Pandora 2 specifications and price

[Null]

I dont want to make fun of anyone but how do they explain dinosaurs? seriously?

http://m.christiancourier.com/articles/93-dinosaurs-and-the-bible

 

[Grench]

8GB RAM implies a 64bit machine. Likely quad core 2Ghz or so. Likely USB 3.0. Likely 1080p 3d graphics capable with several hundred MB of graphics ram - maybe shared from the 8GB.

Now you're totally leaving reality. There's no 64-bit SoC suitable for something with the power budget of Pandora. The only hope would be if Intel decides to release a < 1W Atom that doesn't have x86-64 fused off. Even Medfield does not apply. For OPT to hit a late 2013 release date they'll probably have to obtain at least engineering samples by early next year at the very latest. You won't see mobile SoCs with ARM64 or MIPS64 or whatever in that timeframe.

Not a bit.


CraigIX stated in another message that he was debating between 4GB or 8GB of RAM for this device.


To be able to address 8GB of RAM you fairly well need a 48bit or wider data stream.


Since nobody makes 48bit computers - 64bit is the next logical conclusion.


Not dreaming, just extrapolation.

It may or may not have USB 3. It probably won't have dedicated VRAM, definitely not several hundred MB worth. The graphics, while maybe "1080p capable" on some level, will not surpass XBox 360 and PS3 (which are generally NOT considered 1080p capable)

CraigIX has stated previously that this device must be the most powerful handheld ever. USB 3 is now becoming commonplace on new notebooks and devices. If it doesn't have USB 3.0 out the back, then it isn't going to be all that powerful in 2014, now is it?

With a quad core CPU, 8GB RAM and a fast USB 3.0 controller to the SD media, this thing should be able to emulate a Wii, Playstation and even an XBox (Pentium III).

Having more than oh, 1GB of RAM (probably much less really) doesn't help you with emulating those consoles. Having a USB 3 driven SD controller does not help you emulate those consoles. Having four cores over two only minimally helps you emulate those consoles. Having 2GHz 32nm or 28nm processor that is low power enough to run in Pandora 2's power budget will not give you enough single threaded performance to emulate those consoles at full speed.


And let me add that I definitely hope that OPT does not follow your desire to put a USB 3 SD card reader on the PCB instead of using the SoC's native SD capabilities. Hopefully the SoC itself will have fast enough SD access to make this moot, then everyone will be happy and we won't have to put up with your complaints. But now that it's confirmed that all the SD cards will be micro I think we're going to be in for one hell of a lot..


By the way, chances are that an external USB 3 SD card reader would have a comparable amount of PCB space and routing requirements as a microSD slot (more for your USB 3 hub). So you're intent on saying there's no room for the internal microSD slot but there is for the USB 3 card reader. You'll have to ask yourself what's likely to be more desired by Pandora's current clientele - internal boot microSD + two external SD (sorry, microSD, Craig's call I guess!) or two USB 3 speed SD (sorry, microSD!!).

If the device is going to have USB 3.0 out the back via my above statements, then adding an internalized hub on the circuit board may or may not add more room than bringing direct ports off of the SoC. The fact that an internalized USB hub could handle the USB port off the back, the card slots, the networking adapters (BT & 802.11), keyboard & nub inputs, and potentially the video output as well - wouldn't that potentially replace all but one of those connections to the SoC while giving a system bandwidth of roughly 5GB/sec to any one of them talking to the CPU while -simplifying- the motherboard layout immensely? It's an idea I put out there in this DREAMERS thread. They don't HAVE to follow it - but it is, in my opinion, a rather unique and potentially very effective way to simplify the entire unit.

Right now the Pandora is similar to the Zenith Z-note 486/25 I used to use in DOS emulation speed.

Now we're talking about possibly emulating something in the range of Pentium III to Pentium IV.

You're seriously going way off the deep end here.


Something in the range of Pentium 3 to Pentium 4 is going to be like, 800MHz Pentium 3. That's got to be about 50 times faster than your 25MHz 486. I am not fucking with you. Pandora 2 will not have 50 times the CPU capability of Pandora 1. Not even if you add the performance of every last core together, which would do a fat load of nothing when talking about emulating late 90s PCs that only had one core.


Pandora 2 will probably have something around a 2GHz Cortex-A15. That will be oh, maybe 1.8x more powerful per clock than Cortex-A8, at 2x the clock, gives you about 3.6x the CPU power per core. That is, IF the performance of the memory subsystem doesn't screw you; don't underestimate the ability for SoC vendors today to come out with awful memory subsystems. And hope that it doesn't hit any of the Cortex-A15's glass jaws, like its two way set associative L1 cache.

