Intel Edison - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2014, 06:19:01 pm
content: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/do-it-yourself/edison.htmlThey announced this at CES today. It is"Discover the Intel® Edison development board, a tiny, ultra-power-efficient development platform the size of an SD* card that is small enough to drop into just about anything. "Of course they used on the demo some brute force to achieve a function with a 400Mhz CPU what you can do with a comparator. In general, It looks like the small brother of Galileohttp://uk.mouser.com/new/Intel/intel-galileo-development-board/What do you think about it?

author: Dongulus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2014, 06:51:35 pm
content: The integrated WiFi and Bluetooth in a small, low power package looks promising.How does one access the GPIO? I can't tell from the picture.

author: Torrentula
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2014, 08:27:14 pm
content: Quote from: Dongulus on January 08, 2014, 06:51:35 pmI guess there won't be much I/O given the SD card form factor of which at least two pins are power pins.Probably you will be completely frantic about not blowing out the few GPIOs you have on a $30-50 piece of equpiment. Look at the Raspberry Pi guys.Kanonen auf Spatzen.On the other hand, yes it looks very interesting as a tiny low power Linux box which I could see being put to good use.

author: LukeW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2014, 09:48:18 am
content: Could be interesting, the tiny, well integrated, well designed hardware is very reminiscent of Electric Imp, but maybe, hopefully this will be more openly usable and won't have the lock-in to the electric imp platform that the EI card does.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2014, 12:22:22 pm
content: Similar "computer" is already available on market few years. Its Eye-Fi SD card with WiFi. Remember reading some websites that people hacked it and got access to its linux OS shell

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2014, 01:04:00 pm
content: Interesting... it's essentially a 486-class core at a much higher clock, with some Pentium features.The hardware reference manual has some curious phrasing that appears to be from the 486-era documentation:QuoteI should go dig out the 486 books and compareThey even mention features included "for DOS compatibility"... good to know Intel is still devoted to PC compatibility!

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2014, 01:38:46 pm
content: Clock to clock, it runs against the Cortex A5. Everywhere they say:"The Quark chips use one tenth of the power of Intel's Atom and measure one fifth of Atom's size". That means 0,6W,. and die size can mean anything from 5 mm2. That is actually not bad. If they price it correctly, the Wifi is not onboard, I would gladly use this for embedded. The core even has a PCI express lane, so connecting it to an FPGA (graphics card?!) is not problemtic.

author: BBQ
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2014, 12:39:11 pm
content: Quote from: Dongulus on January 08, 2014, 06:51:35 pmI found a picture of the back side. 21 or 23 pins it seems. There has to be some kind of connector, cheap hopefully.http://www.techtimes.com/articles/2556/20140109/intel-edison-pc-may-be-smaller-than-an-sd-card-but-it-packs-a-punch.htm

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2014, 08:20:11 pm
content: Quote from: BBQ on January 10, 2014, 12:39:11 pmThe image was much larger than used in the article, they just used HTML to make it smaller, here's what it looks like at full resolution.The spacing looks identical to the SD edge connector. I wonder if they'll have some socket similar to a SIM card mated with SD where the SD pins mate from the edge and the other pins are bent over and mate from underneath?They could probably make an LGA style socket where you flip the top, place the Edison in and clamp it down.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2014, 08:34:49 pm
content: I haven't been able to ascertain if it has an ADC, but so far since I've seen no mention of it, probably not.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 09:18:26 am
content: Probably has USB and likely I2C so adding one will be very easy. Likely there are at least 2 temperature sensors as well, one in the CPU and one in the bridge chip.

author: peter.mitchell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 02:40:25 pm
content: It's not a real product until i can buy it from digikey.Infact, it's not more than hearsay until i can get a bloody datasheet!Also, yeah, i can see this being pretty obnoxious to prototype with because the accessible pins...

