|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 11.06.2011 - 08:46 ]

Thanks for your report. Your 1st impression seems to be rather fine. Hope you do some benchamrks and post results.
Also I an curious to hear more about stability and real worls measurements of the netto wattage uptake of the device.

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 28.05.2011 - 06:42 ]

Quote:

That's almost exactly right. ~2W for the MPC5121e, ~2.5W for the RAM, ~2.5W for the hard disk. It may jump if you use high powered USB peripherals (up to 1W).

It would be absolutely impossible for the CherryPal to draw less than 2W unless it was in standby, the MPC5121e off, RAM in self-refresh and the hard disk idle (~0.8W). You may save some power by configuring some Linux daemons and using hdparm to settle the hard disk when it's not being used for a certain amount of time, but the CPU and RAM will always draw that power.

@ Neko

Isn't that CherryPal device using a SSD instead of a HDD?

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 28.05.2011 - 06:39 ]

Thanks for your review, Velcro. In all, we know that the CherryPal could be a much better computer, given the right operating system.
Remember, Genesi did software development for it, namely drivers for the AXE and PowerVR, both of which are not generally available (mostly the later, as it requires a license from Imagination Technologies).

Quote:

The best operating system in the world will not change the fact that the Cherrypal nettop uses roughly the same PowerVR graphics core as Apple's iPhone which puts its graphics performance far below that of the otherwise similarily specced Efika Open Client. This affects not only 3D games such as Quake but the entire user interface.

The iPhone's graphics core was chosen after carefully balancing the technical performance requirements for running the Apple software stack in a low resolution such as 480x320 and the limited availability of battery power.

One does not have to be a very technical person to figure out that the iPhone's graphics core is most likely not a good candidate for anything that even remotely resembles a desktop computer.

If you bought a low-end $120 19 inch widescreen LCD monitor, the Cherrypal computer would be unable to run the display in its native resolution of 1440x900. No matter what horrible shoddy monitors you may use at home, this is unacceptable for any new desktop computer in 2009.

The 5121e could be sufficient for a small portable netbook with a fixed 720p display resolution (and it certainly is for many embedded applications), but it is nowhere near a good choice for the desktop because it provides insufficient performance to drive even today's low end display peripherals. (The very same is true for the otherwise faster Freescale i.MX515 as well, for the record.)

Low power consumption can really only go so far. If this is all somebody cares about, may I suggest pen and paper?


Quote:

The best drivers in the world will not change the fact that an Efika Open Client will outperform a 5121e-based system in many applications.

Quote:

My fault for using the generic term "computer". I didn't mean"desktop computer" at all. I should have said "mobile device", or even "netbook", for which you seem to agree.

Quote:

Very interesting comment.

Quote:

That's also very interesting, many of us knew. A solution? A mini-ITX shaped Efika with a soldered graphics chip. Even an old ATi one runs circles around any embedded PowerVR (albeit much more power hungry), and drivers do exist! Perhaps also, as power comsumption would raise anyway, add more RAM. Easily doable (ahem).

Like the one scheduled years ago...

I guess we should build this computer ourselves, perhaps even Genesi/bPlan could help with the design.

Easily, the already chosen MacMini route makes much more sense as a PowerPC desktop computer. Well done, MorphOS Team.

@ Zylesea

What makes you think an SSD is any lower power than an HDD?

They still draw as much power when accessed and have similar idle (i.e. spun down or heads parked) specs as a real hard disk.

NAND flash memory is not some free ride to better battery life, it is simply far more resilient - it's popular in notebooks because dropping notebooks is common - and far quieter - it's popular in silent PCs because it doesn't make noise when it's accessed :)

@andre, jcmarcos

The MPC5121e has enough power to run a "desktop" - KDE or GNOME or so - most of the requirement is purely RAM. There is a limitation of 512MB for the chip but this is not so bad (it meets and exceeds the minimum specs). Andre's comment is to do with the maximum screen resolution - 1024x768 in 3D (not that you could ever use 3D without the proprietary driver) or 1280x1024 on the DIU.

Most >19" monitors have much higher resolution and therefore must be driven at a non-native resolution. This is directly tied to the bus clock on the DIU for 2D (as this then drives the DAC) and for 3D it is simply a limitation of the PowerVR MBX Lite unit which was designed for low-end mobile devices (~800x600 or 1024x600 widescreen top spec, more commonly 480x320 or so like the iPhone which has an identical GPU).

That same thing is true of the i.MX515 but it has a far more powerful GPU and could drive something significantly larger, but the focus is on fixed panel sizes integrated with a device. It is not a "desktop"

[ Edited by Neko on 2009/1/27 14:32 ]

@ Neko

I never suggested flash memory wouln't need any energy, but on average it should be lesser tahn a hdd. The difference should become biggest, when often accessing small pieces of data. The hdd has to spin up and down, while the flash can switch from idle to operation very instantaneous. But true, i never did real life measurements on my own and current mobile hdds are indeed quite energy efficient.

