That's a 2013 CPU. Pretty ancient, likely no modern codec hardware support. Also look like it hits a 208 on geekbench 5 single treaded, where a raspi 5 is getting 574. Multi treaded, you have the above at 708, versus the Raspi 5's 1608.

So just off the cuff on the cpu, the +$30 raspi5 has 3x single thread speed, and 2x multithread speed. The PI does even better on newer tests. That doesnt take into account the large improvements to RAM either that you get going from decade old ddr3 to ddr4, or wifi 5, or being able to add an nvme, etc. Looks to me that youre getting a lot more computer in a $60 raspi5 than this $30 sff.

Im betting this $30 sff stacks up better against a $30 raspi 4, in which case, yeah, that tracks.

[–] PlasterAnalyst@kbin.social 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's pretty rare to have high performance requirements in an embedded application. Many people load one project onto their pi and for most cases it's overkill. If you need modern codecs, then buy a streaming box. If you want a nas, then buy a nas. You also need to factor in the additional ~$20-$30 of stuff that you need just to boot up a pi.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

So your argument is that a raspi 5 is too good of a machine for most use cases? That's a wholley different argument than the "raspi 5 is too expensive for its specs."

I would argue that you can't really speak to people's individual computing needs without knowing what they are.

Im personally using a 5 as a media box with libreelec, and after paying for everything, I'm out $90. That's still $10 cheaper than a roku 4k ultra, and it does everything and much, much more without locking me into a ad-riddled ecosystem on static hardware. That's a great value for money that the $30 SFF options can't compete with.