Some benchmarks between the Udoo x86 and the Up2

Discussion in 'UDOO X86' started by mkopack, Jun 2, 2017.

  1. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    So I just got my Up2 (Ultimate level) Board. Figured I'd give some comparisons between the two...

    Udoo x86 Advanced, (4GB RAM, 1.6ghz, boosts to 2.06)
    UP2 Ultimate (8GB RAM, 1.1Ghz Boosts to 2.5)
    (so, yes it's a bit of an apples to oranges comparison since I didn't have the Udoo x86 Ultra)

    and RasPi3 just for comparison sake...
    ASUS Tinkerboard

    Sysbench CPU Test:
    Code:
    #total time (in seconds, lower is better)
    Udoo:  57.7303
    Up2:    20.2966
    RPi3:  477.2538
    Tinker: 291.772
    
    #per request min (in ms, lower is better)
    Udoo:   5.77
    UP2:     2.01
    RPi3:    47.7
    Tinker: 29.16
    
    #per request max (in ms, lower is better)
    Udoo:  16.68
    UP2:      6.98
    RPi3:   70.93
    Tinker: 39.85
    
    #95 percentile (in ms, lower is better)
    Udoo:   5.78
    UP2:     2.1
    RPi3:   47.76
    Tinker:  29.19
    
    So, as expected the UP2 was faster. Given that they're using a 6 month and 1 generation newer processor, and I got the highest end version of it vs the mid-range Udoo, I would expect it to win there. Tinkerboard is substantially faster than the RPi3 even though it's 32 bit vs 64, (the faster clock speed and 2x the RAM doesn't hurt!)

    Sysbench IO: (run against a 8GB test file set)
    (Note, Udoo scores were running against the M.2 SSD, Up2 against it's built in 128GB eMMC, RPi3 a 2GB fileset on it's SD card, Tinker was against a 4GB fileset on it's SD card)
    Code:
    # of events
    Udoo:  319400
    UP2:   631000
    RPi3:     70400
    Tinker: 20300
    
    #Total Time taken by event execution (in seconds, lower is better) 
    #(Remember, RPi3 and Tinker were against smaller sample files due to drive space limitations)
    Udoo:  53.0795
    Up2:    70.0625
    RPi3:  48.0444
    Tinker: 21.0481
    
    #per request min:
    Udoo:   0.01
    UP2:     0
    RPi3:    0.02
    Tinker: 0.02
    
    #avg:
    Udoo:   0.17
    Up2:     0.11
    RPi3:    0.68
    Tinker:  1.04
    
    #max
    Udoo:   7.23
    Up2:   14.26
    RPi3:  136.17
    Tinker: 286.43
    
    #95th percentile
    Udoo:  0.41
    Up2:    0.49
    RPi3:   1.57
    Tinker:  2.37
    
    So in this case it apprears the Udoo with it's M.2 has better IO performance. Both utterly kill the RPi3. I'm pretty sure something is wrong with the Tinkerboard. They've been putting out different OS versions, but seems like they're FAR from hitting the performance specs they claim in terms of IO here..

    GLMark2:
    (Just going to give the overall scores here)
    Code:
    Udoo: 982
    Up2:  1026
    RPi3:  (Couldn't get this to run with hardware acceleration, so pointless to give the score)
    Tinker: (couldn't get this to run at all! They REALLY need to work on the OS badly...)
    
    I consider those to be within margin of error. The Up2 scored better in some tests, worse in others. Pretty much a wash.


    Now, one thing I did find interesting - in the EFI/BIOS for the UP, there's specific settings for the Burst mode in the chips. I know there's been a lot of talk about that on the Udoo and whether we're actually ever seeing the advertised high end burst speeds. I wonder if there's something that has to be enabled BIOS-wise that Udoo is missing, (or maybe it's there and it's just not exposed for us to access?) the 2x CPU performance really makes me think that something on the Udoo isn't going right though for it to lose by that much when the base clock speeds favor the Udoo by almost 50%. It makes me wonder if the Up2 is getting to use it's Burst mode up to 2.5, while the Udoo is stuck at 1.6?