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:03:37 pm
content: As it likely will have only PCIE and USB or at least HDMI it will be somewhat usable. Might lead to a whole raft of USB IO devices though at a low cost, with a decent library to drive them.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 08:56:15 pm
content: Quote from: peter.mitchell on January 12, 2014, 02:40:25 pmI'm guessing it will be a vaporware. It will probably fail badly on the market they targeting, and even it would be good for something else, that will not matter. I mean low power consumption is one thing, and charging something every day is nonsense.

author: remixed123
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 01:24:22 am
content: With both BLE and Wifi, it will work well with headless devices for config and setup. Also I'd imagine the use of beacons will be another area for the device.Glenn.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 02:19:24 am
content: I'm thinking Google Glass + MAME. Or tablets with upgradable processors.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 07:31:47 am
content: Quote from: peter.mitchell on January 12, 2014, 02:40:25 pmHere's the datasheets and related docs on the SoC:https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/downloadBody/21828-102-2-25120/329676_QuarkDatasheet.pdfhttps://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/21826-102-2-25118/Intel%20Quark%20Core_DevMan_001.pdfhttp://downloadmirror.intel.com/23197/eng/Quark_BSP_BuildGuide_329687_003.pdf

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 07:42:28 am
content: Quote from: amyk on January 09, 2014, 01:04:00 pmSo we're back to countless hours of tweaking the CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT, again ?

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 12:46:25 am
content: Well, it's finally out.More detailed information here:http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/do-it-yourself/edison.htmlQuoteThey have even part numbers from digikey and mouser in their document on how to make modules.https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/23158-102-3-27299/edison-module_HG_331189-001.pdfand there is plenty of documentation on the main site and in the downloads link of the main site.Also sparkfun has a lot of blocks designed for it:https://www.sparkfun.com/news/1589Verdict too expensive, but if you need that much computing power, then what is $50 for just the edison?Edit: also in the documents they are already mentioning some erratas with the UARTs but apparently you can work around them, didn't dig too much.Pictures:Link to full res of the above image (I resized it to half) 2000x1125 pixels:http://newsroom.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/38-8306-5091/Intel_Edison_with_stamp_nr.jpgFront:Back:With breakout from Intel:With Arduino module from Intel:

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 02:27:54 am
content: I just can't help but feel like they have no idea what they're doing in the embedded market.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 03:01:05 am
content: Sparkfun are selling them on pre-order. They expect 500 in stock next week.https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13024They use a tiny, stackable 70-pin connector to break out all the pins, so you can layer the I/O boards to assemble the desired functionality.Sparkfun already have a bunch of these stackable I/O expander boards for Edison....GPIO:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13038Base (2 USB):https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13045Battery with charger:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/130379DOF:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13033Micro SD:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13041I2C:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13034PWM:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13042ADC:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13046Dual H-bridge:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13043Arduino breakout:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13097FTDI:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13040Console (USB):https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13039OLED:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/13035Intel has been in the embedded market since the invention of the integrated circuit.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 03:31:29 am
content: 70 pin connector sources from the pdf linked before and at the end of this post.DF40C-70DS-0.4V(51) 1.5 mm Mating Stack Heighthttp://www.findchips.com/search/DF40C-70DS-0.4V(51)http://octopart.com/partsearch#!?q=DF40C-70DS-0.4V(51)DF40C(2.0)-70DS-0.4V(51) 2.0 mm Mating Stack Heighthttp://www.findchips.com/search/DF40C(2.0)-70DS-0.4V(51)http://octopart.com/partsearch#!?q=DF40C(2.0)-70DS-0.4V(51)DF40HC(3.0)-70DS-0.4V(51) 3.0 mm Mating Stack Heighthttp://www.findchips.com/search/DF40HC(3.0)-70DS-0.4V(51)http://octopart.com/partsearch#!?q=DF40HC(3.0)-70DS-0.4V(51)Information on what is required to make your own board to mate with the edison:https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/23158-102-3-27299/edison-module_HG_331189-001.pdfEdit: Mating connectors part numbers to make them stackable can be found on DigiKey at least.One thing to take into account is that the GPIOs are at core voltage of 1.8V you if you design or use some of the sparkfun modules you might need to level shift the voltage.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 02:13:56 pm
content: There have been discussions elsewhere about Intel's apparent reluctance to compete effectively in the embedded and low end markets against ARM being caused by not wanting to cannibalize their own market for low end x86 processors. Historically this has been the case with their other processors like the i960.The lack of even a simple display interface or peripheral bus could be an effort at market segmentation to prevent competition with their low end x86 processors. I think that is going to be a problem when the ARM processors they are competing withhavea display interface.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 03:54:37 pm
content: Quote from: SirNick on September 11, 2014, 02:27:54 amthisnot to mention third party usb transceiver and wifi chip on a product made by the BIGGEST BADDEST mofo on the block with most advanced chip fabs on the planet? They couldnt even bother to integrate those on silicon? Its like they arent even trying, this might be just some side projects to tick KPI checkbox somewhere.But Im sure there is a huge untapped market of embedded engineers that need processor booting in legacy real address mode for that sweet SWEET Windows 2.0 compatibility

