tkaiser Posted July 29, 2018 Author Posted July 29, 2018 1 hour ago, Arglebargle said: the Intel nic I tested linked at 5GT 4x without issue Great! Hope you provide performance numbers for both the Intel and Mellanox here. Pine folks currently plan on adding a Tehuti based 10GbE card to their shop (less than 100 bucks IIRC) and also on RockPro64 based clustering with 24 and 48 units (on 2RU)
Arglebargle Posted July 30, 2018 Posted July 30, 2018 21 hours ago, tkaiser said: Great! Hope you provide performance numbers for both the Intel and Mellanox here. Pine folks currently plan on adding a Tehuti based 10GbE card to their shop (less than 100 bucks IIRC) and also on RockPro64 based clustering with 24 and 48 units (on 2RU) Yeah, I'm planning to post a few. I just got my enterprise switch with 4x SFP+ ports in this week and I'm waiting on a couple more 10GbE cards so I can test at >1Gb speeds. FWIW 10GbE cards are dirt cheap on ebay if you don't mind SFP+. I picked up a couple of Mellanox ConnectX-2s and a DAC to connect them for around $50 total. Also, it's not widely known but their hardware is basically identical across models that share the same port configuration each generation. You can buy cheap infiniband cards that no-one seems to want and cross flash them with the VPI model firmware that supports both Ethernet and Infiniband. Out of curiosity does anyone know if iperf in server mode can handle more than one client at once, or do I need to run one copy per client on separate ports?
tkaiser Posted July 30, 2018 Author Posted July 30, 2018 3 hours ago, Arglebargle said: Out of curiosity does anyone know if iperf in server mode can handle more than one client at once, or do I need to run one copy per client on separate ports? I believe it's the latter. And if I would fire up 2 iperf3 tasks at the same time most probably I would use 'taskset -c 4 ' and 'taskset -c 5 ' to pin them to different big cores. Since I don't believe little cores are fast enough IRQ colissions can ruin benchmark numbers (and real world performance too) iperf3 unlike iperf also shows dropped packages every 2 seconds -- you get a bit faster the idea that something's wrong IRQ affinitiy with such fast cards might be a big issue. Ayufan chose to use these settings for both Rock64 and RockPro64: https://github.com/ayufan-rock64/linux-package/blob/d31494d0b9afafa5a98ef0f4d94dcdad611d45e3/root/usr/local/sbin/rock64_fix_performance.sh#L30-L35 (PCIe ends up on a little core while onboard Ethernet and USB3 lands on a big core). With Armbian we're not entirely sure how to deal with IRQ affinity on RK3399 since user configurations differ. Quoting myself: 'most probably the best idea is to switch from static IRQ affinity set at boot by armbian-hardware-optimization to a daemon that analyzes IRQ situation every minute and adopts then dynamically the best strategy'. Anyway: playing with these fast cards is an interesting example for an Active Benchmarking attempt needed
Arglebargle Posted August 10, 2018 Posted August 10, 2018 On 7/29/2018 at 9:19 PM, tkaiser said: I believe it's the latter. And if I would fire up 2 iperf3 tasks at the same time most probably I would use 'taskset -c 4 ' and 'taskset -c 5 ' to pin them to different big cores. Since I don't believe little cores are fast enough IRQ colissions can ruin benchmark numbers (and real world performance too) iperf3 unlike iperf also shows dropped packages every 2 seconds -- you get a bit faster the idea that something's wrong IRQ affinitiy with such fast cards might be a big issue. Ayufan chose to use these settings for both Rock64 and RockPro64: https://github.com/ayufan-rock64/linux-package/blob/d31494d0b9afafa5a98ef0f4d94dcdad611d45e3/root/usr/local/sbin/rock64_fix_performance.sh#L30-L35 (PCIe ends up on a little core while onboard Ethernet and USB3 lands on a big core). Ah, good call, I'll definitely play with pinning processes to different cores while I test. I usually keep netdata running while benching to have some indication of what's going on with the system. I've had trouble getting the board to recognize any of my Mellanox cards (I've tested 3 different models) so I'm not sure what's going on there. There's nothing suspicious in dmesg as far as I can tell either, the cards just aren't detected. I suppose I should probably dump a boot log and see if ayufan or anyone else knows what's wrong. The RP64 is a rev 2.1 board, so the problem isn't the pcie 3.3v supply resistor that needed to be removed on prior batches. The rest of my bargain basement 10GbE ebay gear arrived this week, once I learn a little more about how to work with these Brocade switches I should be able to get some performance numbers for a 4x1Gb bonded connection. On 7/29/2018 at 9:19 PM, tkaiser said: With Armbian we're not entirely sure how to deal with IRQ affinity on RK3399 since user configurations differ. Quoting myself: 'most probably the best idea is to switch from static IRQ affinity set at boot by armbian-hardware-optimization to a daemon that analyzes IRQ situation every minute and adopts then dynamically the best strategy'. Yeah, I tend to agree. Is irqbalance a potential solution?
