DarkSchneider
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:50 am

Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:12 pm

Hi, one of the current uses without doubt for the RPi platform are the servers. IMO the 100Mb Ethernet is far deprecated. RPi needs to be upgraded to Gigabit ethernet ASAP. Having the RPi connected to a gigabit network, and attached to a gigabit NAS device, is a waste to be clamped by the ethernet interface.

It uses an unified USB 2.0 bus, we know, maybe not upgraded to USB 3 because power, OK, but then maybe is time to disattach the ethernet interface from the USB one.

For home server, many times I feel tempted to get a Banana Pi or Odroid, both with gigabit, but the support behind by both foundation and community, I really like more the RPi platform. But sadly it seems to leave out something so usual like a good ethernet interface. Fast Ethernet is more than deprecated since much time ago!

So IMO the gigabit ethernet should be a priority for the RPi 4 or an intermediate RPi 3+.

What do you think about this? Would we have gigabit ethernet on RPi platform soon?

Heater
Posts: 13127
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 3:02 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:19 pm

No.

mikerr
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:46 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:31 pm

Right now you attach a USB gigabit ethernet adaptor and gain better speeds

- around 2x speedup in practice.
Android app - Raspi Card Imager - download and image SD cards - No PC required !

fruitoftheloom
Posts: 20495
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 12:40 pm
Location: Delightful Dorset

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:50 pm

http://www.jeffgeerling.com/blogs/jeff- ... networking

Accept this or buy a product which fulfills YOUR need, AMD Opteron ARM SoC are good for Servers at 10x the price of a RPi 3B:

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... aker-Cello
Retired disgracefully.....

W. H. Heydt
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:36 pm
Location: Vallejo, CA (US)

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:53 pm

ASAP? Not going to happen. The earliest possible upgrade of *anything* on the Pi will be when the "Pi4" shows up and that won't happen until some time in the 2018 to 2019 time frame. The RPF is well aware of the interest in GbE (and USB 3) as people have been asking about it pretty much ever since the launch of the original Model B. Whether the "Pi4B" will have it is one of those things known only to a few...a few who are not talking. By now, either way, it is almost certainly a done deal. The next SoC probably exists and may even be working properly, and even if not, the design has undoubtedly already be fixed in place.

I will have to disagree with fruitoftheloom, however, about the remit for Pi-based servers. Such devices could be very useful in classroom settings, especially with the work going on to support "boot over network".


jahboater
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 6:02 pm

The Odroid-C2 is similarly priced to the Pi3 and has GbE directly connected to the SoC giving over 930Mbps speeds. But the community support, decent software, huge availability of add-ons, etc etc that you get with the Pi outweigh the presence of GbE in my book.

User avatar
mikronauts
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:28 pm
Contact: Website

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 6:19 pm

For you, I agree.

But there are others who need the GigE and USB3 support more than the more active forum.

It totally depends on what a person needs, how much support they need etc.
jahboater wrote:The Odroid-C2 is similarly priced to the Pi3 and has GbE directly connected to the SoC giving over 930Mbps speeds. But the community support, decent software, huge availability of add-ons, etc etc that you get with the Pi outweigh the presence of GbE in my book.
http://Mikronauts.com - home of EZasPi, RoboPi, Pi Rtc Dio and Pi Jumper @Mikronauts on Twitter
Advanced Robotics, I/O expansion and prototyping boards for the Raspberry Pi

DarkSchneider
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:19 pm

Is not only a more active forum. Would the Odroid or Banana Pi OS distributions have all the same packages than Raspbian?
I.e. looking for Odroid we see that for the lastest OS (like the Android one) the C1 is not compatible so you have to get the new one. Recently I updated a RPi2 to the lastest Raspbian and everything is working fine.
Many OS, much software available, good support.

I see a strong support behind the RPi so IMO is sad the waste to be clamped by its ethernet interface. For sync, backups and etc. is bad.

fruitoftheloom
Posts: 20495
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 12:40 pm
Location: Delightful Dorset

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:29 pm

DarkSchneider wrote: Many OS, much software available, good support.