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 05:09:23 pm
content: Quote from: miguelvp on September 11, 2014, 12:46:25 amAsk them they will say is not too expensive. They made this collaborating with sparkfun, and it is cheaper than most wifi arduino shields. On sparkfun.But that is not the baseline they should have aimed! All the Olimex boards have more functions and speed. The RPi is probably faster and cheaper. Sure, it is not wearable, but this one isnt either. Where is the battery connection? Where is the display connection? Why doest this cost more than a basic android phone or even a crappy tablet?Big players in the embedded market tried selling their platforms -where the development board was cheaper than the chip itself- and still they failed. This should cost 20$ (or similar no-brainer price) and run embedded windows to have any sucess.

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 05:36:41 pm
content: This is poop. Not even means to talk to an FPGA at speed. All that CPU power is useless with no way to move data in/out.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 05:49:19 pm
content: Quote from: marshallh on September 11, 2014, 05:36:41 pmIt does have 40 GPIOs that operate at 1.8V, surely you could connect an FPGA to that if you stick with the 1.8V core voltage.The 70 pin connector qty 1 are under $2.That said, if you want to talk to anything else you'll need level shifters, also I haven't read on how the GPIOs are accessed so not sure on their performance.

author: Rigby
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 06:20:46 pm
content: Quote from: SirNick on September 11, 2014, 02:27:54 amThis seems extremely useful to me. dual core 500MHz x86 Atom CPU? That's amazing, to me.This is not something that is deployed as-is; you build your solution around it. In that way, this is a very impressive bit of kit, in my eyes. Built-in Wi-Fi and BT? I'll take two.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 06:36:49 pm
content: Quote from: Rasz on September 11, 2014, 03:54:37 pmThere may be good reasons for this. The semiconductor process used for the processor apparently only supports 1.8 volt I/O so including an integrated USB physical interface or WiFi may be impossible or at least uneconomical.Quote from: marshallh on September 11, 2014, 05:36:41 pmI had much the same thought. At least the Pi and BeagleBone can natively drive high information content displays. If I am not driving either a display or high performance interfaces, then that limits the usefulness of high performance processing and I can use a cheaper ARM microcontroller.Maybe there is a fast bus hidden in those 40 bits of GPIO but if so, I would have expected them to provide details and none of the expansion boards are taking advantage of such a thing. I wonder how the USB controller interfaces to the processor.

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 06:38:01 pm
content: OK, then in all seriousness, please explain what this thing will be good for? Here's what I see:The hobbyists have plenty of options. AVR, a range of PICs, and entry-level ARM stuff out the wazoo. There's pretty much nothing you can't build, from blinky to your own tablet.So what does it have going for it? It's low power (so is ARM), fast (so is ARM), lots of higher-level I/O potential (like many ARMs), and runs x86 code (OK, unique advantage there -- although rarely all that relevant).Now, the downsides: It's expensive (unlike ARM and AVR and PIC), it isn't quite a PC (unlike any of a half-dozen small-enough form factors), and AFAIK not available as bare ICs to integrate into a final design -- so you're essentially stuck with an overpriced dev board forever.There's such a narrow niche of products that this is well-suited for, I just don't see what market segment it's supposed to be targeting? What does it do that isn't being done, better and cheaper, by any of the existing players?It all just seems like Intel felt left out of the embedded market's explosion, wanted to play too, but insists on bringing their flagship IP into the game -- despite the fact that it's not really all that well suited.