    All this being said, they are both really nice boards. Personally I prefer the Udoo's Arduino pinout vs the Up2's RasPi style GPIO. I also like that the Udoo has more options for storage interfaces, I think it just makes the board more versatile. I'm NOT a fan of the Up2's HUGE heatsink and the fact that they put the CPU on the bottom of the board forcing you to run it flipped over, plus the heatsink is covering all but 1 of the mounting holes. Hopefully they offer a smaller HS+fan option soon.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 5, 2017
    JoeJoe and Markus Laire like this.
  2. stecolumna

    stecolumna UDOOer

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    33
    Mumble mumble ... dear mkopack

    do you know that UP board don't support BIOS legacy mode because Intel doesn't support Legacy mode from Cherry Trail ? then with UP board you will have some limitations to use some Linux OS ?
    For example Debian has programmed a transition to UEFI BIOS in the kernel but now also Stretch is in legacy mode.

    Then your comparison is very teoric and valid only with a restricted set of OS.

    However thanks for your experimentation and best regards.

    Stecolumna
     
  3. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ok, I have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you were trying to point out there...

    I was running Ubuntu 16.04.2 on both boards...

    I wasn't trying to show one board was better than the other, just trying to give folks an idea of plusses and minuses of each, and in particular pointing out that the reason we're not seeing the Burst mode performance might be because of a EFI/BIOS issue that Udoo might need to look into which would explain the issues we've been seeing with Burst.

    Each board is nice and has it's advantages (hence why I bought both and why I plan to use ROS on both...)
     
  4. stecolumna

    stecolumna UDOOer

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    33
    Dear mkopack

    For example If you use Ubuntu in multiboot with OS using BIOS Legacy you will have set Ubuntu to BIOS Legacy mode too and perhaps you will have problems with UP board.
    But I don't have UP board then I'm not sure of this.

    However thanks again for your experimentation

    Stecolumna
     
  5. jas-mx

    jas-mx Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    118
    I think your talking about UP (which is cherrytrail, hence legacy bios ) not UP2 (which is apollo lake) is the newer board.
     
  6. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ok, I still don't get what the heck your point is? Why is that a problem? What is the effect of what you're saying?
    What the heck diff does it make if it's Legacy or not? I don't really CARE as long as the OS I want boots up and it does what I need...
     
  7. stecolumna

    stecolumna UDOOer

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    33
    Only for example If you see the compatibility chart with Linux OS of Intel NUC considering all drivers you will discover that newer hardware have more problems. Then isn't always a good choice to have always newer processors because of minor functionality of the drivers. I think that Udoo have a good compromise between component innovation and driver functionality.
     
  8. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    OF COURSE newer hardware is less likely to have all the drivers available. The point is, that's NOT the case currently from what I've seen. The Only issue I see with the Up2 right now is that they need a BIOS update to enable the 40 pin GPIO from inside of linux (and that's coming but it's going to be a few weeks yet). Otherwise, I've had no problem with Ubuntu 16.04.2 on either board. YMMV if you're using some other OS...
     
  9. ThomasOu

    ThomasOu Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2016
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    23
    Well. The Kickstarter pledges of those two projects are overlapped, which means that if you backed UDOO x86, you can reject it and move to UP squared but UP ends later. What I was thinking at that monent was UDOO would be shipped on Nov and UP squared will be shipped somewhen in May&June hence it is half year earlier. Moreover, UP board is 5V input and I really concerned about it at that monent because of Lattepanda board. Both teams have previous successful projects in this area. And I also prefer to trust Chinese doing a reliable and fast job. But as we all known, UDOO x86 delayed to May&June and UP squared shipped on time. If I could know there would be a delay (althought many backers think this is not a serious problem but i don't), I won't support UDOO x86 honestly. UP squared is next gen CPU solution, coming with DDR4-2400 (UDOO x86 DDR3L-1600) and eMMC 5.0 (eMMC 4.5 on UDOO), althought I didn't expect a very large improvement on "real" CPU performane. And these are the reasons that you get from your test results. Talking about your results, they illustrates their differences in a proper way and they are reasonable.
     
  10. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    Well, I didn't post it to make UDoo look bad. Quite the opposite, I see each board as being very good and just different. I prefer the layout of the board and the storage options (as well as the Arduino pinout) that the Udoo has. I also will say that the community support here is better than the Up board.

    God, right now I'm sporting:

    Up
    Up2
    UpCore (or at least I did the KS for it)
    Udoo Quad
    Udoo Neo
    Udoo X86
    Asus Tinkerboard
    RPi 3's, 2's even some old original B, B+ and A's!
    Rpi Zero
    Rpi Zero-W

    I'm actually looking at ideas to build some sort of shelving/cabinet unit that I can mount them all onto, a big 12 port power strip that will work with all the power adapters, and a 12 Port ethernet to plug them all into (although I might just go with an 8 port and run a few off Wifi...) Set them all up to do VNC and that way I can just remote into them from the one (probably the UP) hooked to a KB+Mouse + Monitor.

