[Arm-netbook] My little idea...

[luke.leighton]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Christopher Havel
<laserhawk64 at gmail.com> wrote:
> My understanding, which was based on the Wiki, was that gigabit and USB3
> would be implemented later.

 not quite correct.  *in the future* there will be other CPU Cards
with those features.  the spec *allows* for those.  so if you design
an I/O board which only has 10/100, it's not going to be desirable or
useful with a CPU Card that has gigabit capabilities, is it?

 and the one thing that EOMA68 is designed for is with "long term
investment" in mind.  you buy one or more chassis' and you keep them
in service until they literally fall apart of old age.   .. and you
upgrade the CPU Cards to make sure they stay useful and current.

 ... so if you design a chassis with only USB2 or 10/100 ethernet, how
is it going to be useful to anyone in 2-3 years time?

> Just a thought on the x86 bit... I actually have a PicoITX board (super
> doober cheap eBay find!) that uses the Atom Z530 + NM10 chipset. It's
> Poulsbo PITA graphics but some Linuces do work, including a couple versions
> of Puppy. Oh right -- the PSU is a 5v 4a model...

 yeah, exactly.  the closest that intel gets to "low power" is an ULV
600mhz processor that uses 2.5 watts.  that's excluding the
southbridge chip!

> Just a few thoughts on that sort of config...
>
> Atom Z530 = 2.0w TDP
> NM10 PCH = 2.1w TDP
>
> ...so a Z530 + NM10 = 4.1w TDP.

 yeah exactly.  now try putting that on a 43 x 75mm board in an
enclosed space - don't forget that DDR3 RAM will add another 0.75
watts (assume 2x 32-bit @ 800mhz).  and then there's the inefficiency
of the PMIC.  now you're well over 7 watts.

> According to CPU-World, the max power dissipation ever for a Z530 would be
> 4.64w. According to the NM10 datasheet (DC Characteristics on p225) and a
> bit of math, the maximum power dissipation in the S0 state would be 2.794w.
> That's a total of 7.434w, leaving a ton of room (electrically speaking) for
> a fan.

 you can't get a fan in a 5mm space.  and it has to go on the CPU Card
(the fan) because otherwise it's necessary to add a fan into the
*other* side of the spec... and that's a cost that's completely
unnecessary *and* means that when you get into mass-volume you just
stuffed a) the profit margins b) the reliability.

> So maybe look at that config...? or is Intel incompatible with you guys for
> licensing reasons or something?

 not at all.  intel just simply don't have a product that works.
they've been told.  i've tried reaching out to AMD: it's like climbing
a glass wall.  i even contacted RDC and they honestly don't believe in
their own product because nobody's trying to buy it.  and the RDC
IAD100 series also needs a companion IC and a 3D GPU to make it
comparable.

 l.