The Orange Pi 5 Plus
taoofmac.com
taoofmac.com
At $5-$10 (pi-zero / W) and $35 (pi3 / pi 4) these little boards made a ton of sense.
Pushing into ~ $120-$150 to me doesn't make any sense. You can get 8gb/16gb N100 at that price point complete with a case.
I saw his point on the per-watt performance which is valid, but are people running a room full of these things? Why spend so much to save 10 watts ?
Someone please enlighten me on how this segment still remains viable.
It's successor arch, Meteor Lake has only recently launched, so the N100 shouldn't be too far off in terms of efficiency.
In lower power scenarios the little cores can be more efficient than the large ones. And at 6W TDP the N100 is a low power scenario. https://chipsandcheese.com/2022/01/28/alder-lakes-power-effi...
Me, I write fairly low-level stuff that runs on ARM (for kicks), so having one of these as a server/development sandbox makes a ton of sense (even though I have Macs and VMs and whatnot, some things you can only do with hardware).
I grant that you won't find normal people filling their closets with these. But when you walk past, say, a phone exchange, a 5G base station, or any other of hundreds of invisible machines out there, they'll be running a variation of these boards (perhaps slower and dumber, but soon ramping up to this kind of thing), because Intel lost the embedded market years back.
I have a golf simulator running in the cloud (AWS) on a g4dn.xlarge ec2 insurance.
At home, I use a raspberry pi 5 as a thin client. It plugs into a 4k projector and streams down the display of the cloud PC.
Because it's cheap and reliable, I can leave it in place sitting up on the ceiling attached to the projector. I wouldn't want to devote a more expensive laptop to the job - the raspberry pi 5 is just man enough for the job, powerful enough but only just.
I was using a RP 4 before, but the performance is noticeably better with the RP 5.
Serve the Home has an ongoing series about evaluating these: https://www.servethehome.com/introducing-project-tinyminimic...
> Untested, but the idle power draw on it is supposed to be 10-15watts.
I haven't tested the "mini" one I have, but I also salvaged an older "SFF" HP from work, an 800 G2, with an i5-6500. I've replaced its spinning drive with 2 SATA SSDs (Samsung 840 EVO 512 GB), increased RAM to 2*8+16 GB and thrown in a 4-port intel i350 network adaptor. According to some watt-meter off Amazon it pulls around 16W while idling under Linux running three VMs on top of KVM (OpnSense (= FreeBSD), and two Linux). The highest I could get it was around 50 W while booting up.
The watt meter seems accurate enough. I tested it with a laptop for which I have two adaptors, one specified as 45W, the other 65. With the battery drained, screen backlight at max and a compilation taking 100% CPU, it was reported as drawing 46W and 55 respectively on the two adaptors.
> My only complaint about the unit is that I wish these were powered by USBC PD
Which unit is that? I would actually love that, especially if the USB-C port can also be used as a regular "docking" port, handling DP out and USB in. I could connect my monitor and peripherals with a single cable to it and call it a day, instead of having to deal with random power adaptors lying around. Bonus points if it's actually Thunderbolt.
> More common is to be powered by a 19V barrel jack, which would make replacements more of a pain if the external power supply dies.
I don't think so, those look like pretty much standard fare to me. Although I've heard stories about Dell doing shady stuff with the adaptors, trying to talk to them and stuff, AFAIK HP doesn't do that.
Not to knock ARM SBCs — ARM is great and I think holds a lot of promise for the future, but there’s no arguing that the platform tends to be restrictive outside of mainstream devices (e.g. Samsung Galaxies and Macs).
That's a wrong mindset to have. How are we going to improve environment if we will be careless about energy?
As in the saying > If you look after the pennies, the pounds will look after themselves
Whereas power consumption is recurring and it adds up. Multiply the difference by hundreds of thousands or more devices and it is no longer is trivial.
My last power bill was ~$103 for exactly 256kw, or put another way about $0.40/kwh. For context this is in NYC. I'm sure other people have cheaper power elsewhere.
0.01kw * 24 hours * 30 days * 0.4 $/kwh = $2.88 a month or about $35 a year.
If something is going to be on constantly, the ROI on a 10watts savings can quickly out pace the initial investment.