    I do robotics, so ROS is a big deal to me, and the x86 boards are SOOO much easier for doing that. And the nice thing is ROS is designed to be distributed, so I can run nodes on all the x86 boards at the same time and spread out the workload and such.
     
  11. Wilson

    Wilson New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    9
    The other nice thing is the inclusion of an Arduino 101 on the same PCB. This is something the UP and UP Squared do not have. Most discussions I see are about the main processor, but the Curie chip on board is super useful. I am planning on trying to port a flight controller to it for use on a drone - with the main processor providing visual mapping and autonomous control capabilities.
     
  12. ccs_hello

    ccs_hello UDOOer

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    157
  13. waltervl

    waltervl UDOOer

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    543
    The UP2 has no Arduino 101/Intel Curie processor on board so that is a big difference if you compare the boards.
     
  14. jas-mx

    jas-mx Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2013
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    118
    But the UP2 has an on board fpga which can be reprogrammed for custom i/o support and its not to difficult to add arduino support via a usb port. Based on the previous Udoo boards, whats more important is how mature the Intel Curie Arduino libraries are.
     
  15. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    Well, to be fair, while it has an onboard FPGA, it is yet to be seen whether they're going to provide us a way to modify the code on it... Additionally, the GPIO on the original UP was HORRIBLY slow (like 10x slower than on the RasPi). Since the GPIO isn't supported yet on the UP2, it's impossible to know if that performance issue still exists or not.

    Personally, I prefer the Udoo's use of Arduino setup + CPU GPIO vs UP's use of RasPi pinout - I just find having the dedicated processor and such for Arduino to be a more useful solution. I did go ahead and order an Arduino that hooks into the RasPi-GPIO pinout to give the Up/Up2 similar capability, but until they turn it on in the Up2, it's sitting in a box...

    Obviously, each board has it's advantages and disadvantages. And given I only had the Advanced Udoo x86 to compare with, it's not exactly a fair fight. It wasn't my intent to influence people one way or the other... I was doing it more for my own edification so I'd know what to expect performance wise when doing ROS stuff, because as a desktop both feel about the same performance-wise. And I threw the others in there to show just how much more powerful these x86 boards are than their Arm competitors... Sure we're paying a premium for the performance, and they use a significantly bigger power budget (2+x more) but in some cases that performance is necessary and worth the power draw.

    All that being said, I do think this, plus the stuff I pointed out in the other thread about the burst speed should warrant further investigation by Udoo. Because if nothing else, the results show that it IS possible to see the Burst mode being active on the Up2, while we seem 100% unable to get it to trigger on the Udoo.
     
    Markus Laire and Wilson like this.
  16. ccs_hello

    ccs_hello UDOOer

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    157
    In my own case, I prefer UDOO x86 Advanced Plus for several reasons:
    - N3160 is powerful enough and I got a good deal as in "early" tier (though set back by long waiting)
    - It has SATA interface (now I dual boot over either eMMC or SATA SSD)
    - Arduino 101
    - two M.2 slots (I've converted the B socket into a regular PCIe 2x slot)
    - have most of the peripheral connectors I need

    I know there are still few wrinkles waiting to be fixed. I think it's just a matter of time.
    ccs_hello
     
  17. MicroStrand

    MicroStrand New Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    2
    In the kickstarter world is simply everything a matter of time, also the final transition to become a maker. What ever you make is, when ever it will absolutely error-free work, obsolet, because all relevant circumstances have changed in the meantime and there is always another product ten times faster and more powerful, which appears on the horizon. What a useless effort!

    There is neither a real learning effect nor does it have anything to do with creativity. It is a constant tinkering to the pure self-purpose and the end result often lacks any useful value.
     
  18. ccs_hello

    ccs_hello UDOOer

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    157
    This is a thread talking about benchmark and is technical in nature.
     
  19. mkopack

    mkopack Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    21
    Anyhow, just to further my point about preferring the Udoo - Where I work (Robotics research group for a Fortune 500 company) was looking for things to purchase this year under capital expenditures... I convinced them to put 4 Udoo x86s Ultras on the list of requests. So we'll see...
     
  20. Wilson

    Wilson New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    9
    LOL Says the person who wastes his time heckling on the forum for a product you said you wouldn't purchase. "The end result often lacks any useful value." Don't throw stones in glass houses, bro.
     

Share This Page