www.raspberrypi.com | 520: Web server is returning an unknown error
www.raspberrypi.com
  • Broadcom BCM2712 2.4GHz quad-core 64-bit Arm Cortex-A76 CPU, with cryptography extensions, 512KB per-core L2 caches and a 2MB shared L3 cache
  • VideoCore VII GPU, supporting OpenGL ES 3.1, Vulkan 1.2
  • Dual 4Kp60 HDMI® display output with HDR support 4Kp60 HEVC decoder
  • LPDDR4X-4267 SDRAM (4GB and 8GB SKUs available at launch)
  • Dual-band 802.11ac Wi-Fi®
  • Bluetooth 5.0 / Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE)
  • microSD card slot, with support for high-speed SDR104 mode
  • 2 × USB 3.0 ports, supporting simultaneous 5Gbps operation
  • 2 × USB 2.0 ports
  • Gigabit Ethernet, with PoE+ support (requires separate PoE+ HAT)
  • 2 × 4-lane MIPI camera/display transceivers
  • PCIe 2.0 x1 interface for fast peripherals (requires separate M.2 HAT or other adapter)
  • 5V/5A DC power via USB-C, with Power Delivery support
  • Raspberry Pi standard 40-pin header
  • Real-time clock (RTC), powered from external battery
  • Power button
  • Bonehead@kbin.social
    1·
    1 year ago

    There were reports that many of the original Pine64 Kickstarter boards had this bootloop problem. While I understand this was one of there first products, I still don’t want to sink money into something when better and more stable options are available.

    • somedaysoon@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      There were reports that many of the original Pine64 Kickstarter boards had this bootloop problem.

      If that’s true then they fixed any quality issues on subsequent boards, so you questioning the stability and quality of the current boards is no longer substantiated… but I’m curious what you would consider a more stable option? Surely not anything from the Pi Foundation, as they have had numerous issues with the PSU to USB booting to many others problems as recent with their last major board, the Pi4, which I find unacceptable in my opinion.

      • Bonehead@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        If that’s true then they fixed any quality issues on subsequent boards, so you questioning the stability and quality of the current boards is no longer substantiated

        Meanwhile, anyone that supported their Kickstarter got screwed.

        but I’m curious what you would consider a more stable option?

        Why would I bother when you’re obviously just going to pick it apart, just like you did with the Pi immediately after asking that question. You like the Pine64, great. Good luck with that. I won’t touch them with a 10 foot pole. That’s my opinion. Have a nice day.

        • somedaysoon@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          Why would I bother when you’re obviously just going to pick it apart

          No, I’m going to look at the actual reliability and quality of the boards objectively. I’m questioning your opinion, and asking you about it, and you’re getting offended and insecure by basic questioning and fact checking.

          The fact is that Pine64 boards have been better than Pi boards since the Pi3 when the Rock64 had a real gigabit port, unlike the Pi3 (even though they lied and said it did)… and could boot from eMMC, unlike the Pi3. I still can’t believe people actually run an OS on sdcards. And it was faster. The separation grew drastically on the launch of the Rockpro64, which launched an entire year prior to the Pi4, could boot from USB right away, could boot from eMMC, had a PCIe slot instead of a stupid hat system so it could take legit SATA cards and NIC cards on it. And it had a faster CPU and was cheaper. And did I say, launched an entire year prior. Let me put that into perspective, because the Pi4 struggled with USB booting for an entire year after launching. So you could have better boot options, better hdd interfacing, better mainline Linux support, and a faster CPU for a full two years before Pi4 even got USB booting and fixed their shitty PSUs.

          Be objective. In what way am I wrong? How am I being unfair?