tkaiser Posted August 10, 2018 Author Posted August 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Arglebargle said: Is irqbalance a potential solution? Don't think so and irqbalanced is broken on ARM anyway
tkaiser Posted August 28, 2018 Author Posted August 28, 2018 BTW: I asked yesterday TL Lim about thermal 'performance' of their new Graphene heatsink and he provided the following numbers using sbc-bench (all the time running an Ubuntu Bionic arm64 userland): No heatsink at all: Throttling occured already with multi-threaded 7-zip bench: 1800 MHz: 1803.60 sec 1608 MHz: 111.77 sec 1416 MHz: 185.81 sec 1200 MHz: 0.02 sec 1008 MHz: 0 sec Slim Graphene heatsink: Throttling occured when running cpuminer: 1800 MHz: 1863.62 sec 1608 MHz: 125.87 sec 1416 MHz: 8.82 sec 1200 MHz: 0 sec Mid profile heatsink: No throttling, SoC temp when running cpuminer up to 80°C Tall heatsink: No throttling, SoC temp when running cpuminer up to 74°C As expected the taller the heatsink the better the effect. TL also mentioned that the Graphene heatsink was tested in a condition with no airflow around and that it would perform significantly better when there's some airflow. Would be interesting how this heatsink performs with some air blowing laterally over the surface. As a comparison thermal performance of NanoPC-T4 with stock heatsink (but in different environment, using Debian Stretch, with 2.0/1.5GHz cpufreq OPP already enabled and higher throttling treshold): Throttling occured while running cpuminer: 1992 MHz: 3016.74 sec 1800 MHz: 0.14 sec 1608 MHz: 1.07 sec 1416 MHz: 263.46 sec 1200 MHz: 21.52 sec 1008 MHz: 0 sec It's obvious that NanoPC-T4 settings need some attention since the intermediate 1.8 and 1.6 GHz steps aren't used which makes throttling rather inefficient. Also benchmark execution lasted way longer and some results are below RockPro64 numbers while they should be higher due to higher cpufreqs so we need to look into this in more detail. Finally a thermal image of RockPro64 under full load without heatsink showing how efficient heat dissipation into the ground plane works (the PCB itself acting as giant heatsink):
pzw Posted August 28, 2018 Posted August 28, 2018 11 hours ago, tkaiser said: Finally a thermal image of RockPro64 under full load without heatsink showing how efficient heat dissipation into the ground plane works (the PCB itself acting as giant heatsink): Just one question.. why did you set the emmisivity so low? The temperature reading is heavily influenced by the setting... You can see the heat spread through.
tkaiser Posted August 28, 2018 Author Posted August 28, 2018 38 minutes ago, pzw said: why did you set the emmisivity so low? Picture courtesy of TL Lim. Check #Rock64 channel from yesterday here: http://irc.pine64.uk/
JDL Posted August 31, 2018 Posted August 31, 2018 I spent some time with this board yesterday. Here are my initial impressions: PROs: - Using 32GB eMMC from Pine64 the system is very usable (quick). I have not tested with a NVMe SSD yet. - As @tkaiser has mentioned, the tall heatsink is easily up the task of keeping the RK3399 SOC cool. Questions/Remarks/CONs: - The power on behavior seems intermittent. Specific example: Flash image to eMMC using Etcher, install eMMC, connect power... nothing... press Power, Reset,... nothing. Remove power, re-apply power... board boots. Have others experienced this? - Upgrading to the latest Kernels using the method described above by @tkaiser causes the board to have no HDMI output on reboot (I did not have UART connected). I tried two kernel builds from yesterday. Had to refresh eMMC, very time consuming. - So, is there a stable kernel 4.14, 4.17, or 4.18 you guys would recommend? - I can not get a USB wifi card to come up. This is a v1 TL-WN722N which is supported by ath9k. Shows up in "lsusb", I load the ath9k module, reboot, ath9k is not reloaded. I add ath9k to /etc/modules, reboot and it loads on boot. Still nothing in iwconfig. I tried adding "wifi.scan-rand-mac-address=no" to NetworkManager.conf, no help. dmesg does not show firmware being requested, and the information is a little odd. It shows as "USB NIC" and serial number "12345". Same behavior on USB 3.0 and 2.0 ports. (This USB NIC has been plug and play on all sorts of things including Android for years.) I feel like I am missing something obvious. Any ideas? - How should the "RECOVERY" button be used? There is not information at "http://wiki.pine64.org/index.php/ROCKPro64_Main_Page#Datasheets_for_Components_and_Peripherals" The item is labeled as "28" in a picture, but not in the table below the picture. Would this make it possible to flash the eMMC like on the ROCK64? I do not like pulling it off the board over and over. Thanks!
