[Tech Update] Benchmark Testing of UP Squared, Raspberry Pi 4 & Jetson Nano
Test Systems:
The test is performed by keeping the system aligned as much as possible, realizing the hardware differences and considering the following baseline:
Comparison Overview:  The results with the greatest spread from best to worst included: ✔ Stream (Type: Copy) at 3.92x ✔ OpenSSL (RSA 4096-bit Performance) at 2.68x ✔ PHPBench (PHP Benchmark Suite) at 2.3x ✔ RAMspeed SMP (Type: Copy - Benchmark: Integer) at 2.25x ✔ perf-bench (Benchmark: Sched Pipe) at 2.21x ✔ Parallel BZIP2 Compression (256MB File Compression) at 2.13x ✔ Java SciMark (Computational Test: Composite) at 2.03x ✔ x264 (H.264 Video Encoding) at 1.94x ✔ PyBench (Total For Average Test Times) at 1.89x Results:  UP Squared N4200 4GB had the most wins, coming in first place for 90% of the tests. ▶ Comparison of UP Squared with the RPi4 and Jetson system’s performance shows,
|
Comments
-
The Mouser web site lists the Up Squared N4200 4GB DDR4, 32GB eMMC as end of life https://www.mouser.ca/ProductDetail/AAEON-UP/UPS-APLP4-A20-0432?qs=vLWxofP3U2yxSbwZAZ0i5w==. Your web site lists it without any mention of it being discontinued https://up-shop.org/up-squared-series.html. What is the production status of your Up Squared N4200 boards?
-
Hi @jmadeley , the UP Squared Processors is going through an F1 Stepping change. The product details have been updated and hence the old Part number will no longer be available. You can find the new updated PN for UP Squared here ,
https://www.mouser.ca/ProductDetail/AAEON-UP/UPS-APLP4F-A20-0432?qs=/ha2pyFadui2jH/A5m2SCxmc2/WIp9grDEwnLostHiTa%2BPNWE4P1z5fD%2BUe9MItc -
Something I'm struggling with is when you would use Pentium N4200 vs. Atom x7-E3950. The former has a higher boost clock frequency, but lower base, while the latter has higher base and lower boost. My understanding is that not all cores will simultenously run at the boost frequency, so maybe Atom is a bit better on properly multi-threaded apps? But also the Atom is double the TDP, yet both are manufactured on the same process node and so can this really be attributed to the marginally higher base operating frequency? Or is there some other factor that I've not considered.
Our particular application involves running a real-time application (via ACRN hypervisor) and aiming for best possible performance using this class of processor (it's high bandwidth DSP), and I cannot seem to decide which of the two will be best fit. I have also seen mention of Intel Time Coordinated Computing — which seemingly includes RT features — in Atom E3900 series marketing literature, but then this will confusingly jump from talking about Atom to mentioning Celeron and Pentium processors, since these are also in the Apollo Lake family, without being clear if features such as TCC applies to them also.
-
The reason to choose the Pentium over the Atom was mainly to choose a configuration with the same amount of RAM and storage of the other 2 systems.
Performance of Atom vs Pentium is similar, but Atom works better on sustained workload, while Pentium works better for short high peak workload.
In general Atom is a better choice for industrial applications also due to its extended temperature range.
Regarding TCC on Apollo Lake platform, it is available on the Atom SKU, but need to double check for more details.
In your case I would suggest the Atom E3950.Also if you would like to share the use case with ACRN (which is really interesting) please feel free to do it in the community or contact us directly.