Similar to a VirtualBox session on an X86 Linux machine, we would be able to have multiple ARM VMs running in the background that we can toggle in and out. Having one with an iPod, one with an Android, and more running in VM sessions simultaneously should be hardware-possible. Yes, that would require the software to catch up - which it won't do without a platform to do it on.

That'll require the software to catch up, which it won't do without the platform. Good argument! Not like this sort of software would ever be developed for markets that'll use the same SoCs but sells hundreds of times the volume, especially now that they're incorporating keyboard docks and USB for gamepads and stuff.


The very thought of even emulating iOS on a non-Apple platform has all sorts of technical obstacles that goes far beyond the level of hardware virtualization it has. But if it happens I can all but guarantee that it'll happen for Android first (where if it can sell without Apple shutting it down it'll make millions)

This opens huge capabilities - that are going to require the fast CPU, big RAM, big fast storage, high resolution screen and high speed networking - all in a tiny package that fits in your pocket.

Your argument is suddenly feeling awfully circular.

Given the 'specs' that have so far been implied - this sounds like a whole new frontier in hand held computing. I'm excited just to have a ring side seat!

I'd be pretty excited too if I had your imagination and disconnection from reality!

You're neglecting the realities of computing beyond the CPU.


In the era of a 486, most hard disks were 40-160MB and transferred data in the 256K-2MB/sec range. The RAM was particularly slow by today's standard too. The 486 CPU was, most of the time, waiting on it's RAM and disk to catch up.


Fast forward to the Pandora. When doing DOS emulation, it isn't the sub-systems we're waiting on - it's the CPU and the fact that it isn't JUST handling that one aspect of things. That single core is maintaining the primary OS (Angstrom), an emulation layer (DosBox), and the program we're running - AND whatever else we have running in the background on the main device. Three or more things on one core - each in contention for CPU time on it's own threads.


Fast forward to the hypothetical Pandora II with a wider data path (64bit as above) and big RAM and four cores running 2Ghz (or more). Yes, DosBox itself is only going to get one of those cores at any given time, but it's easily going to get 100% of a core, not just portions of one. DosBox will also be, in theory, recompiled to run under the 64bit host OS. It will no longer have to chunk/thunk down 32bit DOS code to push it through to the CPU with it's wrappers around it - it could insert that directly into the 64bit processing stream with wrappers and all. So, from DOSBox's perspective, we have, roughly, a 7X gain in CPU speed itself (getting a whole 2Ghz core instead of 1/2 or less of a 600Mhz core). With the wider data path - that actually doubles it again since there is no chunk/thunk required. So, 14X. Next look at the ecosystem it runs in. Instead of 20MB/sec reads from SD we could run DOSBox itself - and it's drive contents from RAM. CraigIX said dual channel DDR3 is being considered. That is roughly 24GB/sec - or roughly 1000 times the speed of the current Pandora's SD slots. I'd say that's worth a 'double' on the performance guide for what can/can't be played in this example.


So, we're up to having DOSBox on the Pandora II exhibit roughtly 28 times the performance that it does now.


After searching I found a benchmark that has crossed through the history of CPUs. We could even run it on the current Pandora as native, under DosBox, under Amiga, etc if someone is really really bored.


http://field.hypermart.net/CPU/cpu.htm


Using a 486/33 (which is what the chart has a spec for and is still roughly right for the current Pandora's DosBox), it would run this test in roughly 100 seconds.


Assuming I'm even remotely on track for my above assumptions, the Pandora II would be able to run the test in roughly 100/28 = 4.16 seconds.


Cross referencing back to the chart this makes my above assumptions/estimations/wildassguesses place the Pandora II as roughly equivalent to a 200Mhz Intel Pentium Pro. I used to play the original Half Life on a 180Mhz Pentium Pro.


So - not quite a P3 under this guestimate. PIII did the test in 1.45 seconds, So I originally estimated high by 2.25X too high.


Still, 28X performance leap sounds huge - but all things considered, I think that is going to be closer to reality than 2-4X faster.


As far as running an Android or iPad tablet OS inside an emulation layer - we're already doing that with Android. The CPUs are the same. In my humble opinion it's just a matter of time before we have a VM environment for Apple inside Android - or Android inside Apple - or since it's all ARM code running on nearly the same CPUs, both inside a Pandora II. That feat is a lot easier to predict than emulating a P-III. When dealing with a multi-core CPU and being able to give one to the system and two or more virtual cors to each of the running VMs - it starts to make good sense.