I see a strong support behind the RPi so IMO is sad the waste to be clamped by its ethernet interface. For sync, backups and etc. is bad.
11 million Raspberry Pi's seem to survive with 10/100 Ethernet :shock:

The best Operating System for other "traditional" SBC's is Armbian (Debian Jessie re-spin): https://www.armbian.com

Regards what to buy as an alternative the conscientious is Hardkernel's Oodroid due to quality of product and support: http://www.hardkernel.com/main/main.php

Thanks for passing by, cheerio...................
Retired disgracefully.....

mfa298
Posts: 1387
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:18 am

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:37 pm

DarkSchneider wrote: I.e. looking for Odroid we see that for the lastest OS (like the Android one) the C1 is not compatible so you have to get the new one. Recently I updated a RPi2 to the lastest Raspbian and everything is working fine.
Many OS, much software available, good support.
To some extent that backwards compatibility is what limits what the SoC can do. The Peripherals are limited by the VideoCore GPU so changing to faster interfaces may well mean a major change to the SoC which could break that backwards compatibility. So far the upgrades have only been to the Arm core which is a bolt on extra as far as the SoC is concerned.
DarkSchneider wrote: I see a strong support behind the RPi so IMO is sad the waste to be clamped by its ethernet interface. For sync, backups and etc. is bad.
I'm not sure that there's much point in only upgrading the ethernet interface as you'll still be limited by the SD / USB interfaces.

jahboater
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 8:31 pm

Well I think the best OS for ARM SBC's full stop is Raspbian for various reasons.

But for the Odroid-C2, Ubuntu works, and is 64-bit, but its kernel is 3.14 whereas Raspbian is moving towards 4.9 by the looks of it.

And look at this:

Code: Select all

~* time scp myfile pi@pi:
myfile                                                            100%  378KB 378.0KB/s   00:00    

real	0m0.183s
user	0m0.004s
sys	0m0.004s
~* time scp myfile odroid@odroid:
myfile                                                            100%  378KB 378.0KB/s   00:00    

real	0m0.780s
user	0m0.008s
sys	0m0.000s
I don't understand that as the C2's hardware is fast: CPU (1.7Ghz cortex a-53 in 64-bit mode), disk (eMMC), memory (2GB 1.1Ghz DDR3), and ethernet (GiGe) all are way faster than the Pi but perhaps the old kernel is slower. I don't know.

Other timings I tried: "ping -s 64000 -c 10" also report faster network speeds for the Pi3 (with GigE usb adapter).

The 937Mbps figure I saw for the C2 was in a magazine benchmark run (iperf).

tweak42
Posts: 498
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:16 am
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 8:37 pm

DarkSchneider wrote:Hi, one of the current uses without doubt for the RPi platform are the servers. IMO the 100Mb Ethernet is far deprecated. RPi needs to be upgraded to Gigabit ethernet ASAP. Having the RPi connected to a gigabit network, and attached to a gigabit NAS device, is a waste to be clamped by the ethernet interface.

It uses an unified USB 2.0 bus, we know, maybe not upgraded to USB 3 because power, OK, but then maybe is time to disattach the ethernet interface from the USB one.

For home server, many times I feel tempted to get a Banana Pi or Odroid, both with gigabit, but the support behind by both foundation and community, I really like more the RPi platform. But sadly it seems to leave out something so usual like a good ethernet interface. Fast Ethernet is more than deprecated since much time ago!

So IMO the gigabit ethernet should be a priority for the RPi 4 or an intermediate RPi 3+.

What do you think about this? Would we have gigabit ethernet on RPi platform soon?
Doubtful. Eben has essentially stated upgrades are considered but they have to add value as a teaching-to-code computer or reduce cost so they can cram in some other feature to add more value for $35. I don't foresee implementing a gigabit ethernet interface being either of those.

The number one item I hope for is USB 3.0 but that is reliant on Broadcom manufacturing a SOC with one at the same price as the current SOC.

W. H. Heydt
Posts: 10774
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:36 pm
Location: Vallejo, CA (US)

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:05 pm

tweak42 wrote: The number one item I hope for is USB 3.0 but that is reliant on Broadcom manufacturing a SOC with one at the same price as the current SOC.
Same here. To the best of my--very limited--knowledge, Broadcom is in the throes of moving to a 28nm process node. Since that will entail, essentially, a full redesign effort (or equivalent), I am holding out hope that part of that process will upgrade the VC4 to have USB3 and--with luck--be able to address more than 1GB RAM, even if the memory size of the Pi remains the same with the Pi4 when it arrives. Indeed, I would be very happy with a Pi4B whose only difference from a Pi3B is USB 3.

jahboater
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:05 pm

Here are some timings for various Pi's and a C2.
The C2 does win here but as you can see its only a tiny bit faster than the Pi3 with a USB ethernet adapter, not enough to notice I think. And the Pi3 is going through two switches, the C2 one.

