Hacker News Reader

Comment by andyl | Hacker News Reader

You can already get a 4x4 Intel NUC machine on amazon for ~$150 with case and mounting bracket. They are capable machines.

NUC with haswell processors (less wattage) coming this fall - price TBD.

View on HN

Project member here. I was disappointed with the way the PCWorld article described it as an "open source PC". MinnowBoard is really an open hardware embedded platform. If you're looking for a small form factor PC, the NUC is definitely the way to go. MinnowBoard is for embedded applications or product development where interfacing with custom hardware (whether I2C sensors, or custom FPGAs through PCIe, etc) is needed.

I can't believe you guys price it at 199$, totally unacceptable as embedded platform. at 1/4 of the price, there are plenty of ARM solutions. Why even bother?

If the board doesn't meet your requirements, then don't use it. The MinnowBoard is part of an ecosystem of boards that offer different feature sets at different prices. One differentiator the MinnowBoard has is that its SATA and Gigabit ethernet are powered by PCIexpress, so you're definitely going to see performance reflect that. Likewise, we offer PCIe lanes through our expansion connector, so the MinnowBoard could be interfaced with high-speed hardware (think FPGAs) for all sorts of interesting applications.

I find the comparisons of MinnowBoard with ultra low-cost embedded boards like RasberryPi to be pretty silly. The MinnowBoard is not Intel's version of a RasberyPi. The media may play this up just to generate conflict and to set up a straw man comparison, but I hope people are capable of seeing through that.

> but I hope people are capable of seeing through that

You and me both, but sadly I don't think it's going to go that way in the general tech-enthusiast media without a pretty significant "nudge" from you folks and maybe a few others. Unless you've got some experience with performance-demanding applications in embedded systems, you have no idea why RPi/Minnow is an Apples/Oranges comparison.

But everyone understands price! All they're seeing is two tiny boards, one produced by David that sells like hotcakes, the other produced by Goliath. Goliath's is late enough to be called a reaction to David's move, and it's nearly six times the price...

It depends on what you're doing. If you're making an internet toaster, go buy an arduino. If you're doing anything CPU intensive, or if you're not familiar with embedded systems tooling, cross-compilation, Yocto or similar build systems, Atom >> ARM.

I'll very happily pay $200 for this.

Honest question, no snark - Why not gut out an elcheapo laptop's mainboard (Atom or AMD Brazos) and dedicate a usb port to an Arduino or something. You get the power of x86 along with the expandability (i.e. GPIO, SPI, I2C, etc) of a microcontroller chip.

I've done sort of what you suggest professionally on projects where design decisions are driven largely by per-unit cost. If the SoCs that do everything you need aren't cheap/available, go with the best-fit main microprocessor to handle the heavy lifting, and one or two cheap micros to fill in the missing pieces. It's also a good approach for when a part of your solution needs good strict real-time software.

However for low-volume and/or personal projects, dev cost/time often trumps hardware cost and heterogeneous systems have a whole host of secondary challenges. Specific to your recommendation, it's a more complicated power architecture, more components to enclose, more tooling to worry about (software and hardware), and I have to worry about how to synchronize and communicate between the SBC and the micro/arduino.

It's worth an extra $100+ to be able to focus my limited free time on solving the problem I want to solve rather than on "shaving yaks."

Ah got it. Thanks. I didn't think power would play a significant role, but if it does then I can see why.

It all depends. Are you running off batteries, or wall power? Does your system have idle time that it can take advantage of for power savings? Were the boards in question designed with features to allow for low-power sleep, etc? Are you working with analog? Do your boards have low noise supplies, or do they expect a low noise input source? Are you doing any high current or high voltage switching? Is power-coupled noise an issue? Are we doing any switching of mains power? Is safety an issue? Should we use isolated supplies? If so, how much isolation do we need?

Software folks, myself included, tend to drastically underestimate the complexity of power design...

There is a reason an entire branch of electrical engineering is devoted to it. A branch I am considering going back to.

> CPU intensive

it's a 1GHz single core CPU from 2010. While Atom might have some IPC advantage over ARM, I doubt that as a whole it would be competitive against high-perf ARM boards, like the ODROIDs (up to 1.7GHz quad-core, beginning at 89 dollars).

[Edit: In the embedded world "as a whole" rarely makes sense. Design takes a very top-down approach where only specific features of a hardware platform (those necessary for the OEM product/solution) are considered for value comparison. This is why most SoC vendors have so damn many chips in each of their SoC product families.]

It depends on the problem you're solving, how much time/effort you're willing to dedicate to your solution, and what type of solution you choose.

If you have an embarrassingly parallel problem that optimizes well for ARMv7, you're 100% correct. If you're working on a more serial solution utilizing libraries optimized for SSE, Intel cache heuristics, Intel pipelining techniques, or similar (many of which don't exist or have equivalent siblings on ARM), I'm betting on the single-core 1GHz Atom pony.

While I have great respect for Arduino, if you are looking to do something with networking, go buy a BeagleBone Black (or other cheap ARM linux board).

I was using a bit of hyperbole to illustrate the spectrum of choices. I think if you're building an internet toaster, you might want to reevaluate your priorities.

An internet connected microwave on the other hand... http://madebynathan.com/2013/07/10/raspberry-pi-powered-micr...

Yea, the use case is for software that isn't optimized for ARM / MIPS that uses SSE. Which is a real buttload of software.

Why is this thing priced like a Ferrari in a market filled with Fiats?

Because it's a Ferrari amongst Fiats?

Not to be that annoying guy but:

"Ferrari S.p.A. is 90% owned by the Fiat Group."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat

I don't know what this means.

Bit of a bad analogy - they're both pretty unreliable cars as a whole!

The Atom chip hardly crushes the latest ARM cores.

My only disappointment is that there's no option for a 64-bit Atom. Yes I know that would mean a 2GB option instead of 1GB would likely be required, but doing OS development is way easier on a 64-bit system.

Otherwise, this seems relatively spot on.

Aah - that makes sense - NUC doesn't have GPIOs and isn't designed for interfacing with custom hardware.

It looks like the official pricing is double of the price you're talking about: a bit less than 300$ on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Computing-Gigabit-i3-3217U-DC321...

The price depends on the specific model (last I checked there where three). The one you linked is the dual HDMI, i3 one. I purchased a 1xHDMI Celeron one for $150. There are also bare motherboard versions.

Oh ok, I did a quick search and found this blog article: http://intelnuc.tumblr.com/ and it looked like the cheapest model was the dual port HDMI one.. but you're right, checking on Intel site[1] there's also a Celeron based model, DCCP847DYE, that costs 165$ on Amazon[2]

[1] http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-...

[2] http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Next-Computing-Black-BOXDCCP847D...

I think those all come with fans, they have two PCIe connectors, but they are the fragile edge connector style, so those two things rule them out for a lot of embedded applications.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com