Regardless of where you or I guestimate the performance to fall out, it should be safe to say that the Pandora 2 should knock the socks off of the Pandora I and eat it's supper while the Pandora I cowers in the corner of it's younger sibling.

 

[Exophase]

Because that is the way it has always been. Finding a reviewer's sample article about a 16GB microSDXC card getting similar performance to full sized 128GB SDXC cards that have been on the market nearly a year does not support your argument of same-same Grench is insane.

I asked him why he thinks that, not you. I don't really learn anything from hearing you insist that always has been == always will be for the millionth time.

The Pandora is not just a game console. You may not have any use for cards larger than 32GB - many of us do.

You keep bringing this back to what you think I want, when I've never spoken based on my personal desires. And this defense is irrelevant, because I've specified that I think one internal boot microSD plus two external full sized SD is a good design, while you want one internal full SD and one external. Nowhere have I argued for nothing but microSD, but since that's what Craig wants I guess it's all moot.


I'm surprised that you'd actually go from 100% sure to buy it to zero interest based on microSD over SD. Are you used to getting every last thing you want? Is Pandora flawless in your eyes?


Your assertion that they'll lose a big chunk of buyers over this interests me. Let's find out.

 

[Grench]

Because that is the way it has always been. Finding a reviewer's sample article about a 16GB microSDXC card getting similar performance to full sized 128GB SDXC cards that have been on the market nearly a year does not support your argument of same-same Grench is insane.

I asked him why he thinks that, not you. I don't really learn anything from hearing you insist that always has been == always will be for the millionth time.

And yet you have given absolutely no evidence to support your opinion that microSDXC is as good as SDXC without comparing new microSDXC vs old SDXC hardware.

The Pandora is not just a game console. You may not have any use for cards larger than 32GB - many of us do.

You keep bringing this back to what you think I want, when I've never spoken based on my personal desires. And this defense is irrelevant, because I've specified that I think one internal boot microSD plus two external full sized SD is a good design, while you want one internal full SD and one external. Nowhere have I argued for nothing but microSD, but since that's what Craig wants I guess it's all moot.

Sad, isn't it? This may have all been for nothing.

I'm surprised that you'd actually go from 100% sure to buy it to zero interest based on microSD over SD. Are you used to getting every last thing you want? Is Pandora flawless in your eyes?

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

Your assertion that they'll lose a big chunk of buyers over this interests me. Let's find out.

Your poll is flawed. Instead of asking if they would 'not buy' one configuration vs another, it is more appropriate to ask what configurations they would find acceptable. It may even be one you and I have not thought of.

For example, I could live in a world with one internal microSDXC and two exposed SDXC slots - I would simply have no use for the microSD and would consider it to be wasted space and cost. However, if the machine has nothing BUT microSD - then it just lost it's purpose to me.


So, lets find out what people really find as acceptable vs non-acceptable outcomes by giving them a lot more options. http://boards.openpandora.org/index.php?/topic/9153-microsdxc-sdxc-and-mixed-configurations/

 

[Null]

ITT

 

[Exophase]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

So basically you had it in your mind that Pandora 2 would emulate PS2, XBox, Wii, a Pentium 3 to Pentium 4 level PC, and simultaneously virtualize a bunch of ARM devices including iPhones.


But substitute SD for microSD and suddenly it's just another PSP or Nintendo game console.

 

[Grench]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

So basically you had it in your mind that Pandora 2 would emulate PS2, XBox, Wii, a Pentium 3 to Pentium 4 level PC, and simultaneously virtualize a bunch of ARM devices including iPhones.


But substitute SD for microSD and suddenly it's just another PSP or Nintendo game console.

LOL - twist all you like. If the Pandora 2 still does all of those things - I'll still be thrilled to see it do so. But if it's strictly a microSD device, I would be better off just using the old Pandora as I require full sized SD slots in my particular use scenario. I can't justify a $700 handheld that I can't manipulate, filter, move and copy SD card data with. The rest of it is nice and all, but without full sized SD slots, it becomes just another game machine to me.


For those of you it will work for - more power to you. At that point I'll be looking elsewhere for my next device.

 

[WizardStan]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

What? Seriously, what? Are you listening to yourself? If it has 1 external full sized SD card and one internal full sized SD card, it is perfect, but if it has two external full sized SD cards and one additional internal microSD card it is for all intents and purposes just another PSP? I can't even begin to fathom what twist of logic leads to this.

