Still waiting for a Pi 500 and wondering what do this summer? Raspberry Pi enthusiasts unable to wait for the shelves to fill up with Pi-500 stock are starting to get creative. The Raspberry Pi 400 is getting a little long in the tooth these days. Initially launched in 2020, 12 months after the Raspberry Pi 4 made its debut, the computer-in-a-keyboard was a throwback to those halcyon …
The PCIe implementation is half baked, good luck finding NVMe drive that will work with it and then build trust it is not going to randomly crap out.
I couldn't get Ethernet to work reliably with the stock distribution and WiFi dies after few days and requires hard reboot.
I don't have time to troubleshoot that pile of eWaste.
I've a pi 5 with a pimoroni nvme base, and it's quite choosey about the drives it will work with; I've got a WD drive that won't work, apparently because the nvme base can't supply enough power as the drive initialises. Howver, that's not a pi5 problem, it;s a problem with the nvme adapter. (Speaking for myself, I found it a bit annoying, but I went out and bought an el-cheapo nvme drive that was listed as working (I forget the brand) and it's been running home assistant for me 24/7 for a few months now, and it's noticably snappier than running on a pi4 with a USB to SSD adapter. (However, I suspect most of the improvement is the change from the USB interface, rather than the speed improvement from the pi 5)....
N100 and N305 and Intel's most exciting CPUs from the past few years. Similar power draw to ARM CPUs of the same performance but with open drivers, cheaper and with the x86 ecosystem where you can just use a generic ISO to install the OS instead of needing a custom built ROM for each SOC.
No, that's not how it translates because of two things I think you probably already know:
1. On an X64 processor, you don't need custom images of any operating system, and you usually don't need custom kernels either. On a Raspberry Pi, you definitely need custom images, and sometimes you also use custom kernels. On other ARM boards, you always need custom images, and you often use custom kernels. The more "custom" things you have in a build, the more annoying the process can be when something doesn't work as expected. For instance, in-place upgrades from one standard distribution to another are a pretty common test target and generally work well, whereas doing that with images sometimes breaks or just isn't available for a while, and if your kernel has patches which haven't been upstreamed, you may not get to update the kernel at all unless you can find the sources and try to patch it yourself.
2. If you really do want to run Windows, the Raspberry Pi can do it. Probably better now, because the last time I tried, it was on a Pi 3B. Windows 10 didn't like the single gigabyte of RAM and, while it ran, it wasn't fun to use.
If you insist on misstating what people say, you paint yourself, not as someone who understands the distinction and has a good argument, but someone who has a pointless adherence to a product without the knowledge to explain why. There are reasons to favor the Raspberry Pi, but you haven't stated any of them.
"1. On an X64 processor, you don't need custom images of any operating system, and you usually don't need custom kernels either. On a Raspberry Pi, you definitely need custom images, and sometimes you also use custom kernels. On other ARM boards, you always need custom images, and you often use custom kernels."
What you are saying is that all computers should be based on Intel X86 CPUs and no other CPU or architecture is worth it because you have to compile an OS to run on non-X86? Well, I suppose it's a point of view. Not one I agree with, but if it works for you who am I to argue? Apple may not agree with you either. Nor, for that matter the Risc-V crowd. Even MS are building for ARM these days.
"What you are saying is that all computers should be based on Intel X86 CPUs and no other CPU or architecture is worth it because you have to compile an OS to run on non-X86?"
Am I saying that? I don't remember saying that. However, I am pointing out that the original critique: "with the x86 ecosystem where you can just use a generic ISO to install the OS instead of needing a custom built ROM for each SOC" is correct, and not only for Windows.
That is no reason why you can't use something else. It is one point in X86's favor, not the only thing to judge a CPU on, and certainly not a reason to ignore every other architecture whatsoever.
Also, it's not about compiling the OS. Someone has to compile the kernel to run on anything, and that's either me or the distro maker, mostly them in practice. The distinction is just with the ease of portability and modification when standard firmware is involved. The solution to this that I'd like to see is not the destruction of ARM and the use of X64 everywhere, but instead standard firmware used on ARM chips. Neither of those things are going to happen, but if standard firmware for ARM happened, I'd be happy, and if destruction of ARM happened, I'd be unhappy. For one thing, I'd probably have to turn in all my Raspberry Pis for that to happen and I don't want to.
The N100 appears to be a CPU rather than a complete system.