FrankM Posted September 9, 2018 Posted September 9, 2018 For the "Recover" button -> https://github.com/ayufan-rock64/linux-u-boot/commit/ea6efecdfecc57c853a6f32f78469d1b2417329b
tkaiser Posted September 13, 2018 Author Posted September 13, 2018 On 8/30/2018 at 8:15 PM, tkaiser said: Next test with thermal pad replaced by copper shim of same height and board still lying on the table: 17:11:54: 1800/1416MHz 6.12 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 70.6°C 17:12:06: 1800/1416MHz 6.10 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 71.1°C 17:12:18: 1800/1416MHz 6.09 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 72.2°C 17:12:30: 1800/1416MHz 6.13 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 73.9°C 17:12:42: 1800/1416MHz 6.11 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 72.2°C No throttling and max temperature reported as 74°C. The above was with RockPro64 and a 1mm copper shim between RK3399 and heatsink. Since 2 NanoPi M4 arrived in the meantime I removed the heatsink and copper shim from RockPro64 to use the copper shim now with the NanoPi (with promising results). Now trying to get a really thin film of thermal compound on both RK3399 and the heatsink and then putting them both with nothng in between together: Full output from 'sbc-bench.sh -T 70 ; sbc-bench.sh -t 50' now https://pastebin.com/raw/hmRUMkGu and comparison to above: 20:50:26: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 70.0°C 20:50:38: 1800/1416MHz 6.44 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 68.9°C 20:50:50: 1800/1416MHz 6.52 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 68.3°C 20:51:03: 1800/1416MHz 6.62 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 70.0°C 20:51:15: 1800/1416MHz 6.60 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 71.7°C As expected even better thermal values now: 71.7°C displayed but the average load next to it indicates that some other background activity happened in parallel (the 'cpuminer --benchmark' task on an otherwise idle RK3399 should not exceed 6.2 so the 6.6 of my test run indicate a problem -- I need to re-test again ) But the good news is: if you get some thermal compound then you don't need a copper shim at all and can also avoid the thermal pad. But it's a good idea to use the thermal pad to cut some pieces and put them next to RK3399 to prevent shorts as can be seen above.
tkaiser Posted September 13, 2018 Author Posted September 13, 2018 2 hours ago, tkaiser said: 71.7°C displayed but the average load next to it indicates that some other background activity happened in parallel (the 'cpuminer --benchmark' task on an otherwise idle RK3399 should not exceed 6.2 so the 6.6 of my test run indicate a problem -- I need to re-test again [x] Done. 70.6°C max reported now with cpuminer benchmark running but otherwise totally idle board lying flat on a surface. And then I repeated the test this time bringing the board in an upright position since as we can see from the thermal image above RockPro64 PCB is designed to also dissipate heat from SoC into the PCB's copper ground plane. So allowing some airflow around the whole PCB should help. And it does: 69.4°C now reported. The 1.2°C less do not tell anything relevant so better look at how temperatures changed while testing: idle to 70°C high to 50°C lying flat 420 sec 280 sec upright --- sec 210 sec (with my limited time I was not able to test 'idle to 70°C' and this test is also flawed since the starting temperature is not fixed. That's why I always recommend to test with 2 consecutive sbc-bench runs and only look at the second run that starts with an overall warm board since cooling down from previous test run at always the same start temperature: sbc-bench.sh -T 70 ; sbc-bench.sh -t 50 -- for details see here) Comparing with 'stock heatsink situation' (the grey thermal pad between SoC and heatsink) this is a nice improvement. With identical demanding task and external conditions (ambient temperature still at 24°C) temperatures went down from 85°C (with slight throttling occurring) to 71°C when executing the 5 minute benchmark run starting at 50°C. And by allowing some airflow around the whole PCB this gets even better and temperatures drop even a bit more. This is important for people wanting to avoid fans since by replacing the thermal pad with thermal compound and allowing for some airflow (no tiny enclosures!) they know they get maximum performance out of their board without throttling happening (the cpuminer benchmark is pretty demanding since making use of NEON optimizations 'normal' software doesn't use). As a comparison the lightweight sysbench 'cpu test' joke running for 20 minutes: sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=200000000 run --num-threads=6 root@rockpro64:/home/rock64# armbianmonitor -m Stop monitoring using [ctrl]-[c] Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:21:22: 1800/1416MHz 0.11 5% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 40.0°C 0/5 12:21:28: 1800/1416MHz 0.58 25% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0% 44.4°C 0/5 12:21:35: 1800/1416MHz 1.10 99% 1% 98% 0% 0% 0% 45.0°C 0/5 12:21:41: 1800/1416MHz 1.49 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 45.0°C 0/5 12:21:48: 1800/1416MHz 2.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 45.0°C 0/5 12:21:55: 1800/1416MHz 2.62 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 45.6°C 0/5 12:22:02: 1800/1416MHz 2.89 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.2°C 0/5 12:22:08: 1800/1416MHz 3.45 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.9°C 0/5 12:22:15: 1800/1416MHz 3.65 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.9°C 0/5 12:22:22: 1800/1416MHz 3.84 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.9°C 0/5 12:22:29: 1800/1416MHz 4.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.9°C 0/5 12:22:35: 1800/1416MHz 4.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 46.2°C 0/5 12:22:42: 1800/1416MHz 4.52 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:22:49: 1800/1416MHz 4.82 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:22:55: 1800/1416MHz 4.91 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:23:02: 1800/1416MHz 5.00 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:23:09: 1800/1416MHz 5.23 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:23:16: 1800/1416MHz 5.