And that is every 10 watts. Something using 100watts continuously is 10 times that.
This affected a bunch of my other thinking as well. Having a raspberry pi in my home as always on server costs as much a small linode instance and much less reliable.
Video encoding power draw is also 86% lower and even if I found something to max the new card out, it's still 40% lower than maxing out the old card (for a lot more compute power than the ten year old card).
(From what I remember, ASPM is sometimes still a mess especially with consumer chips with their own frequency transitions and OC'd fabric/System Agents, and devices don't all wake up reliably all the time and return to high-power state, so iirc the enthusiast advice is "it's only a couple watts, it's a hassle, leave it off". I fear this may become "it's a hassle and it's also a significant power expenditure". I hope it's improved like other frequency transition things. :\)
Also, just in general, the product focus on efficiency varies between vendors. NUCs are quite efficient, because they put a lot of focus into it to win those corporate contracts back in the day. A random minisforum mini pc probably is less efficient than an old nuc. Connectx-5 is much less efficient than connectx-4 even when running at lower pcie speeds. Ssds generally pull much more power than the HDDs they replaced, and pcie5 pulls much more than pcie4 which pulls much more than PCIe 3. Most laptop or other power bricks don't hit 80+ cert and if you are switching off a fancy brick that does, you'll use more. Etc.
Not saying you didn’t look at it, but you have to look at it specifically and newer is not automatically better, sometimes product tiers increase over time too. And it’s certainly always a product-by-product thing. The exact way products are built or cut down doesn't just matter for performance, it affects power too.
In the UK for me unit prices from April to July last year were £0.50/kWh (USD$0.64) and that was with the government implementing a price cap and subsidising it.
It’s down dropped to a more reasonable £0.29 (USD$0.37) but that’s still with the government capping the maximum rates that can be charged, but no longer subsidising energy companies as the UK wholesale rate is lower than the cap.
PG&E (the dominant player in northern california):
- lobbied hard against muni power
- spent its safety budget on executive compensation
- is recouping its maintenance costs and criminal penalties from its ratepayers instead of from its shareholders
- got Newsom to stack the regulatory body (CPUC) with PG&E sycophants
- is back to paying its shareholders dividends
- has one of the most influential California politicians (Willie Brown) on their payroll
Yes, it's obscene that in a climate as mild as the Bay Area, $400+ utility bills are the norm. Short of some major revolt, rates are set to go up in March as well.
And then the discourse diverges into yet-another discussion about how billing works, and power deregulation, and other things.
But the only number that matters is the total cost per kWh -- including delivery, distribution, generation, taxes, fees, grift, and whatever else might be included in the bill total.
And that's easy to figure out: Total dollars billed divided by total power consumed, for any given billing period.
The result is a number, in US dollars (or whatever local currency), that neatly and inclusively expresses what a person was actually-charged, per kWh, for electricity in their home for that period.
---
So, for example: My most recent electric bill was, in total, $176.26.
I used 1,111kWh during that period.
$176.26 ÷ 1,111kWh = a cost of $0.158 per kWh, plus or minus a rounding error, for the power I used last month.
---
Only now can I extrapolate that if that my total cost per kWh remains static over time (it will not, but it is likely to be close), then: A 10 Watt difference in 24/7 power consumption is equivalent to ~$13.85 per year, for me.
I can now also evaluate that cost in more practical terms, wherein: I can see that using an extra 10 Watts on a 24/7 application costs me less than one decent beer per month, or one twelve-pack per year. And I'm pretty far from wealthy, but I can see that drinking one fewer beer per month isn't going to make me wealthier in any practical sense of the word. A 10-Watt difference in power consumption thus won't weigh heavily on my decision to use one system or another -- as long as it is just one such system.
As we race towards $1/kWh I wonder where the breaking point will be.
I'm on a time-of-use plan so the costs vary both on when and how much you use.
I pay $0.16/kwh net of everything (all taxes + fees). That's insane.
* In the winter, my computer means I run my space heater less by every watt it puts out. It's free.
* In the summer, the costs are several times higher. Every watt put out by my computer means several watts of running the AC.
