Interesting... time to do some fair, controlled comparisons... On Nov 27, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
> Federico Lucifredi wrote: >>> Quark? Is that some new Intel CPU? >> >> Indeed. SoC, to be precise. >> >> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/do-it-yourself/galileo-maker-quark-board.html > > Introducing the Intel Galileo development board, the first product in > a new family of Arduino-compatible development boards featuring Intel > architecture. > ... > This platform provides the ease of Intel architecture development > through support for the Microsoft Windows, Mac OS and Linux host > operating systems. It also brings the simplicity of the Arduino > software integrated development environment (IDE). It's all about > delivering Intel performance and quality to the DIY maker > community--to support invention and creativity. > > So Arduino compatible? Looking at the evaluation board schematic, which > includes a block diagram (also appears in Galileo data sheep below): > https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-21822 > > I'm not seeing a microcontroller for the Arduino-compatible > functionality. Are they implementing it through emulation in the main > CPU? (Looks like they use I/O expanders hanging off of an I2C bus to > implement GPIO and PWM.) > > Apparently it is shield compatible with Arduino ("pin-compatible with > Arduino shields designed for the Uno R3"). > > Quoting from the almost 1000 page Quark SoC data sheet: > https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/downloadBody/21828-102-2-25120/329676_QuarkDatasheet.pdf > > o 400 MHz maximum operating frequency > o Single processor core > o 32-bit processor with 32-bit data bus > o Support for IA 32-bit Pentium x86 ISA compatibility > o Integrated Floating Point Unit > o Low power options to run at half or at quarter of maximum CPU > frequency > o 32-bit address bus, 32-bit data bus > o 16 Kbyte shared instruction and data L1 cache. > o Total memory size from 128 Mbyte to 2 Gbyte > o On-die Boot ROM provides Hardware Root of Trust (RoT) for firmware > authentication > o The SoC has two PCI Express root ports, each supporting the PCI > Express Base specification Rev 2.0 at a maximum of 2.5 GT/s data > transfer rates. Each root port is configured as a x1 link. > o 10 and 100 Mbps data transfer rates with RMII interface to > communicate with an external Fast Ethernet PHY > o 16 GPIO pins provided > o 6 GPIO pins remain active during S3 and can be used to wake the > system from the Suspend state. > o Remaining 10 GPIO pins are powered during S0 state only and are not > available in S3 > o Two 16550 compliant UART controllers [oddly connected to a 3.5mm > headphone style jack] > o Legacy Bridge Components - Provides hardware blocks required to > support legacy PC platform features. The legacy bridge components > include the RTC, Interrupt Controllers, Timers and General Purpose > I/Os (GPIO). > > > That was for the SoC at the heart of the board. More high-level details > in the Galileo eval board data sheet: > https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-21835 > > Galileo is the first Arduino board to provide a mini PCI Express > (mPCIe) slot. This slot allows full size and half size (with adapter) > mPCIe modules to be connected to the board and also provides an > additional USB Host port via the mPCIe slot. Any standard mPCIe module > can be connected and used to provide applications such as WiFi, > Bluetooth or Cellular connectivity. > > > As this board has a "full sized mini-PCI Express slot", which could > potentially accept a SATA interface supporting port multipliers, I > wonder if this would make a good NAS controller. (Might be limited by > the 400 MHz CPU and 100Mb Ethernet.) > > > So this seems far more geared towards makers than the MinnowBoard. I > wonder why they are pursing both? > > What's the ultimate intended market for this SoC? Phones and tablets? > > Have we reached a point where the Arduino hobby market has created > enough product volume and familiarity among new engineers that Arduinos > are now looked upon as a viable building block for industrial solutions? > (I can't see Intel getting all that excited over a low volume "maker" > product.) > > If you're a vendor of small embedded boards, which have traditionally > been vastly incompatible with each other, you now have an opportunity to > produce something that is Arduino compatible, so your buyer already > largely knows how to develop for it. You just have to sell them on your > particular integrated peripherals or whatever other hardware advantage > you bring to the table. > > -Tom > _______________________________________________ > Hardwarehacking mailing list > Hardwarehacking@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/hardwarehacking _______________________________________________ Hardwarehacking mailing list Hardwarehacking@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/hardwarehacking
