[June 19] Armbian (5.42) ROCK64 | [June 19] Armbian (5.38) PINE A64(+) / PINE A64-LTS / SOPINE | [June 19] motionEyeOS (20180224) PINE A64(+) | [June 19] Armbian (5.46) Pinebook | [June 06] Bionic LXDE (0.6.44-239) ROCK64 | Bionic Minimal (0.6.44-239) ROCK64 | [June 06] Debian Stretch Minimal (0.6.44-239) ROCK64 | [June 06] Jessie OpenMediaVault (0.6.44-239) ROCK64 | [May 21] Slackware (20180508) ROCK64

Project Inspiration | Get Started | IRC Logs | Forum Rules/Policy


Some performance comparisions
#1
So, since I've got both the pine64, rock64 and rockpro64 on the bench atm, and am playing with some timelapse video conversion... I thought I'd run a job on all three and see what the results were.

Unsurprisingly, the rockpro64 won the race. I was surprised to see the pine64 wasn't that far behind the rock64, but then again, I'm not doing anything that I think would really take advantage of the hardware encoding...

Now this wasn't that hard a job, stitching together some 1800 stills into a around 90 second timelapse, but it still illustrates the performance difference between the boards at this stage, with what is likely to be sub-optimal encoding settings.

   

And because evilbunny made me pull out my pineH64 and run linux on it... it gets a mention also, but it is a dishonorable mention as the Linux image I have for it is barely enough to boot it, and it is seriously un-optimised ...

Code:
real    2m48.377s
user    10m49.964s
sys     0m1.980s
[email protected]:~$
Reply
#2
(06-09-2018, 03:31 AM)pfeerick Wrote: So, since I've got both the pine64, rock64 and rockpro64 on the bench atm, and am playing with some timelapse video conversion... I thought I'd run a job on all three and see what the results were.

Unsurprisingly, the rockpro64 won the race. I was surprised to see the pine64 wasn't that far behind the rock64, but then again, I'm not doing anything that I think would really take advantage of the hardware encoding...

Now this wasn't that hard a job, stitching together some 1800 stills into a around 90 second timelapse, but it still illustrates the performance difference between the boards at this stage, with what is likely to be sub-optimal encoding settings.



And because evilbunny made me pull out my pineH64 and run linux on it... it gets a mention also, but it is a dishonorable mention as the Linux image I have for it is barely enough to boot it, and it is seriously un-optimised ...

Code:
real    2m48.377s
user    10m49.964s
sys     0m1.980s
[email protected]:~$

It looks like a significant uplift in performance, can't wait to get my hands on one.....
Reply
#3
It would great if we can see some test results of Samba performance on conventional disk as well as on SSD.
Reply
#4
(06-15-2018, 08:27 PM)rontant Wrote: It would great if we can see some test results of Samba performance on conventional disk as well as on SSD.

I'll do that once I have a SSD to connect to it... it's still in the mail. Sad
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)