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 48.1°C 0/5 12:23:23: 1800/1416MHz 5.47 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:23:29: 1800/1416MHz 5.52 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 47.5°C 0/5 12:23:36: 1800/1416MHz 5.55 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 48.1°C 0/5 12:23:43: 1800/1416MHz 5.70 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 48.8°C 0/5 12:23:49: 1800/1416MHz 5.72 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 48.8°C 0/5 12:23:56: 1800/1416MHz 5.74 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 48.1°C 0/5 12:24:03: 1800/1416MHz 5.86 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:10: 1800/1416MHz 5.87 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:16: 1800/1416MHz 5.88 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:23: 1800/1416MHz 5.97 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:30: 1800/1416MHz 5.97 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:24:36: 1800/1416MHz 5.98 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:43: 1800/1416MHz 6.05 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:24:50: 1800/1416MHz 6.05 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 12:24:57: 1800/1416MHz 6.05 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:25:04: 1800/1416MHz 6.11 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 49.4°C 0/5 12:25:10: 1800/1416MHz 6.10 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 12:25:17: 1800/1416MHz 6.09 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:25:24: 1800/1416MHz 6.15 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:25:31: 1800/1416MHz 6.14 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:25:37: 1800/1416MHz 6.13 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 12:25:44: 1800/1416MHz 6.18 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:25:51: 1800/1416MHz 6.17 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:25:58: 1800/1416MHz 6.22 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 12:26:05: 1800/1416MHz 6.20 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.0°C 0/5 12:26:11: 1800/1416MHz 6.18 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:26:18: 1800/1416MHz 6.23 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:26:25: 1800/1416MHz 6.21 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:26:32: 1800/1416MHz 6.19 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:26:38: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 50.6°C 0/5 12:26:45: 1800/1416MHz 6.22 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:26:52: 1800/1416MHz 6.20 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:26:58: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:27:05: 1800/1416MHz 6.22 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:27:12: 1800/1416MHz 6.20 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:27:19: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:27:26: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:27:32: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:27:39: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:27:46: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:27:53: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:27:59: 1800/1416MHz 6.28 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:28:06: 1800/1416MHz 6.26 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:28:13: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:28:20: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:28:27: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.1°C 0/5 12:28:33: 1800/1416MHz 6.28 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:28:40: 1800/1416MHz 6.26 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:28:47: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:28:54: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:00: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:07: 1800/1416MHz 6.23 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:14: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:21: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:29:27: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:29:34: 1800/1416MHz 6.31 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:29:41: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:48: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:29:55: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 51.7°C 0/5 12:30:01: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:30:08: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:30:15: 1800/1416MHz 6.28 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:30:22: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:30:28: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:30:35: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:30:42: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:30:49: 1800/1416MHz 6.28 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:30:56: 1800/1416MHz 6.26 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:31:02: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:31:09: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:31:16: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:31:23: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.2°C 0/5 12:31:29: 1800/1416MHz 6.26 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:31:36: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:31:43: 1800/1416MHz 6.28 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:31:50: 1800/1416MHz 6.26 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:31:56: 1800/1416MHz 6.24 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:03: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:10: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:32:17: 1800/1416MHz 6.23 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:23: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:32:30: 1800/1416MHz 6.25 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:37: 1800/1416MHz 6.23 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 52.8°C 0/5 12:32:44: 1800/1416MHz 6.43 