It's actually a rather large difference. If I were in Alaska, computer power would be nearly free. If I were in Mexico, it'd be very, very expensive.
also minding the cpu power state of the device , making sure it's running efficiently and going to sleep whenever possible.
I’m all electric heat pump. That ran for about 300hrs last month, so accounts for around 800kWh.
Also, wow your electricity is really cheap.
My Orange PI 5 has been running Nextcloud, Mastodon, Jellyfin, XMPP, Cryptpad, Vaultwarden, and about a dozen other services/sites for about a year. I love it. Some apps only run on X86, and I install those on a VPS.
Ideed, but I think one would be best served to actually do the math. I like having my own router on which I can segment stuff, for example, having my smart TV on the network but not allowing it to phone home and deliver me ads.
I have an old 6th-gen i5 I salvaged from work, which, I thought, must draw a lot of power, so I started looking at newer low-power models, like n5xxx or n100s. Well, if you want one with multiple network ports, it quickly costs around 2-300 Euros. You can also forget about having 10 Gb ports, although such Internet speeds are becoming common where I live, and you can get a 30 Euro dual 10Gb adaptor off Ebay which fits in the PC I already have.
Anyway, I don't actually need 10 Gb right now, so it's not really an issue in practical terms. But 300 Euros isn't exactly pocket change for me, so I sat down and did the math. I'd need around 3 years to break even on electricity costs. Then I went and bought a watt-meter off Amazon. Turns out, the horror-stories of older computers drawing around 40-50 W at idle didn't apply to my specific box, and it only drew around a third of what I had estimated, which means an 8-9 year break-even. Of course, rates will most likely increase over that period, which would bring it closer.
It's also cheaper and probably easier to work with than Apples ARM systems for these purposes (although the used market for the m1 will probably cross below a new pi within 2-3 years)
The last time I read a post like this I immediately rushed to buy an N100 that I now have sitting in my living room doing literally nothing, lol
It's funny how huge the market is for people (like myself) addicted to having the latest and great tech gadgets.
I have multiple of every Raspberry Pi... doing nothing.
Now waiting for my Pi 5.
It’s not best for being a server in a closet
Of course it largely failed at that (imagine running a lab full of raspberry pi 1 model b with the original full-size sd card and phone usb chargers) but everything else is a retcon/product pivot. It wasn’t invented for hacker anything.
The Pi has a nice ecosystem, is better for hardware hackery than N100 mini PCs, and like all cheapish consumer products, people will kinda buy them just to buy them. I have a Pi5 sitting unused on my desk. Doing my part to pay for Eben's private island, I guess. I'll find a use for it eventually.
[1] https://github.com/theodric/NASty/blob/main/NASty-bill-of-ma...
if it works as advertised.... my previous experiences with their zero line have been.... trying...
And the power supply. Current-day SBCs aren't like the first-gen raspberry pi, where you could just recycle your old phone charger and off you went.
https://www.armbian.com/download/
Those projects are well worth a contribution, as they don't have a giant like Broadcom behind them.
https://github.com/RPi-Distro/pi-gen
Worth a play.
Board vendors believe that it is OK to host their images on dubious download sites, with zero information on what the image is built with.
I'm not affiliated with them or anything, but also appreciate their efforts and have a small recurring donation set up in the hopes of seeing it continue. Especially for groups like this that have image hosting and hardware costs, even a few dollars can make the maintainers' load lighter and help them continue doing this kind of quiet, important work.
Or why not take advantage of the absolutely trivial deployment that the Raspberry Pi Imager offers?
This is like the place the 3D printing world has been in for the last two or three years. Why is it not OK to want to just do stuff and not think about performance-tuning the hardware before you do stuff?
Some of us just want to make stuff, not tinker with the tools.
There's already a post about this issue on the forums, and a fix: https://forum.armbian.com/topic/26818-opi-4-lts-no-hdmi-outp... . But the precompiled version offered isn't for my board (I have the non-LTS version), so I'll have to compile it myself.
It's not valid, it's not even an argument.
For me, the killer was a combo of 3 things: 1. Too expensive relative to performance. 2. Availability of quite decent N100 (and similar) boxes with expandable memory and storage. 3. Not interested in Pi that should be actively cooled.
