Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything You Need To Know About The NVIDIA Jetson TX1 Performance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by hausi14 View Post
    I have a NVidia TV Shield station and I could install Ubunt 14.04 on it. I have two questions:
    Could you please elaborate how you have achieved that? I am really interested.


    BTW: it is me, or the Phoronix site feels much quicker and lighter now? Faster servers? Lighter ads?

    Comment


    • #22
      Newby Phoronix member here - Hi Michael,

      Awesome expose. Amazing performance from the TX1. I think your article shows that it's not long before we can seriously consider arm chips for high end desktops.

      In that vein, I was just wondering if you can give us details to how to get the Nvidia Ubuntu 14.04 stack working on the Shield TV. I for one agree with you that this same TX1 processor can be obtained much more cheaply this way, and I already have one. Obviously I'd like to get the video drivers working as effectively as on the Jetson. If you have any instructions or links, including how to get rid of Android, much appreciated.

      Comment


      • #23
        discounted version will sell for $299
        They have interesting notion of "discount". Actually, this board looks quite interesting in terms of features and performance. But it seems to be kinda power hungry and its price just plain awful. If someone does not gives a fuck about power consumption and ok about huge heatsink and active cooling, they can build quite a powerful x86 system at $399 price tag, clearly exceeding what this things can offer. And "less than credit card" sounds cool, but, uhm, it requires heatsink which is three times as large as their CPU module itself, lol. Incredible marketing bullshit. Most x86s are also smaller than credit card... but it going to change when you attach heatsink and plug it to mainboard .

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by cjcox View Post
          Price will kill this. What is Nvidia thinking? Design something for small embedded solutions and price it like a high end desktop CPU??

          At the same time, I think we all know that producing a CPU is expensive. Maybe this should strictly be for Nvidia's high end (large and expensive) solutions? But even so, Nvidia probably makes something better in that class.

          If Nvidia would only partner with some more people maybe? They need somebody that can push out lots of volume of product. You used to find a few Tegras in non-Nvidia items, but lately, on their newer stuff, seems pretty limited to only things actually made by Nvidia (?).

          Two choices:

          1. Get out

          2. Partner with somebody that can push high volumes of something that everybody wants.

          Just my opinion. Nice ARM CPU... that we'll never see in anything we can afford...
          ...and certainly never in anything actually useful, say like a Shield tablet or Google Pixel C

          http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-6.0-Next-Week

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by kgardas View Post
            Dear Phoronix,
            I'm a little bit curious why in some benchmarks TK1 is better than TX1. Let me ask is your TK1 board based on Denver dual-core Tegra or is it 4-core Cortex-A15 version? If the later then I'm afraid TX1 should definitely be faster. Could you be so kind and verify that code you run on TX1 is 64bit? The thing is, if you compile for 64bit you do have way much more registers in CPU and generally speaking compilers like that and produce faster code.
            Thanks!
            Karel
            The tests were all running 32-bit code. You can see the base compiler options on the first page.

            Comment


            • #26
              Too expensive

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by darkblu View Post

                The tests were all running 32-bit code. You can see the base compiler options on the first page.
                Indeed, now I see, default compiler configured for armv7-a. Oh, man, this does not tell anything about the final performance of the chip. And by final I mean using all the CPU capabilities running it in ARMv8-a mode...

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
                  But it seems to be kinda power hungry and its price just plain awful. If someone does not gives a fuck about power consumption and ok about huge heatsink and active cooling,
                  ...it requires heatsink which is three times as large as their CPU module itself, lol.
                  Yes, the price is going to turn away a lot of people, myself included. But Michael said it peaked at 16.2 W, usually under 10 W. How is that "power hungry"? He also said that the small fan only turned on when it was under heavy load. That heatsink and fan are nothing compared to x86 systems. I'd really like to know what you're comparing this to.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by kgardas View Post

                    Indeed, now I see, default compiler configured for armv7-a. Oh, man, this does not tell anything about the final performance of the chip. And by final I mean using all the CPU capabilities running it in ARMv8-a mode...
                    Not to mention the compiler support for ARMv8 NEON vs that for ARMv7 NEON - the former produces much better code than the latter.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
                      They have interesting notion of "discount". Actually, this board looks quite interesting in terms of features and performance. But it seems to be kinda power hungry and its price just plain awful. If someone does not gives a fuck about power consumption and ok about huge heatsink and active cooling, they can build quite a powerful x86 system at $399 price tag, clearly exceeding what this things can offer. And "less than credit card" sounds cool, but, uhm, it requires heatsink which is three times as large as their CPU module itself, lol. Incredible marketing bullshit. Most x86s are also smaller than credit card... but it going to change when you attach heatsink and plug it to mainboard .

                      That's just your cluelessness that strikes again.

                      1. The kind of people who are purchasing those boards aren't interested in x86.
                      2. That "oversized board" is merely a reference design. Hardware designers can and will re-implement it in a smaller form factor. They sell the CPU modules separately for a reason, after all.
                      3. <10W is hardly "power hungry".

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X