author: Rigby
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 06:42:52 pm
content: there are lots of competing options for anything this platform could provide, agreed. There are lots of solutions (usually) foranyproblem one encounters.I feel that it's less about Intel joining the fray (that's their prerogative) than it is somehow an offensive move in your eyes. Am I right? Probably not.There are lots of solutions that anyone can choose for whatever project they're working on. This is just as valid of a choice as any other, considering that individual people have individual preferences and comfort levels.In short: I don't see a problem with having MORE ways to solve a problem.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 06:55:09 pm
content: You should read this document really:https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/23158-102-3-27299/edison-module_HG_331189-001.pdfSpecially section 4, 5 and 2.Not sure why they disabled all the graphics processing cores (section 2)

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 07:34:18 pm
content: Maybe the edisons use binned Atoms with bad graphics

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 07:43:03 pm
content: I'm not so sure what Intel is trying to do here either, by putting really powerful x86 CPUs in small packages with constrained I/O options. At least give it PCI-E or PCI, even legacy ISA would open up a ton more connectivity possibilities than this...Theother thread here about the Galileois similar: that one is PC-enough to run a Windows variant, but there's really no point in doing that ifadding a video card so you can actually use 'Windows' makes the whole thing look rather silly.

author: SirNick
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 07:45:44 pm
content: Competing options are good, so more power to 'em. But their strategy is just baffling. For one, there's an Arduino board. But, the document Miguel linked to claims the SoC is targeted to the smartphone market.Well, good luck with that.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 07:49:01 pm
content: Surely you don't need a full PCIe video card, these for example will do if they have drivershttp://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?995971_g10ehttp://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?1182700_g10eThere is also mini pci express to mini pci that opens Nvidia boards.

author: Rigby
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 08:31:40 pm
content: Quote from: amyk on September 11, 2014, 07:43:03 pmThere are many production variants of Windows that run headless. This is just another that could, and the Galileo is another that can. Headless Windows is just as valid as headless Linux, especially given just how slim that Galileo variant really is.

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 09:56:04 pm
content: Quote from: Rigby on September 11, 2014, 06:20:46 pmBut why would you pick a dual core 500MHz x86 over a dual core 1GHz ARM ? Sure in theory you might be able to run windows but who would want to?I can only see that Intel refusing to face the fact that they lost as the only reason that they don't make an ARM, it is definitely not technology or production capability that is holding them backafaik they are already making FPGAs with ARM cores for Altera

author: ludzinc
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 10:02:12 pm
content: There is a lot of legacy code for embedded x86 machines out there.That's one reason!

author: Rigby
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 10:29:13 pm
content: Quote from: langwadt on September 11, 2014, 09:56:04 pmBy that logic the only valid platform for embedded development is ARM.Why use ATMega chips when there are dual core ARM chips?If that is not what you're saying please restate it.

author: legacy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 10:39:58 pm
content: Exactly, why everything MUST be ARM ?btw, i like the sparkfun reaction the Intel's new product

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 10:59:40 pm
content: The edison has out of order execution for what is worth.

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 11:04:11 pm
content: Quote from: legacy on September 11, 2014, 10:39:58 pmMake a zillion adapter boards?

