05-10-2016, 01:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2016, 01:15 PM by nomadewolf.)
(05-10-2016, 12:26 PM)longsleep Wrote: All Pi's have only 100M NIC - why do you think it es even remotely comparable to a Pine64+ with 1000M NIC? Compare it with an ODROID C2 or if you want with a ODROID C1.
I want it compared with the Pi precisely to see what the improvement will be and because that will be the deciding factor if i buy the Pine to replace the Pi or not.
And i know that theoretically it's not even remotely comparable, but i also know that the final performance will depend on much more stuff than the actual interface speed (as you might as well know since you provide us a kernel). BUS speed, processor, quality of the drivers, quality of the overall image, maturity of it all, kernel version... the final result may vary quite a bit, given all those variables.
What i want to know is: is it worth it?
(05-10-2016, 11:58 AM)jl_678 Wrote: I have both although my Pi is a B2. It is too early to compare the performance of the two as I just built the Pine64+ last night. I believe that Mate desktop includes Samba, but I have not had a chance to test that either.
From an experiential standpoint, Longsleep (and others) have done an amazing job in getting Linux running on Pine, but in my limited experience, Raspberry Pi was easier to setup and configure given the massive community and mature code. However, to your point, those benefits come with a trade-off of an older (and slower) architecture, and does not seem like the LAN bandwidth issue has been addressed with the Pi3.
I would be interested some Pi2 vs Pine64 Samba bandwidth testing and will try to get around to it later this week. I will probably use CrystalDiskMark. Do you have preferred parameters?
I don't really know
Just want to know what's the Pine capable of in that department.
(05-10-2016, 12:51 PM)rahlquist Wrote:(05-10-2016, 11:58 AM)jl_678 Wrote: From an experiential standpoint, Longsleep (and others) have done an amazing job in getting Linux running on Pine, but in my limited experience, Raspberry Pi was easier to setup and configure given the massive community and mature code. However, to your point, those benefits come with a trade-off of an older (and slower) architecture, and does not seem like the LAN bandwidth issue has been addressed with the Pi3.
I would be interested some Pi2 vs Pine64 Samba bandwidth testing and will try to get around to it later this week. I will probably use CrystalDiskMark. Do you have preferred parameters?
First off I couldnt disagree more. longsleeps latest ubuntu installs quick easy and clean, just as clean and simple as raspbain on a pi. Even the larger debian install with XFCE put out by lenny installs simply. Image, it boot it, resize it, done. With the lastest kernel from longsleep I finally have hdmi out I can use and wifi that should work for the majority of popular devices out there. Of course your experience is your experience.
The Pi architecture is cheap because of its architecture. Not much point putting Gig-e on a USB backed bus.
As for using CrystalDiskmark to do bandwidth testing? You have seen everything that says the microsd on the Pine is limited to no more than 20-33Mbps? I can push full gigabit over the pines Ethernet with no sweat, getting it data that fast is another matter.
You went straight to my concerns. Having Gigabit is one thing, but what it can do with it is what i'm interested in.
In my case, serving USB2.0 hard drives.
