[HH] Intel Galileo

[Kurt Keville]

Interesting... time to do some fair, controlled comparisons...

On Nov 27, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Tom Metro wrote:

> Federico Lucifredi wrote:
>>> Quark? Is that some new Intel CPU?
>> 
>> Indeed. SoC, to be precise.
>> 
>> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/do-it-yourself/galileo-maker-quark-board.html
> 
>  Introducing the Intel Galileo development board, the first product in
>  a new family of Arduino-compatible development boards featuring Intel
>  architecture.
>  ...
>  This platform provides the ease of Intel architecture development
>  through support for the Microsoft Windows, Mac OS and Linux host
>  operating systems. It also brings the simplicity of the Arduino
>  software integrated development environment (IDE). It's all about
>  delivering Intel performance and quality to the DIY maker
>  community--to support invention and creativity.
> 
> So Arduino compatible? Looking at the evaluation board schematic, which
> includes a block diagram (also appears in Galileo data sheep below):
> https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-21822
> 
> I'm not seeing a microcontroller for the Arduino-compatible
> functionality. Are they implementing it through emulation in the main
> CPU? (Looks like they use I/O expanders hanging off of an I2C bus to
> implement GPIO and PWM.)
> 
> Apparently it is shield compatible with Arduino ("pin-compatible with
> Arduino shields designed for the Uno R3").
> 
> Quoting from the almost 1000 page Quark SoC data sheet:
> https://communities.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/downloadBody/21828-102-2-25120/329676_QuarkDatasheet.pdf
> 
>  o 400 MHz maximum operating frequency
>  o Single processor core
>  o 32-bit processor with 32-bit data bus
>  o Support for IA 32-bit Pentium x86 ISA compatibility
>  o Integrated Floating Point Unit
>  o Low power options to run at half or at quarter of maximum CPU
>  frequency
>  o 32-bit address bus, 32-bit data bus
>  o 16 Kbyte shared instruction and data L1 cache.
>  o Total memory size from 128 Mbyte to 2 Gbyte
>  o On-die Boot ROM provides Hardware Root of Trust (RoT) for firmware
>  authentication
>  o The SoC has two PCI Express root ports, each supporting the PCI
>  Express Base specification Rev 2.0 at a maximum of 2.5 GT/s data
>  transfer rates. Each root port is configured as a x1 link.
>  o 10 and 100 Mbps data transfer rates with RMII interface to
>  communicate with an external Fast Ethernet PHY
>  o 16 GPIO pins provided
>  o 6 GPIO pins remain active during S3 and can be used to wake the
>  system from the Suspend state.
>  o Remaining 10 GPIO pins are powered during S0 state only and are not
>  available in S3
>  o Two 16550 compliant UART controllers [oddly connected to a 3.5mm
>  headphone style jack]
>  o Legacy Bridge Components - Provides hardware blocks required to
>  support legacy PC platform features. The legacy bridge components
>  include the RTC, Interrupt Controllers, Timers and General Purpose
>  I/Os (GPIO).
> 
> 
> That was for the SoC at the heart of the board. More high-level details
> in the Galileo eval board data sheet:
> https://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-21835
> 
>  Galileo is the first Arduino board to provide a mini PCI Express
>  (mPCIe) slot. This slot allows full size and half size (with adapter)
>  mPCIe modules to be connected to the board and also provides an
>  additional USB Host port via the mPCIe slot. Any standard mPCIe module
>  can be connected and used to provide applications such as WiFi,
>  Bluetooth or Cellular connectivity.
> 
> 
> As this board has a "full sized mini-PCI Express slot", which could
> potentially accept a SATA interface supporting port multipliers, I
> wonder if this would make a good NAS controller. (Might be limited by
> the 400 MHz CPU and 100Mb Ethernet.)
> 
> 
> So this seems far more geared towards makers than the MinnowBoard. I
> wonder why they are pursing both?
> 
> What's the ultimate intended market for this SoC? Phones and tablets?
> 
> Have we reached a point where the Arduino hobby market has created
> enough product volume and familiarity among new engineers that Arduinos
> are now looked upon as a viable building block for industrial solutions?
> (I can't see Intel getting all that excited over a low volume "maker"
> product.)
> 
> If you're a vendor of small embedded boards, which have traditionally
> been vastly incompatible with each other, you now have an opportunity to
> produce something that is Arduino compatible, so your buyer already
> largely knows how to develop for it. You just have to sell them on your
> particular integrated peripherals or whatever other hardware advantage
> you bring to the table.
> 
> -Tom
> _______________________________________________
> Hardwarehacking mailing list
> Hardwarehacking at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/hardwarehacking