[spcano01]

I bought a Pi Model B, and have fought with SD corruption from the get go. When it runs for a bit, it seems ok - but gets too frustrating on the menus or launching a video.

I then picked up a XU Lite from http://www.hardkernel.com/ and installed Android on it. LOVE it! Full hardware decoding, and the normal android love. With Aereo and DroidMote/XBMC Remote, I couldn't be happier!!

They just came out with a U3 for $59, but I think I'll stick with more expensive one to be on safe side of speed. Although, there are videos of the U3 playing Tekken 6 and XBMC that looks nice. But it's only a ~$80 difference, and I was very close to buying a NUC! So, I consider myself having saved money and loving android!

[Bonzi]

I would buy a Cubox-i instead of a raspberry pi.

For a start there is a $45 model, which is 5x faster than a Pi, and includes a box and IR receiver (which the Pi does not).
There is a $100 model which is better for xbmc.
It is much smaller than a Pi too.

The person who wrote Raspbmc (raspberry pi xbmc) is rewriting raspbmc for the cubox-i.
Also, Openelec, Geexbox, and Yocto XBMC variants are also available (all builds are early versions).

I agree, its nice hardware and if it had the kind of support community as RPi, it would be a no brainer. But it doesn't...so its hard to know if XBMC will ever work on the cubox as well as it does on the Pi...

[joelbaby]

I agree, its nice hardware and if it had the kind of support community as RPi, it would be a no brainer. But it doesn't...so its hard to know if XBMC will ever work on the cubox as well as it does on the Pi...

But it does have very strong developer support:

- Sam Nazarko who wrote Raspbmc is writing a new version for Cubox.
- OpenElec are releasing test builds.
- A developer in this forum has been working on a version for a few months.
- Geexbox (another xbmc variant) is available.

Cubox-i is:

- cheaper than a Raspberry Pi when you factor in the cost of the Infra Red receiver, and a box.
- 5x faster than Pi for the base $45 model
- more compact

It is early days, and anyone who buys a cubox-i should remember that the developers have only had their hands on them for a few weeks.

More chatter about XBMC on Cubox-i, and the builds that are in development here: http://imx.solid-run.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=7

[Milhouse]

I agree a Cubox-i2 looks like a good option for the longer term, however it appears that none of the Cubox range will be available for another couple of months (expected March delivery, according to the website).

If anyone is considering the Cubox-i1, I personally wouldn't bother and would just go with the Pi which is available now, cheaper, already has very good XBMC support and basically does the job. I wouldn't expect the Cubox-i1 to be significantly better than a Pi, certainly not enough to justify the extra cash and waiting 2 months (it should be a little faster than an overclocked Pi, sure, but also with a lot more bugs at least for the first few months).

[awp0]

The Cubox looks pretty cool IMO. Couple of questions:
1. Where can you even buy it? I see it back ordered all over the place. I don't even see a $45 model but I do see a $49 Cubox-i model.
2. I'm curious about the "5x faster than raspi" comment for the single core model. Can you point me to that benchmark?

Thanks.

[Milhouse]

2. I'm curious about the "5x faster than raspi" comment for the single core model. Can you point me to that benchmark?

I doubt such a benchmark exists, as in terms of pure ARM performance per MHz, the Cortex-A9 based i.MX6 SoC in the CuBox-i1 is about double the performance of the ARM11-based SoC in the Pi. The Vivante GC800 GPU in the Cubox-i1 i.MX6 is significantly less powerful than the VideoCore4 GPU in the Raspberry Pi (6GFlops compared to 24GFlops), and realising the full potential of the GPU will depend greatly on the quality of the drivers (is there a Vivante GPU developer working on XBMC as there is for the Pi?)

So any claim of "5x faster" than the Pi when comparing the single-core i.MX6 is pure fantasy. With both devices clocked at the same 1GHz clock frequency, the Cubox-i1 should be faster on ARM, but only by as much as 2x, while inferior on GPU-bound tasks - fairly critical for an application like XBMC - and therefore not worth the investment of time and extra money.

The dual-core version, once it becomes available, could be worth considering however it is still hobbled with the same weak GC800 GPU, but could be said to offer closer to that 5x performance increase (though more likely only 3-4x, certainly not more).

The CuBox i4-Pro (quad-core) with Vivante GC2000 (24GFlops, so comparable to the Pi VC4) should offer well over 5x faster performance, though you're only going to see this increase when the application is properly multi-threaded as even a quad-core i.MX6 will only achieve a maximum of 2x faster performance on single-threaded tasks, which probably includes much of XBMC. But now we're no longer comparing apples and apples as the quad-core CuBox is almost 4 times the price of the Pi.