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2014, 11:27:17 pm
content: Quote from: Rigby on September 11, 2014, 10:29:13 pmthere's embedded and then there's embeddedATMega would be more in line with something like ARM cortex M0, neither have mmu and can't run regular linux. Apart from being capable of 5v IO it is hard to see why you wouldchoose an ATMega given a clean sheetdual core ARM and now Edison is some where between that and a full blown PC, just like the obvious choice for a desktop is an x86 the obvious choice for some thing just belowthat is an ARM

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:10:49 am
content: If you've got all these GPIOs, there's no reason you can't just bit bang an LVDS interface to an FPGA. The thing has two 500MHz cores plus a 100MHz MCU, it'll be plenty fast.Also, an I right in understanding it has a Mini PCI-e interface?Sent from my Smartphone

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:23:56 am
content: Quote from: timb on September 12, 2014, 12:10:49 amThe Galileo does have a Mini PCI-e not the Edison. The Edison is limited to 50MHz I/O speed as far as I can tell from the doc unless I'm missing something.

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:33:15 am
content: Ugh, fucking Intel... It's like that first Galileo board they released with I2C based GPIO. What were they thinking???Sent from my Smartphone

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:36:51 am
content: No PCIe.Also, GPIO on embedded CPUs is usually a losing scenario. Unless there's DMA provisions you could be stuck with 10mhz toggle rates.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 01:37:45 am
content: Quote from: marshallh on September 12, 2014, 12:36:51 amAnd you are spot on (from their GPIO section):Quote

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 02:28:24 am
content: Quote from: timb on September 12, 2014, 12:10:49 amQuote from: miguelvp on September 12, 2014, 01:37:45 amThis is quite common with microprocessors and microcontrollers that include integrated I/O. Many current ARM implementations running in the 50 to 200 MHz range have bit-bang I/O rates slower than a 20 MHz PIC. Only recently has this improved but their I/O still does not operate at core speed.If you want high throughput I/O, a dedicated function block like a bus interface is needed.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 02:52:55 am
content: At least their DDR3 operates at 400MHz I believe.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 09:11:03 am
content: Quote from: timb on September 12, 2014, 12:10:49 amAt these speeds LVDS is complete overkill...Quote

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 10:40:23 am
content: Damn, that really sucks... What the hell, Intel?I guess I was just expecting it to have *some* means if high speed I/O. Lately my work with ARM chips has been on the higher end; I.e., TI's Sitara.TI really got it right with PRU-ICSS cores in the AM335x series. It's basically two small, fully programmable MCUs, each with independent memory (plus a shared block) and full access to all the I/O on the system. They're programmable from the ARM side, so you can easily swap programs and I/O mapping as you need it!There's a nice project where a guy turned a BeagleBone black into an 8 channel, 100+MHz logic analyzer via the PRUs. They basically read data in real time and use DMA transfers to stick it in memory, where the ARM core can process it when it gets time.Sent from my Smartphone

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 11:58:14 am
content: Quote from: timb on September 12, 2014, 10:40:23 amIf that is really important to you, look at the Zynq chips. Dual core 666MHz ARMplusArtix7-grade FPGA. You could build an LA that goes an order of magnitude faster with an order of magnitude more inputs. With care you could build in decent real-time triggering as well.Avnet does some nice boards (MicroZed, PicoZed), as do other manufacturers. (Typically 1GB SRAM, ethernet, USB, SD card, JTAG, decently grounded I/O, single and differential inputs, multiple voltages)Red Pitaya use Zynqs in their sort-of-vaguely-open-source oscilloscope. Watch out for the poor grounds and limited I/O types on their extension connectors.

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:05:11 pm
content: Oh, I'm not building a LA, I just mentioned it as an example of the usefulness of having a realtime subsystem embedded with your CPU. (Be it an FPGA or PRUs.)It's really a shame, on paper it looks like a nice chip; dual 50MHz cores, plus a 100MHz 486-class MCU, Bluetooth a and WiFi, all wrapped up in a tiny little POP chip.It's sad there's no way to get data in or out of it to take advantage of it!Sent from my Smartphone

author: Rigby
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2014, 12:15:20 pm
content: I just got a DE1-SoC dev kit from Terasic and it has a dual core 800MHz ARM Cortex-A9 w/1GB of RAM and an FPGA with 85k gates all in one neat little platform. It's gonna be fun if I ever get any time to play around.