Code: Select all

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi0   // Pi Zero usb ethernet
PING pi0 (192.168.0.112) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=13.0 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=13.0 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=13.2 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=12.9 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=12.9 ms

--- pi0 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9012ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.604/12.845/13.203/0.223 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi2    // Pi2 built-in ethernet
PING pi2 (192.168.0.10) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=11.4 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=11.4 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms

--- pi2 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9005ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 11.440/11.562/11.698/0.084 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 piclk  // Pi3  builtin Wifi
PING piclk (192.168.0.108) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=52.1 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=52.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=63.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=51.7 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=69.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=77.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=55.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=73.0 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=47.8 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=65.9 ms

--- piclk ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 47.848/61.159/77.955/9.862 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi  // Pi3  USB 3.0 GiGe ethernet
PING pi (192.168.0.80) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.69 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=4.25 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=4.27 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=4.25 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=4.27 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=4.22 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=4.24 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=4.18 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=4.23 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=4.23 ms

--- pi ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9012ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.182/4.288/4.693/0.143 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 odroid  //  Odroid-C2 builtin GiGe ethernet
PING odroid (192.168.0.2) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.03 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=3.92 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.92 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=3.93 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=3.90 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=3.93 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=3.91 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=3.88 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=2.54 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1.93 ms

--- odroid ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.931/3.594/4.039/0.692 ms
~* 

Heater
Posts: 13127
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 3:02 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:14 pm

So, like I said, "no".

The Pi was not created to provide cheap media servers or NAS devices or other gadgets.

If it happens to be able to do those things along the way then all well and good.

User avatar
mikronauts
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:28 pm
Contact: Website

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:21 pm

That does not test throughput (ie data transfer speed) just ping time. Useless.

In real life, a C2's gigabit Ethernet is almost 10x the throughput of Pi3's 100Mbit Ethernet, and is almost 5x the throughput of a Pi3 with a good USB3 Gigabit adapter.
jahboater wrote:Here are some timings for various Pi's and a C2.
The C2 does win here but as you can see its only a tiny bit faster than the Pi3 with a USB ethernet adapter, not enough to notice I think. And the Pi3 is going through two switches, the C2 one.

Code: Select all

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi0   // Pi Zero usb ethernet
PING pi0 (192.168.0.112) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=12.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=13.0 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=13.0 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=13.2 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=12.9 ms
64008 bytes from pi0 (192.168.0.112): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=12.9 ms

--- pi0 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9012ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.604/12.845/13.203/0.223 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi2    // Pi2 built-in ethernet
PING pi2 (192.168.0.10) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=11.4 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=11.4 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=11.6 ms
64008 bytes from pi2 (192.168.0.10): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=11.5 ms

--- pi2 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9005ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 11.440/11.562/11.698/0.084 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 piclk  // Pi3  builtin Wifi
PING piclk (192.168.0.108) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=52.1 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=52.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=63.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=51.7 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=69.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=77.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=55.9 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=73.0 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=47.8 ms
64008 bytes from piclk (192.168.0.108): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=65.9 ms

--- piclk ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 47.848/61.159/77.955/9.862 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 pi  // Pi3  USB 3.0 GiGe ethernet
PING pi (192.168.0.80) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.69 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=4.25 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=4.27 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=4.25 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=4.27 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=4.22 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=4.24 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=4.18 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=4.23 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=4.23 ms

--- pi ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9012ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.182/4.288/4.693/0.143 ms

~* ping -c 10 -s 64000 odroid  //  Odroid-C2 builtin GiGe ethernet
PING odroid (192.168.0.2) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.03 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=3.92 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.92 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=3.93 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=3.90 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=3.93 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=3.91 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=3.88 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=2.54 ms
64008 bytes from odroid (192.168.0.2): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1.93 ms

--- odroid ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.931/3.594/4.039/0.692 ms
~* 
http://Mikronauts.com - home of EZasPi, RoboPi, Pi Rtc Dio and Pi Jumper @Mikronauts on Twitter
Advanced Robotics, I/O expansion and prototyping boards for the Raspberry Pi

jahboater
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:52 pm

mikronauts wrote:That does not test throughput (ie data transfer speed) just ping time. Useless.
Its measuring the round trip time for a nearly 64k byte packet - so its moving 128k bytes through the interface in that time (the "-s 64000" is the givaway).
Please - what do you call data transfer ?

Further, its not involving any encryption (like scp does) which unfairly limits the slower processors, and the ICMP echo request packets are bounced at an early stage.

Actually I cant explain the slow C2 result, but all the Pi's results seem reasonable.