[awp0]

Thanks milhouse, I suspected it was something like this and I had also read that the CPU was technically about 2-2.5x times as powerful. But I was curious if someone had actually produced such a benchmark and whether it had anything to do with XBMC. That would be greatly surprising given all the work that has been invested in raspi performance and the relative immaturity of the cubox.

[joelbaby]

But now we're no longer comparing apples and apples as the quad-core CuBox is almost 4 times the price of the Pi.

Talking of apples - How much is a Pi + Case + IR Receiver?

[mayoman]

Talking of apples - How much is a Pi + Case + IR Receiver?

GB£50 + €2 + some of your time

Cheaper if you already have SD cards, cables, or suitable USB chargers lying around.

[Milhouse]

Talking of apples - How much is a Pi + Case + IR Receiver?

IR receiver - if you need one - can be bought for a few dollars and installed on the GPIO pins; a USB IR dongle will cost a little more (though certainly under $10). A cheap plastic case shouldn't cost more than a few dollars (I bought mine for £4). Pi + Case + IR Receiver shouldn't cost more than $45 if you shop around.

[joelbaby]

2. I'm curious about the "5x faster than raspi" comment for the single core model. Can you point me to that benchmark?

Sorry the 5x faster CPU was for the dual core model.
The single core i.mx6 CPU is 2.5x faster than a Pi CPU (measured in DMIPS).
Cortex A9 @ 1GHz = 2,500 DMIPS vs ARM1176JZ @ 772MHz = 965 DMIPS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ARM_cores


All the i.mx6 have more than one graphics processor.
There is the GC2000 for 3D graphics (or GC880 in lower models). There are also separate GPU on-board for 2D, and a separate Vector GPU.
The memory speed is also higher in i.mx6. Most of the models also have more memory than a Pi model B - which can also increase overall performance for applications.

Someone questioned ongoing development of the graphics driver. Its open source - so will hardly be an issue. With: Wandboard, Utilite, Cubox-i, Udoo, and a whole bunch of other boxes being built around this platform + all the builds being worked on for XBMC .... doesn't exactly point to a problem in that area.

The Cubox-i2 Ultra was selling for $95. It's easily faster than a Pi ... by 5x for the CPU alone. It has 1GB of 1066MHz RAM. It cost twice as much as a basic Pi kit. No need to overclock, or worry about extra heatsinks.

5x speed for 2x Pi cost ... is an easy cost/benefit analysis to make.

[Milhouse]

Sorry the 5x faster CPU was for the dual core model.
The single core i.mx6 CPU is 2.5x faster than a Pi CPU (measured in DMIPS).
Cortex A9 @ 1GHz = 2,500 DMIPS vs ARM1176JZ @ 772MHz = 965 DMIPS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ARM_cores

DMIPS/MHz is more like 1.2 (ARM11@1GHz) to 2.5 (Cortex-A9@1GHz), which is worth noting as almost all Pis are capable of hitting 1000MHz, so the performance difference is closer to 2:1 than 2.5:1.

The Cubox-i2 Ultra was selling for $95. It's easily faster than a Pi ... by 5x for the CPU alone. It has 1GB of 1066MHz RAM. It cost twice as much as a basic Pi kit. No need to overclock, or worry about extra heatsinks.

5x speed for 2x Pi cost ... is an easy cost/benefit analysis to make.

Probably closer to 4, but that's splitting hairs. Thing is, you're only going to realise all of this extra performance in ideal situations, ie. when an application scales well with additional cores, and an application such as XBMC is likely to be heavily dependent on single threads of computation (eg. Python addons etc.) much of the time, which means that in real life (and not marketing hyperbole) you're back to 2x faster irrespective of how many cores you may have.

[awp0]

5x speed for 2x Pi cost ... is an easy cost/benefit analysis to make.

Well except that today it's "potentially" 5x because the XBMC distros are immature and (probably?) not yet optimized, and because the speed of XBMC is more complex than just CPU speed, right? Regardless, I'd love to see a side-by-side video from someone who knows what they're doing. Certainly that would be great for people making a buying decision.

[joelbaby]

ARM11@1GHz

If you want to overclock your pi, and put heatsinks on it.
The Cortex A9@1GHz is actually underclocked. Standard speed is 1.2GHz.

Maybe having to overclock is admitting that the standard performance leaves a bit to be desired.

[Milhouse]

If you want to overclock your pi, and put heatsinks on it.

No heatsinks required, that's just another fallacy.

Maybe having to overclock is admitting that the standard performance leaves a bit to be desired.

What CPU doesn't benefit from overclocking?