> Low power consumption can really only go so far. If this is all
> somebody cares about, may I suggest pen and paper?

Nice one:-)

Maybe standard notebooks are "greener" than the CherryPal in the end. Interesting comment by a CherryPal user:

"At the moment, the Cherrypal, fixed to a monitor, uses about two thirds of the power than my laptop does. However, I can't do the job I need to with the Cherrypal, yet. If a job takes twice as long with a tool that uses two thirds the power, then it makes the supposed saving an actual loss. It also has an impact on a persons own time and stress levels."
http://technilife.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-twist-on-being-green.html

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 28.05.2011 - 06:37 ]

> A low wattage notebook computer is also green; I don't know about a
> "standard" one.

It's either this or that. I don't know which one of these Michelle is comparing the CherryPal to in the blog entry I cited.

> It would be very green to not buy a big new tower computer and
> monitor and get a notebook instead. I don't see a particular reason
> to use that argument against the CherryPal.

I rather think it's probably quite a surprise for many that a "standard" (as in "standard" above) Notebook might be "greener" than a CherryPal C114, especially considering the official figures published by CherryPal.

|||

[ Edited by Velcro_SP 19.04.2011 - 08:35 ]

> you're leaving out the monitor

Where am I "leaving out the monitor"?

> as well as the fact that it was a nuanced and thoroughly debatable
> comment about factoring utility into "green," which Michelle
> followed up immediately by saying that you can't really insert
> subjective utility in a shop calculation.

You miss my point. I'm talking about "job takes twice as long" and "uses two thirds the power". That doesn't necessarily sound like "subjective utility" to me, assuming her numbers are about correct of course. Admittedly, it depends on how you use the device. If you just turn it on and do nothing then, the C114 is probably "greener" than turning a notebook on and doing nothing afterwards.

Furthermore, Michelle -- like the majority of CherryPal customers -- got (either bought or by becoming a "brand angel") the C114 mainly because of the promised "cloud":

"One of the key features for me that the CherryPal has which the others don't, is flexibility and options. It has the, "cloud," which the likes of the EeePC don't have"
http://technilife.blogspot.com/2008/07/not-too-long-before-cherrypal-lands.html

As of now, there is no CherryPal "cloud" and therefore the key feature for many C114 owners is still missing.

Further examples:

"What is the timeframe on getting the cloud? I would be interesting to see how much of a performance boost it would provide."
http://cherrypal.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=software&thread=15

"clearly a cloud computing device without cloud is not much fun at all"
http://cherrypal.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=settingup&thread=1 :-)

|||



[ Edited by Velcro_SP 19.04.2011 - 08:34 ]

After seeing Michelle's CherryPal application test, I'm quite surprised at how good the performance is: Using Open Office (!) and throwing GIMP a "14.5 MPx file" (!!) is something I've never thought was possible in a humble MPC5121e device.

I don't agree with Neko's statement in another thread, about 1280x1024 not being enough for a desktop.

Now, if THTF finally starts selling its LimePC range (mid-February, was said?), with possibly an updated system software, taking advantage of the PowerVR...

This whole MPC5121e story is like a roaller coaster to me: One day it feels like dead-end rubbish, another day it shows surprinsing performance...

@ jcmarcos

Quote:

I know a local company that still uses computers with 300 Mhz AMD K6 processors to run Open Office. These machines are capable to handle OO reasonably well in a professional environment after they were upgraded with additional memory. They would also be able to load in a 14.5 MPx file since, again, this is foremost a matter of sufficient system memory.

Nothing very special about it, really. The Efika has only 128MB which slows some things down due to the required swapping. It is not like many people haven't strongly requested to bump up the amount of memory and include USB2.0 many months before it was released... But, that is a whole other story.


Quote:

Personally, I think it is kind of pointless to debate about what particular resolution might or might not be sufficient for desktop use from a theoretical point of view. The problem of the 5121e is that it drastically limits your choice which is extremely problematic because it is becoming increasingly difficult to even find monitors with a resolution of 1280x1024 and less.

In contrast, if you buy an Atom-powered nettop or an Efika Open Client for more or less the same price, you can freely choose whatever display size suits you best.

Quote:

hhm? when? in 10 years? even the newest monitors/tvs are capable of such a resolution
and usually also far smaller ones

Quote:

Yes but, when talking about flat panels, if you don't use a resolution that matches the panel's one, ugly scaling effects show up. But I don't think that should rule out a computer.

Try running a 4:3 resolution as 1280x1024 on a widescreen
16:10 monitor.. It's horrible.

Unless you guys missed it. There are pretty much no non-
widescreen monitors available anymore.

1680x1050 and 1920x1200 are the normal screen resolutions
of today (22-24" screens). Unless your device can support
1680x1050, you better not market it as any kind of desktop
computer.

22" widescreen are cheaper than 19" 4:3.

[ Edited by ironfist on 2009/1/29 12:00 ]

@ ironfist

Sorry to nitpick but 1280x1024 is 5 by 4, not 4 by 3

:)