I always wished the Pi had eMMC storage but it never happened for the non-compute module versions.
I still have a few Pi’s around the house and they are plenty powerful for their purpose.
Software support for RISC-V isn’t as good yet either. I don’t know of any hardware that supports the hypervisor extension, there is no IOMMU spec today, many distributions don’t give it the same support as ARM64, etc. It is definitely improving rapidly, but I don’t think there have been any really compelling RISC-V SoCs just yet.
The Milk-V Oasis is out, but are you saying there's going to be another revision of that board?
I'm torn between the Lichee (7-node, 28 cores), the Milk (1 node, 64 cores), or the VisionFive 2.
If I was going to build out a lab for shared use across a number of engineers building packages and ci/cd for Linux, what would be the best option now, while we all wait for the hardware to improve in H2/2024?
Their Oasis [1] board is going to use SiFive's IP, the main cluster is 12 P P670 cores, and 4 E cores. There are also 8 X280 cores as an "NPU", also RISC-V but with a slightly different ISA.
[0] - https://milkv.io/pioneer
[1] - https://community.milkv.io/t/introducing-the-milk-v-oasis-wi...
Each Pi so far was about a 30% jump in power consumption, this time it's over 130%. They couldn't get the performance they needed, so they cranked the Pi 5 TDP beyond what was sensible to compensate. I mean 5A over 5V USB-C is borderline non-standard and basically maxing out the current port without needing a regulator. It's really funny seeing the N100, a CISC for fucks sake, get 2-3x the performance while pulling 2 watts less under load. This is their AMD Bulldozer moment.
Because the bigger-faster-hungrier race is putting them in direct competition with x64 boards, where you then ask yourself that for a couple of watts more you'll be able to get a real PCI slot or two to plug in whatever you want, and use the RAM you want.
It's basically a Raspberry Pi Zero with the difference that it has a gigabit ethernet port instead of WiFi+Bluetooth.
This is not an ad, I've ordered two because my OpenVPN server which runs on a Raspberry Pi B+ (1st gen, 9 MBit/s throughput on Bookworm) needs upgraded hardware.
In that context, it's remarkable that Bookworm still runs on an device as old and weak as the 1st-gen Raspi.
Unfortunately it was a industrial vendor so don't think you can buy it in low quantities and the price is probably way too high for what it is.
I feel like there must be a market for something like that tough, a board with the bare essentials to make it cheap enough to have a few around the house / office and leave it up to the customer to find a wireless card that could be upgraded down the line.
It's also really amazing when it's used in mesh VPNs like Tailscale.
My setup bridges two home networks into one with two different subnets.
Long term I definitely want to use Wireguard, but for I'll continue using what works reliably.
Regarding Tailscale, I don't want to use 3rd party services for this.
This abounds across all tests, from the very first I/O tests that show the Orange Pi 5+ beating both Intel configurations to the OnnxStream test that shows Intel beating the Orange Pi 5+ even though the Intel unit has to load/stream the model from its paltry SATA disk while the Orange Pi 5+ is outfit with an NVMe drive.
My u59 ships with SATA SSDs, as it happens.
I do have an Intel i7 13th Gen with PCIe 4.0 NVMes (and several modern Macs), but that would be so far off base (and so expensive) that it isn't even comparable. The i7-6700 is much closer in "value", if you will.
However, you are mis-reading the way the OnnxStream test works. It is still CPU-bound for the most part.
This is a small computer with the previous generation of Intel Atom CPUs (Jasper Lake) and it happens to support only SATA SSDs, so your suggestion of using a NVMe SSD would have been impossible.
Even with the current generation of cheap Intel CPUs, i.e. Alder Lake N, for instance N100, the CPUs have very few PCIe lanes and most cheap computers do not have an M.2 socket that works at the full PCIe 3 speed of 32 Gb/s like the SSD of the tested OrangePi computer, but they have sockets with only 2 lanes or only 1 lane, which work at half speed or at quarter speed.
Most computers with RK3588 have a full-speed M.2 type M SSD socket and this is one of their advantages over most other computers in this price range.
