 5 wide, with a dept of 15 pipelines( executes more instructions but maybe more latency?? )

A73:
Instruction Decode Width: 2-wide( can only decode 2 instructions at time.. )
Dispatcher Execution Unit: Out of Order 4 wide, with a dept of 11-12 pipelines( executes less instructions but maybe less latency?? )

So,
A73 has a 33.33% slower decoder, a 25% less powerful dispatcher, also a considerable shorter pipeline depth, only 73.3% to 80% of A72..

The only thing A73 has( and his important..), is a $1 cache bigger( 64i + 32/64d) vs A72 $1(48i + 32d)
Also,
Since its pipeline depth is shorter is could also means that it could have less latency..

Yeah, I saw those specs, too.

But, as I said about DRAM clocks, you can't just latch on to a couple specs and use them to characterize the performance of the entire system. There's a lot more to the A73 than that.

Here's a good overview of the A73. Particularly, the second page goes into some of the various performance improvements it contains:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/10347/arm-cortex-a73-artemis-unveiled

I don't know were those values come from( 4.72 vs ~6.35 DMIPS/Mhz ), and its a purely integer benchmark ONLY..
They can be challenged by other benchmarks people have been running( that supports my case, of A72 having a big performance per core.. ), you can see values between ~6.3 and ~7.4 DMIPS/Mhz for A72 there( depending on implementation.. )..

That article just plotted values from a different wikipedia page, which seems to have changed since the article was written.

I am just guessing..

And I don't find it helpful. Benchmarks would be helpful.

You need to be correct, because a real comparison would make sense, in same node size.. example 16 nm..
In this way, you could sort out any doubts..

I don't really understand your preoccupation with node size. The SoCs we're talking about only come in one node size, each. So, they should be judged and compared as is. Because that's how they're actually used, not based on some theoretical performance estimate of a different node size.

[coder]

Thanks, guys.

You both are making my decision--and indeed, ANYone's decision--to buy the RK3399-based Pinebook Pro look like a stroke of genius.

https://www.pine64.org/pinebook-pro/

I do hope you enjoy it.