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:51: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:32:57: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:33:04: 1800/1416MHz 6.53 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:33:11: 1800/1416MHz 6.49 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:33:17: 1800/1416MHz 6.49 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:33:24: 1800/1416MHz 6.45 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:33:31: 1800/1416MHz 6.41 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:33:38: 1800/1416MHz 6.42 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:33:45: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:33:51: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:33:58: 1800/1416MHz 6.38 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:34:05: 1800/1416MHz 6.43 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:34:11: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:34:18: 1800/1416MHz 6.41 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:34:25: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:34:32: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:34:39: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:34:46: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:34:52: 1800/1416MHz 6.31 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:34:59: 1800/1416MHz 6.41 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:06: 1800/1416MHz 6.45 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:13: 1800/1416MHz 6.46 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:20: 1800/1416MHz 6.42 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:26: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:35:33: 1800/1416MHz 6.40 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:40: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:35:47: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:35:54: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:00: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:07: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:14: 1800/1416MHz 6.40 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:21: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:36:27: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:36:34: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:41: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:36:48: 1800/1416MHz 6.44 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:36:54: 1800/1416MHz 6.40 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:37:01: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 55.0°C 0/5 12:37:08: 1800/1416MHz 6.39 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:37:15: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:37:21: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:37:28: 1800/1416MHz 6.35 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:37:35: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:37:42: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:37:49: 1800/1416MHz 6.40 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:37:56: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:38:02: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:38:09: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.3°C 0/5 12:38:16: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:38:22: 1800/1416MHz 6.36 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:38:29: 1800/1416MHz 6.33 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:38:36: 1800/1416MHz 6.30 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:38:42: 1800/1416MHz 6.52 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:38:49: 1800/1416MHz 6.51 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:38:56: 1800/1416MHz 6.47 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:39:02: 1800/1416MHz 6.43 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:39:09: 1800/1416MHz 6.44 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 55.0°C 0/5 12:39:16: 1800/1416MHz 6.40 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:39:23: 1800/1416MHz 6.42 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:39:29: 1800/1416MHz 6.38 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 55.0°C 0/5 12:39:36: 1800/1416MHz 6.35 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 55.0°C 0/5 12:39:43: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 Time big.LITTLE load %cpu %sys %usr %nice %io %irq CPU C.St. 12:39:50: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:39:57: 1800/1416MHz 6.31 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:04: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:40:10: 1800/1416MHz 6.31 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:17: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:40:24: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:31: 1800/1416MHz 6.29 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:37: 1800/1416MHz 6.27 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 53.9°C 0/5 12:40:44: 1800/1416MHz 6.37 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:51: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:40:57: 1800/1416MHz 6.32 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:41:04: 1800/1416MHz 6.34 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5 12:41:11: 1800/1416MHz 6.31 100% 0% 99% 0% 0% 0% 54.4°C 0/5^C Temperature stays at 55°C at an ambient temp of 24°C. Please note that once you cramp your board and heatsink in a tiny enclosure this will look entirely different.
RaskAr Posted February 1, 2019 Posted February 1, 2019 Hello dear hackers, The rockpro64 board looks promising but one can read (in the pine64 wiki) about the "ROCKPro64 2x2 MIMO Dual Band WIFI 802.11AC/BLUETOOTH 4.2 MODULE" being "In 0.7.9 [this is] deliberately disabled for stability reasons." ! Haaaa but my project 100% need Wifi ac 2x2 MIMO Is this info still relevant ? Is it only for the official image or also for ARMbian images ? Because 0.7.9 refers to the official pin64 image right, right ?
dragonlost Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 no one to info on the wifi mimo on armbian?
TonyMac32 Posted February 27, 2019 Posted February 27, 2019 The board itself is barely bootable on Armbian, so we haven't gotten to luxuries like the fancy wifi.
Recommended Posts