Since the OnnxStream performance depends both on SSD and on CPU performance, there is no surprise that an Intel Skylake CPU using AVX2 instructions is so much faster than Cortex-A76 with much lower clock frequency that it wins the benchmark despite the slower SSD.
The only benchmarks more informative than these would have included comparisons with a computer using the direct competitor of RK3588, i.e. Intel N100 (which is faster for CPU-limited tasks, but not necessarily for those involving I/O or video), but it appears that the author does not have such a newer computer.
The RK3588 designs stood out to me as having a very nice PCIe layout (the RK3588s, for instance, doesn't), and that is one of the main reasons I wanted to test the Orange Pi 5+.
I really like the pi zeros for low power budget computing, but I think once you're getting into this kind of power envelope, you're kicking into "real computer" territory and I'm not sure how much benefit the SBCs are giving you.
An M1 Mac is more powerful for sure, but for my use cases (my OPi5+ is being used as a video capture relay with its onboard HDMI capture and my two OPi5's are k8s nodes running Github Actions jobs) it would also be a lot more expensive.
A Mac Mini that matches the important specifications here--and CPU performance isn't one of them, but memory capacity and disk storage are--is twelve hundred dollars. Before you add a capture card or the additional terabyte of storage for the video capture box. Also then I'd have to fight with Asahi Linux or something, because my workflows, while probably portable to macOS, already exist on Linux.
I have no problem buying Macs, I have plenty. The Mini is not a replacement for the needs I described. The more general Ryzen mini-PCs are better competitors, and if you need more and faster compute are a better call at ~$230 to $400--a far cry from the Mac mini's pricing.
Admittedly, as much for the hell of it as anything.
How cozy is it :) ?
> This also means I could probably (if I could find a suitable model that fit into 4GB RAM) use the Orange Pi 5+ as a back-end for a “smart speaker” for my home automation setup (and I will probably try that in the future).
This is pretty interesting for me. I had (wrongly, I suppose) assumed that hardware requirements for LLMs were “have a recent NVidia GPU” but this proves otherwise.
Edited to add: I'm looking for something like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38704982 (LLM in a Flash) even if I find something with 16/32GB of RAM, which is why I looked at OnnxStream as well (but of course the inference in LLMs is different, so I can't leverage the NVMe just yet).
You can get a 32 orange off aliexpress today already
As I understood it since the beginning, the RPi is a teaching and learning tool, not your 32gb home server running git, nextcloud, plex, portainer and 15 other services. So faulting it for something it was never intended to be seems a bit unfair?
https://forum.armbian.com/topic/33306-trying-to-use-opi5plus...
a) don't understand the market or its needs particularly well
b) aren't really paying attention to the underlying trends from the foundation or the trading company
c) are willing to write off any absurdly arcane, poorly-documented things they had to do to get a competing board to offer a stable, supported alternative to the Pi 5.
But the most interesting thing about the Pi 5 is what it tells you about what is coming.
Look at the (astonishingly) successful RP2040, and then look at the Pi 5's RP1 Southbridge, and then scratch your chin and think for a bit.
It's not really incremental. Something quite big has happened here, we just don't see the product of it yet.
In other words: 1. The RP1 (implemented on TSMC 40LP) contains all the power hungry/high bandwidth IO that is difficult to do on smaller process nodes. This allows the main processor to be moved to smaller nodes or even a different vendor/architecture in future boards. Easier to target better power efficiency in the future. 2. Going forwards, the IO feature set will now be consistent and reliable, by reusing RP1. It is no longer a requirement to try to get these peripherals on the main processor.
It's clear that at least these things have changed:
1) there is now independence from the "old smartphone processor" model
Because the RP1 allows them to take control of the very bits of the puzzle that the Pi pioneered and apply them more broadly (including to x86 hardware if they chose to; they clearly did this in the development process)
2) nothing in particular stops them selling the RP1 as-is (except that they are not going to).
There have been some interesting allusions very recently as to what the success of the RP2040 and the RP1 might mean for a future microcontroller lineup, but my guess would be a mid-sized processor optimised for very small educational computers and emulating larger machines.
I would expect to see an RP2040 successor board based around something like the RP1 with USB-C and more concessions towards DVI/HDMI for one thing.