Recommended price is $55 apparently, so I assume everything else required will push that up, and will the resulting system end up being anything like a Pi, or just a low-end PC? Which isn't what the Pi was really ever meant to be.
On top of which, no-one claims that the RPi is the best in pure bang for the buck terms- you've long been able to buy similarly-named Chinese knockoffs if that's your main priority.
The Pi's ecosystem and support is as much a part of the appeal.
Feel free to provide a link or example, which I'd have thought you'd have done anyway.
But I suspect that even if such machines exist, they're not going to fill the same niche as the Pi.
If the N100- based system was closer to what you wanted, good for you. Let us know how you got on with it.
The Pi5 does not need an SSD. They are for boot time and application launch time fetishists. Run stuff from memory (up to 8GB) and leave everything running! Extra storage comes over the network.
ian@azathoth Wed Aug 14 11:29 am ~
$ uptime
11:29:09 up 36 days, 19:38, 2 users, load average: 0.39, 0.16, 0.11
But if your use case includes starting, closing and re-starting the same applications all day, and constant rebooting, you probably wont get it . . .
Nothing needs an SSD; I could boot my laptop off a USB disk and it would still work. However, one of the selling points of the Pi 5 was that you could use an SSD, which is sometimes relevant. One of the cases where it is especially relevant is in a desktop computer, such as the one the article is about. I don't want to hold every application I might want to run in 8 GB of RAM. That wouldn't leave me a lot of RAM for memory-intensive things. Nor do I want to get another computer to provide network storage and run a Pi as a thick client that still has to execute everything. If I'm doing that, I might as well run the computing on the server providing the storage and use an earlier Pi as an actual thin client.
Fortunately for me, I wouldn't have to, because that's one of the main reasons why NVME was added. I don't know how well it works because I haven't bought a Pi 5 (there's a cap somewhere for how many Raspberry Pis you can have before you have a problem, and I might be near it). I wouldn't be surprised to hear that elsergiovolador's summary of reliability is simplistic. However, your response that nobody needs it kind of sounds like you also think it doesn't work and are trying to make excuses for that.
You weren't actually that subtle making your suggestions that, instead of using an SSD, I run stuff from RAM:
"Run stuff from memory (up to 8GB)"
or use network storage:
"Extra storage comes over the network."
So I didn't have any problems comprehending your suggestions. I just didn't like them for use as a desktop.
Maybe you're accusing me of misunderstanding you because of this part:
"However, your response that nobody needs it kind of sounds like you also think it doesn't work and are trying to make excuses for that."
If it was, you might note that I said that it "sounds like", not it "definitely is". I'm pointing out how someone could interpret your comment when they know the benefits of SSDs. I doubt you have any experience testing whether or not the SSDs work because, from your comment, you don't need them for your uses. However, as a response to someone claiming that they don't work, this isn't very convincing and neither is being told that, since you don't need one, I don't need one either. So if that's what you had in mind, it seems the misunderstanding was on the other end.
That certainly looks like a lot of computer for the money, in the advert at least.
So- as I asked previously- how did you get on with that model personally? For someone so dismissive of the RPi based on alleged flaws that you only discovered through personal experience, I assume you'd have judged the N100-based design by the same criteria.
Or did you just pick the cheapest model you could use to make your point from AliExpress and judge it off the spec sheet?
I mean, for someone being so forceful with their opinion regarding the N100, I assume you'd have personal experience of- and be able to recommend- a particular system?
Regardless, no-one claimed that the Raspberry Pi was the dirt-cheapest in pure bang-for-buck terms nor the ideal choice for every use case, and it sounds like it's not what you're looking for personally. That doesn't mean that your choice for what you want it for is the best for everyone else.
I bought one of these (16G, 512G version) for £98 delivered back in mid April. Installed Linux and using it as an experimental machine. Works well for me. Speed is good.
I was looking at a Pi 5 having already got Pis 1-4, but by the time I priced everything up, the N100 was cheaper and there were more options for OS's.
I am not dissing the Pi, but the N100 as a desktop machine seems better. It may be different answer if I was using the I/O or camera.
I recently reread a blog article I wrote about 8 years ago trying to find a single board computer for a semi-embedded system - for various USB-related reasons, long since resolved, a Pi was off the list. I tested and rejected, in order: Beaglebone Black (OS unreliable and maintained by one volunteer), Hummingboard i2ex (overheated until parts fell off board), FitPC3 (power issues), FitPC4 (intermittent failure undiagnosable by manufacturer), Odroid C2 (failed to boot when loaded with too many USB devices). And every one of these of these looked absolutely perfect on paper.
