Holiday Deals On The Raspberry Pi 2 & Other ARM Boards

[caligula]

The power switch really more less a power cut off as compared to Pi Supply's Switch. I just normally leave my Kodi Pi on all the time, but uses far less power than the dedicated PC that it replaced.

My local Microcenter has had Pi 2's for the official price for months (stock varies). The PineA64 looks like a worthy challenger, hope they can deliver on time.

The prices are just too high for me. RPi + hifiberry + Pi supply switch + sd card + wifi dongle + power supply may cost over £100.

[GraysonPeddie]

I have ordered a Raspberry Pi 2 with a case to go with it.

[AdrianBc]

Posted by LoveRPi:
> The problem with any A53 core is that it sucks too much power to be passively cooled or enclosed.

I think that you are confusing Cortex-A53 with Cortex-A57, with respect to the power consumption.

Cortex-A53 does not consume significantly more power than its 32-bit prdecessor, Cortex-A7.

I have several DragonBoard 410c boards, with quadruple Cortex-A53 at 1.2 GHz and included GPU & DSP.

The processor does not have any heatsink. Moreover it is enclosed inside a RF shield. Nevertheless, it does not overheat at all.

The fact that it does not require any special cooling was one of the reasons for which I bought these boards to replace some boards with Cortex-A15, which required better cooling than an Intel NUC, to avoid overheating.

One other reason was obviously the 64-bit ISA, because, IMO, all the 32-bit Cortex-A processors are completely obsolete, only the 32-bit Cortex-M and maybe Cortex-R (which were not updated since many years ago) will continue to be competitive.

[AdrianBc]

Posted by LoveRPi:
> The problem with any A53 core is that it sucks too much power to be passively cooled or enclosed.

I think that you are confusing Cortex-A53 with Cortex-A57, with respect to the power consumption.

Cortex-A53 does not consume significantly more power than its 32-bit predecessor, Cortex-A7.

I have several DragonBoard 410c boards, with quadruple Cortex-A53 at 1.2 GHz and included GPU & DSP.

The processor does not have any heatsink. Moreover it is enclosed inside a RF shield. Nevertheless, it does not overheat at all.

The fact that it does not require any special cooling was one of the reasons for which I bought these boards to replace some boards with Cortex-A15, which required better cooling than an Intel NUC, to avoid overheating.

One other reason was obviously the 64-bit ISA, because, IMO, all the 32-bit Cortex-A processors are completely obsolete, only the 32-bit Cortex-M and maybe Cortex-R (which were not updated since many years ago) will continue to be competitive.

[AdrianBc]

Posted by LoveRPi:
> The problem with any A53 core is that it sucks too much power to be passively cooled or enclosed.

I think that you are confusing Cortex-A53 with Cortex-A57, with respect to the power consumption.

Cortex-A53 does not consume significantly more power than its 32-bit predecessor, Cortex-A7.

I have several DragonBoard 410c boards, with quadruple Cortex-A53 at 1.2 GHz and included GPU & DSP.

The processor does not have any heatsink. Moreover it is enclosed inside a RF shield. Nevertheless, it does not overheat at all.

The fact that it does not require any special cooling was one of the reasons for which I bought these boards to replace some boards with Cortex-A15, which required better cooling than an Intel NUC, to avoid overheating.

One other reason was obviously the 64-bit ISA, because, IMO, all the 32-bit Cortex-A processors are completely obsolete, only the 32-bit Cortex-M and maybe Cortex-R (which were not updated since many years ago) will continue to be competitive.