 

[Aurekana]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

What? Seriously, what? Are you listening to yourself? If it has 1 external full sized SD card and one internal full sized SD card, it is perfect, but if it has two external full sized SD cards and one additional internal microSD card it is for all intents and purposes just another PSP? I can't even begin to fathom what twist of logic leads to this.

Just from scanning the thread it looks as though he wants at least one full-SD card slot wherever it is on the device, and was only considering not buying it if it ONLY had microSD.

 

[Nintendo]

We really need a lols forum section.

 

[WizardStan]

Just from scanning the thread it looks as though he wants at least one full-SD card slot wherever it is on the device, and was only considering not buying it if it ONLY had microSD.

He's been arguing with Exophase for quite some time, and even myself recently, that a single external full SD slot and internal full SDXC slot is superior to two external full SD slots and an internal microSD slot. He's made his case that one of the full sized SD slots simply be moved internally, and Exophase and I have disagreed, saying that two external full sized SD slots is preferable, and in that case an internal SD slot can afford to be the more cost effective microSD without sacrificing functionality to those like Grench that care greatly for more speed than most are likely to need: by simply using one of the high speed external slots, he could ignore the "slow" microSD slot entirely and be no worse off than if he had his way of having only a single external SD slot. This debate has been going on for days, long before Craig intimated that the future of Pandora would be all microSD. Craig's statement basically makes all arguments moot, but it still serves as an interesting theoretical exercise: Grench wants something that makes sense in his head, anything else is strictly inferior; Exophase and I have both given reasons why we believe his idea is flawed from two completely different perspectives, and provided a compromise that would result in maximum benefit for everyone. Grench has rejected that compromise, returning to a stance of my-way-or-nothing. This is now a mental exercise, trying to understand Grench's position, because it makes no sense to me but he is so adamant about it that I can only think that there must be some kind of logic to it that he simply hasn't explained very well yet: if that's the case, that he really does have a very good argument that we're just not understanding, then it is important that we work to understand it, otherwise we could miss out on something that truly is superior.

 

[Nintendo]

Why can't we all just agree to disagree?

 

[WizardStan]

Why can't we all just agree to disagree?

Agreeing to disagree is what you do when your opinions differ. If you think something is too hot and I think it is too cold, well I guess we can agree to disagree.


If you say the light is red and I use a detector to measure the wavelength of the light coming out of it at 480nm, that isn't an opinion we can disagree upon: you are wrong, that light is blue.

 

[Nintendo]

What I meant was...just leave it, because there's no way to meet in the middle with all this.

 

[Exophase]

LOL - twist all you like. If the Pandora 2 still does all of those things - I'll still be thrilled to see it do so. But if it's strictly a microSD device, I would be better off just using the old Pandora as I require full sized SD slots in my particular use scenario. I can't justify a $700 handheld that I can't manipulate, filter, move and copy SD card data with. The rest of it is nice and all, but without full sized SD slots, it becomes just another game machine to me.

What am I twisting exactly? You made a post where you expect Pandora 2 to be capable of doing all of those things. None of that is even remotely contingent on having full SD support. I just find it amazing that you equate all of those things with mere Sony or Nintendo handheld console features, especially when those were the whole focus of your post.


Now of course Pandora 2 probably won't be able to do all (or possibly even any) of those things, but that's not really pertinent.


If you must have full SD for the device to be a reasonable purchase for you than so be it, but saying that it becomes another PSP or whatever is using loaded language.. are you really going to tell us that the ability to mess around with full SDs is the ONLY thing you do on Pandora (or would do on Pandora 2) that you can't as easily do on one of the commercially locked handhelds?

 

[Null]

There's only one way to sort this out.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Rl46Dpy-P4?feature=oembed

 

[Askarus]

You keep bringing this back to what you think I want, when I've never spoken based on my personal desires. And this defense is irrelevant, because I've specified that I think one internal boot microSD plus two external full sized SD is a good design, while you want one internal full SD and one external. Nowhere have I argued for nothing but microSD, but since that's what Craig wants I guess it's all moot.

I agree with this.


I'd rather prefere a (maybe slower) micro SD for booting but 2 full SD slots outside.


Pandora 2 can emulate Dreamcast, PSP, NDs and maybe PS2 and Gamecube (please don't start discussing again that Gamecube and PS2 are unrelistic).


These higer systems need much more space for theire games than a N64 does.