Eventually I bought a Pi3, which was the only one that actually worked, and kept working.
Which eventually brings me to my point: it's not just about the price and it's not just about the hardware. You need a software stack that is well-designed, well-tested and maintained, and on that front the Raspberry Pi foundation has form. There's a reason they've have been adopted by industry.
Intel N100 is much better in almost every metric.
Why bother with RPi
Why don't people like what I like, because it's all about meeeeeeeeeeeeee!
I don't need an N100 thanks, I've already got computers with more powerful Intel x64 processors, several. I don't need another one.
So do what you want, leave me alone.
> There's a certain retro-chic to Barnatt's [custom-built Pi 500]. While the color was apparently chosen to mimic that of the original Amiga 500
I clicked the video link, and the colour looks more like an aged and yellowed Amiga 500, certainly not the light cream/beige it would have been when new.
(It even has the mismatched key colour you see in devices where the plastic in different components has aged at a different rate).
A similar complaint was made about that mini Atari 400 replica that came out recently.
Are people under the impression that's what all those vintage computers looked like originally, or were *meant* to look like? Or do some *want* them to look like degraded 40-year old antiques, even if that's not flattering?
I guess you have to be patient.
I, being more of the Heath Robinson persuasion, opted for a AUD4.00 plastic food storage container with a lid big enough to bolt on a USB SSD and four sawn off plastic masonry plugs as standoffs from the container's bottom for the RPi5. A few holes in the sides for the power and peripherals and cooking with gas.
For pretty you might Velcro® the box to the back of the monitor which I did with an earlier RPi2 version after I discovered the monitor's USB port could supply enough current for the Pi.
I believe the USB SSD isn't that much slower than NVMe HATs and compared to booting off a SD card much, much faster with both Raspberry Pi OS and AlmaLinux 8. The networking wifi, ethernet just worked.
A mechanical keyboard, decent monitor and mouse the system is actually quite usable.
Of course I have prettier, cheaper refurbished x86_64 units that have NVMe, better graphics and much faster but if you want to tinker with something a bit different or with an element of challenge these systems, RPis and their like, are rather attractive.
Horses for courses.
The Raspberry Pi is not a device for tinkerers and hobbyists to do their worst – the "foundation" has made that clear over the years.
They're more interested in the industrial and surveillance markets than hobbyists or education.
No doubt the fan army will downvote this like they have other critical posts but the RPi Foundation lost my trust and that of many others years ago by failing to deliver and hiring a police state fetishist.
I bought the first few models but no longer have any interest in waiting to buy another RPi.
I am on both sides of this fence, (I was booted off the forum during lockdown over the prioritization issue - for basically saying Eben just wanted a yacht - several years before the actual flotation), but I like the reasonably-priced and well-supported M$-free technology.
Have at it, downvoters!
I never found the Pi 400 format compelling, as my Raspberry Pi's which aren't headless are sharing monitors and full size keyboards with other machines, and those that are connected to TVs use mini wireless keyboards with trackpads, so no trailing power or HDMI cables.
What I am lacking is a portable solution, i.e. a Pi 5 with a built in keyboard and small screen I take to where my headless Pis are, to checkout any issues. I am happy to mains power it, but if it had a battery, it would also make a good basic laptop.
You could build something out of it, but I'm not sure how useful it will be. Unless you're willing to use a really small screen, you'll probably make the package bulkier to add a screen large enough that you're willing to use it, and a small USB keyboard is easily obtained but will make internal cable management tricky. I've built similar things out of Pis before, and they worked, but they were always more ungainly than a normal laptop. The footprint of my box was smaller, but it had to be taller to get everything in and wider if I didn't want to trail cables.
Incidentally, also from experience, the only reason you can accomplish your goal is being willing to mains power it. Pis do terribly with batteries and the Pi 5 is the most power hungry of all of them. You can use a USB battery for charging phones which will be relatively cheap and last a while if you get one of the larger and heavier options, but the Pi can't measure its capacity, so if you forget to charge it, expect power to be lost at an inconvenient time. You could instead get one of the battery systems intended for use with a Pi which will get around that in exchange for costing a ton more than the other option and generally being limited to a few 18650s which will give you a few minutes of battery life. I've wanted a Pi-powered laptop since the Pi 2 became available, and they've had them for a while, but battery life is always one of the worst features.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
