On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 11:59 AM David J Taylor via time-nuts < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Given that the path to the outside Ethernet world on both of those models > is > via a USB controller, I would expect to see very little improvement with a > TCXO in a constant temperature environment. Just perhaps with a RasPi-4 > you > /might/ see an improvement as the Ethernet has a more direct path, but > that's a board where self-generated heat is greater, so the thermal issues > might make things worse. > > There's a bunch of 'ifs' there though - on the early Pis, the ethernet chip was a major source of heat. Presumably it's a different, non-USB part on the Pi4 so that may or may not have changed. Does the Pi4 inherently run hotter, or is it just capable of running at a level where it consumes more power ? If it's under-used and maybe even intentionally underclocked, it might do better than earlier versions. It would at least be worth including a Pi4 running the same workload as the other boards in any parallel test. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