3) they now don't have all their eggs in the one basket (which is better for the foundation)
4) they could now choose a "partnership" model where something like the RP1 turns up in other people's hardware; there are already SBCs on the market using RP2040s for GPIO. [1,2]
Essentially, what has happened is not an incremental change. It's not even particularly incremental in the Pi 5, which is architecturally new.
It is a step change on the design level but also on the business level.
[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/news/thunderberry5-sbc-to-take-...
[2] https://linuxgizmos.com/low-profile-radxa-x2l-sbc-featuring-...
It is an “interesting” choice for an SBC (probably a bad one given the lower efficiency and higher BOM cost) but overall it hasn’t changed the fact that the N100 is still a faster, cheaper, more efficient device (despite its monolithic SOC design!) unless you actually need the GPIO.
It’s really only an improvement vs the early RPi 1 boards where everything was interfaced using a 500mbps half-duplex usb2 connection as a system bus. That was an exceptionally bad design, particularly in the days when the (closed-source) kernel modules would drop usb frames under load. But the newer ones with sata support etc have already moved away from this.
It is more interesting that rpi is branching out into chip design etc, vs relying on third-party suppliers or pre-existing designs, than on an actual technical level.
No, they're mystery meat-based, merely pretending to be 5.x, like most of those Chinese SoCs. I'll care when it can run mainline and not Armbian.
I have another board (Khadas Vim4) with HDMI input. But the HDMI input only recently got support in their vendor provided Linux image and is finnicky. In the Armbian image I couldn't get it to work for more than a few frames of input video (tried with gstreamer and ffmpeg).
Additionally, I couldn't find any information on HDMI input in Linux (seems like everyone uses USB capture cards that use uvc with v4l2).
*-sound:3
description: rockchiphdmiin
physical id: 6
logical name: card3
logical name: /dev/snd/controlC3
logical name: /dev/snd/pcmC3D0c
I can't see anything interesting in the USB bus: $ lsusb -t
/: Bus 06.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=xhci-hcd/1p, 5000M
|__ Port 1: Dev 2, If 0, Class=Hub, Driver=hub/4p, 5000M
/: Bus 05.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=xhci-hcd/1p, 480M
|__ Port 1: Dev 2, If 0, Class=Hub, Driver=hub/4p, 480M
/: Bus 04.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=ohci-platform/1p, 12M
/: Bus 03.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=ohci-platform/1p, 12M
/: Bus 02.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=ehci-platform/1p, 480M
/: Bus 01.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=ehci-platform/1p, 480M
(other than the ludicrous bandwidth available, that is)...but I am using the Armbian 5.x image, so maybe I am missing some driver or ARM DTD.
i have it configured at 16gb of ram, a 2tb nvme, connected to my network at 1gbit, and to my nas to run iscsi at 2.5gbit.
it is a very nice little system, and has been rock steady running ubuntu 22.04. i plan on making it my primary database server, but that's a later project.
it's been in service for 8 months now, and has been quite impressive. highly recommended for those into small compute home databases.
Right now I'm using an old office PC that costs $7/m to run. Using the USB port on my router is too slow (maybe I need more expensive HDD enclosures) and can't RAID
The "hacks" with these are to use the m.2 port with an m.2 to PCIE adapter to get 10gbe or several more SATA ports.
NAS's are tricky to spec because people have such a wide range of requirements. For example, a lot of people want their NAS to be able to do video transcoding which wouldn't work well on this hardware.
The idea of video transcoding is pretty strange to me. What happened to the days where the client had the necessary codecs to play a video?
Even if you store the video in the destination format, adding subtitles immediately requires Plex (and similar) to transcode, rendering the subtitles into the video.
Personally, I have VLC installed on my Chromecast and, while it's not as pretty or convenient as Plex, the format of my files is irrelevant.
http://www.orangepi.org/html/hardWare/computerAndMicrocontro...
unfortunately, there are too many sellers selling them on aliexpress for me to find their store there, so you will have to wait until they recover from the hug. prices are the same on each, though if you are purchasing from the united states.
(edited for clarity)
Was this a coincidence or was the article biased?
I've got two in my k3s cluster so very much a thing already