User avatar
mikronauts
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:28 pm
Contact: Website

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:07 pm

Data transfer is sending the data as fast as possible.

The ping test is useless as it artificially imposes half duplex (send 64k, wait for response of 64k, with turn-around delay.

Use iperf for actual throughput figures, or copying large files to/from an NFS server.

Re/C2:

Could you be running the tests against a 100Mbps interface? That would limit ping to the same rate for the Pi and the C2.

You did not identify where you were running the tests from, perhaps there is a limit there.
jahboater wrote:
mikronauts wrote:That does not test throughput (ie data transfer speed) just ping time. Useless.
Its measuring the round trip time for a nearly 64k byte packet - so its moving 128k bytes through the interface in that time (the "-s 64000" is the givaway).
Please - what do you call data transfer ?

Further, its not involving any encryption (like scp does) which unfairly limits the slower processors, and the ICMP echo request packets are bounced at an early stage.

Actually I cant explain the slow C2 result, but all the Pi's results seem reasonable.
Last edited by mikronauts on Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://Mikronauts.com - home of EZasPi, RoboPi, Pi Rtc Dio and Pi Jumper @Mikronauts on Twitter
Advanced Robotics, I/O expansion and prototyping boards for the Raspberry Pi

mfa298
Posts: 1387
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:18 am

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:13 pm

jahboater wrote: And look at this:

Code: Select all

~* time scp myfile pi@pi:
myfile                                                            100%  378KB 378.0KB/s   00:00    

real	0m0.183s
user	0m0.004s
sys	0m0.004s
~* time scp myfile odroid@odroid:
myfile                                                            100%  378KB 378.0KB/s   00:00    

real	0m0.780s
user	0m0.008s
sys	0m0.000s
I don't understand that as the C2's hardware is fast: CPU (1.7Ghz cortex a-53 in 64-bit mode), disk (eMMC), memory (2GB 1.1Ghz DDR3), and ethernet (GiGe) all are way faster than the Pi but perhaps the old kernel is slower. I don't know.
That's just testing what's slowest out of Source drives, destination drives, scp, network speeds, and a few other things. You'll also see the effects of things like tcp slow start

jahboater
Posts: 4613
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:15 am

mikronauts wrote:Data transfer is sending the data as fast as possible.

The ping test is useless as it artificially imposes half duplex (send 64k, wait for response of 64k, with turn-around delay.

Code: Select all

~* ping -s 64000 -c2 pi
PING pi (192.168.0.80) 64000(64028) bytes of data.
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.26 ms
64008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=4.26 ms

--- pi ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.260/4.264/4.269/0.065 ms
~* ping -s 32000 -c2 pi
PING pi (192.168.0.80) 32000(32028) bytes of data.
32008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.54 ms
32008 bytes from pi (192.168.0.80): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2.53 ms

--- pi ping statistics ---
2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss, time 1001ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.532/2.537/2.542/0.005 ms
OK its not linear, but the rtt's are clearly dependent on the amount of data transferred.

Anyway, iperf gives the expected results:

Code: Select all

~* iperf -c pi
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to pi, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 192.168.0.6 port 59580 connected with 192.168.0.80 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   380 MBytes   319 Mbits/sec
~* iperf -c odroid
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to odroid, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local 192.168.0.6 port 57197 connected with 192.168.0.2 port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.08 GBytes   925 Mbits/sec

ejolson
Posts: 3438
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:47 am

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:25 am

tweak42 wrote:Doubtful. Eben has essentially stated upgrades are considered but they have to add value as a teaching-to-code computer or reduce cost so they can cram in some other feature to add more value for $35.
While you can teach programming using 8-bit computers, you can't run Mathematica, Minecraft or a web browser. For technology to be relevant in education, it is almost essential for it to be relevant in industry too. The fact that PiNet will work much better with GB networking is also significant, as this is used in some schools to set up computing labs with Pi computers.

User avatar
CarlRJ
Posts: 599
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 4:00 am
Location: San Diego, California

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:16 am

When you come up with an idea that's so obviously great that you can't understand why nobody's thought of it before, it's usually worthwhile to look around a bit... to see if someone has already thought of it, before working up an impassioned plea in support of your great idea. The idea of more/better IO for the Pi comes up here constantly; there are plenty of posts here asking for Gigabit Ethernet, SATA interfaces, and/or USB3 ports. (And on the topic, 100 Mbit/s Ethernet is no longer the new shiny, but it's hardly deprecated.)