In my left slot I have a 64 GB SD and it's too smal for me because of PSX games. Imagine what happens if Dreamcast is playable, too.


Lots of more data is required.


Better quality of TV-output means better high res films. That also means more storage on SD is used.


One external SD is much to less.


We need as many GB as we can get.


Even if booting might be a little slower with micro SD it's nececarry (in my point of view) to have two "mobile" SD cards. It's more freedome for the useer, too. I can't imagine what woulld happen if I only had one SD on my Pandora.


What I want to say: What's inside (micro or normal) doesn't matter. The important fact is that we need 2 fast and full siced SD outside.

 

[urisma]

Pandora 2 can emulate Dreamcast, PSP, NDs and maybe PS2 and Gamecube (please don't start discussing again that Gamecube and PS2 are unrelistic).

I hate to be that guy, but...


No. It can't. It might have the capability hardware wise (which it probably doesn't, at least for GC and PS2, using traditional emulation methods) , but without the software it doesn't mean shit. Currently, the only one of these with any ARM development is nullDCE (that I'm aware of, anyway). And PS2 and gamecube are unrealistic.


As per SD cards, 1 internal microSD and 2 external full sized would be the best option, but 3 SD slots takes a fair amount of board space, which is in high demand for a portable like the Pandora. I personally could get by with one slot and a nice 64 gigs of storage space, since I don't really care if I can only carry my favorite 30 PSX games along with full N64 / SNES / NES / GB / GBA rom sets rather than my 100 favorite PSX games.

 

[Grench]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

What? Seriously, what? Are you listening to yourself? If it has 1 external full sized SD card and one internal full sized SD card, it is perfect, but if it has two external full sized SD cards and one additional internal microSD card it is for all intents and purposes just another PSP? I can't even begin to fathom what twist of logic leads to this.

You


are


intentionally


mixing


two


different


arguments.


I NEVER said that, "if it has two external full sized SD cards and one additional internal microSD card it is for all intents and purposes just another PSP"


1. The device is worthless to me if it has NO full size SD slots. In that scenario I would not be able to justify it's purchase - it has lost a key feature -to me-. In this case with NO full size SD slots - it effectively turns the device into a paper weight for my primary use. In THIS scenario with no full sized SD slots, it may as well be just another PSP.


2. In my ideal world I would have two user facing full sized SD slots AND one internal full sized SD slot.


3. if 2. is not possible to volume constraints, I would choose to have one external SD and one internal SD over two external SD and one internal microSD - because microSD is a waste of space. I'm not the only one who thinks microSD is for the birds. It's fragile, slow, lower in capabilities in every way possible but physical size.


4. If it had an internal microSD and two external full sized SD, I'd probably still buy it - I'd just be annoyed that they crapped on their own device by sadling it with a crippled slot.


5. If it had an internal microSD and only one external full sized SD, I'd probably not buy it.


6. If it had an internal full sized SD and an external full sized SD - that's fine too if the volume savings makes a difference.


I want a device where it is convenient to boot from a full sized SD card while leaving at least one exterior accessible full sized SD card that I can swap data through. I want to be able to stage the contents of several SD cards worth of photos and videos to the static/boot card (need a BIG card there) so I can collect them, make a properly sorted album and connect to my server via SSHFS to send up the contents of that structure to my server. I can and do use my current Pandora this way.


If you put a microSD card into that equation - it kills that functionality. I can't make the slot dimensions bigger - and I can't get a 128GB microSD to use as that primary landing and sort drive.


Slot to slot copy speed is important. Single card/slot GB is important and media cost is important. Card durability with multiple insertions is VERY important. microSD fails on all accounts.

 

[Grench]

My use scenario that allows me to personally justify owning a high $$$ handheld revolves around it's ability to handle full sized SD media. Remove that capability, and for all of my purposes you have just created another PSP or Nintendo handheld game console. Other's use scenarios will vary.

What? Seriously, what? Are you listening to yourself? If it has 1 external full sized SD card and one internal full sized SD card, it is perfect, but if it has two external full sized SD cards and one additional internal microSD card it is for all intents and purposes just another PSP? I can't even begin to fathom what twist of logic leads to this.

Just from scanning the thread it looks as though he wants at least one full-SD card slot wherever it is on the device, and was only considering not buying it if it ONLY had microSD.

Thank you - you got most of it. Except that I need TWO full sized SD because I need a large target drive as well as one I can swap full sized SD cards out of. microSD fails on every account that matters.