The Raspberry Pi is inherently IO bandwidth limited because the only practical path out of the SoC is a single USB2 port. The A/A+ and Zero run that single USB2 port directly to the edge of the board. The B-variants add a single additional chip that provides a 5-port USB2 hub, with one of the ports used by an on-chip Ethernet NIC (thus, 4 USB2 ports and Ethernet to the edge of the board, but still chained off the single USB2 path coming out of the SoC).

Upgrading the corner of the chip that was a single core ARM to be a newer/faster quad core ARM (the fundamental change from the B/B+/A/A+/Zero to the 2B and then the 3B) took some work. Note that basically none of the IO changed, just the ARM core(s). Adding any additional IO involves substantially more work. (They sort of pulled the last possible magic trick with the 3B, attaching WiFi/Bluetooth to spare SDIO and UART interfaces, IIRC - not really fast IO, but it made the 3B much more connectable.)

Any real next step involves redoing much of the design for the SoC that basically is the Pi, and that will be both expensive and time consuming. There is no "but just add..." GigE, or SATA, or USB3. Presumably the Foundation is somewhere along the long path between thinking about the next SoC design and actually building it. It'll arrive eventually, but don't hold your breath.

As well, I don't think the Foundation is particularly looking to compete against other players in the consumer market. The Wikipedia page for the Pi summarizes it nicely, saying it's "developed in the United Kingdom by the Raspberry Pi Foundation to promote the teaching of basic computer science in schools and in developing countries." Their goal is for it to be "enough" computer for those teaching purposes, and for it to be really inexpensive, to make it affordable for as many places of those places as possible. That this little single board computer works so well for hobbyists is a happy accident. We should be happy that we have it, and be constantly looking for ways to make the existing hardware do new interesting things.

When people start saying, "yeah, but schools need high-bandwidth servers too"... sure, yes, but that school server could easily be a repurposed five year old desktop PC, with all sorts of high speed IO bandwidth available - that isn't a use case that the Pi has to fill.

So look forward to new capabilities in the nebulous future, but be joyful for what we have now - it's a terrific little machine, with some quite clear limitations. If your needs exceed its capabilities, the obvious answer, near term, is to simply use other more capable hardware.

DarkSchneider
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 10:50 am

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:45 am

Could be that the original purpose was educational, but the reality is that it has come much further. I think there are more Pi distributed used for non-educational than for educational purposes.
Looking at its reception, I think is an excellent oportunity to get something near to an alternative computing solution.
So the original purpose can be one, but if you get an unexpected (good) reception, why not to take advantage of it? IMO is a waste not doing it.
We have alternatives, machines with a similar SoC, but different. Each one with its own software, so let's go reinstalling all the software again because the Raspian already in SD card is not valid, and etc. If sometime I change to another one then repeat the same.
It is a good chance to get a multi-purpose unified platform. And we already know that even in the RPi platform can be alternatives for educational, if the price is the problem. We have revision like the RPi B+ (better than the original) for or the RPi Zero to be cheaper.

Here a practical example RPi vs Banana (Gbit), both the original one, the RPi already get its limit (the same than for RPi2 or 3) and for the Banana look at the transfer for SATA HDD to get the network limit:
Image

For anyone releasing something that gets a much greater reception than expected originally, there could be someone not taking advantage of it?
It is even used for cluster computing, that for server purposes is very reliable (a service per machine easily replaceable).
Image

jamesh
Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Posts: 23404
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Gigabit Ethernet at this stage?

Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:56 am

DarkSchneider wrote:Could be that the original purpose was educational, but the reality is that it has come much further. I think there are more Pi distributed used for non-educational than for educational purposes.
Looking at its reception, I think is an excellent oportunity to get something near to an alternative computing solution.
The RPF's charity status is dependent on it's educational purpose - that means education IS the main purpose, what ever else the Pi is used for.

Think of the cost. If it takes £3M pounds to add gig ethernet is that valid? I suspect it would cost at least that, probably considerably more. Is that worth it for the education side? It's >3M not spent on education for one thing. It's not a question of taking advantage of the good reception (11M sold is pretty good), but ensuring the charities money is spent wisely, and according to the aims of the foundation. If there is a charitable business case to get it done, then great, it will might get done. But then there is the time aspect - probably three years of work? As someone who worked on the VC4 chip I know its is NOT an easy job to add gig Ethernet, or indeed add anything at all!

I still have a 100T network at home. Seems to work fine.
Principal Software Engineer at Raspberry Pi (Trading) Ltd.
Contrary to popular belief, humorous signatures are allowed. Here's an example...
"My grief counseller just died, luckily, he was so good, I didn't care."

Return to “General discussion”