Arduino Due or Beaglebone Black

Hi there!

I'm an happy Arduino Uno user and I'm considering to buy an Arduino Due. At roughly the same price, does it make sense to buy a Due instead of a Beaglebone Black, that does have more power and more connections?

I'm looking for some objective ideas (not like "Arduino rules, so i will buy a Due") and technical points, because I haven't found any comparison online. I know, Beaglebone has a slightly different application range than Arduino, but the question is: if it has Linux AND i/o capabilities like a Due, why should I buy a Due?

Thank you in advance for your advice.

They are not really in the same league, but to answer the question: The Due is way easier to work with. Try looking for documentation on the BBB, if you are comfortable with what you find then go ahead and get that one.

It's interesting to note that the upcoming Arduino TRE is almost a unión of UNO and BeagleBone Black. It will contain an UNO AVR core as well as a R3 pin layout in the interior for connecting UNO shields. However, it also has a Texas Instruments 32-bit Sitara ARM Cortex-A8 processor with GPIO and Comm/HMI/Storage interfaces tied to it.

Likewise the Galileo from Intel contains an UNO AVR core with R3 pin layout and a second processor, the 32-bit Intel Quark (a Pentium derived SoC) driving comms and a host of other interfaces.

Makes me question the future of DUE's Cortex-3M core. I haven't heard a thing about it in a year from the Offical Keepers of Arduino... just us hobbyist/developers that have struggled with it and the Beta IDE for more than 15 months. Is Arduino staying UNO all the way, and just borrowing from others for some of the advanced comms/video/audio/storage interfaces?

Also think about the power supply - Beaglebone takes more current which may matter.

MarkT:
Also think about the power supply - Beaglebone takes more current which may matter.

:wink: I was thinking the same thing: maybe the Due draws generally less power, so it is more prone to “energy efficient” uses. But are we sure of this? :~

I've got a BeagleBone Black. It's good, but as io53 said, they're not in the same league- trying to use the BBB for control applications like an Arduino largely means you have to go through sysfs (a file-system like abstraction layer for the kernel), which is sluggish. Or, you can try and manually thread your way through it's driver architecture, which can be quite a headache.

Additionally, there is the consideration that Linux is a multithreaded OS- while this is good on the face of it, it is fundamentally not 'real time' (although it can get close)- you can't garuntee that the processor will be working on what you want, when you want. Of course, this may not matter to your apploication.

greeTufty: I've got a BeagleBone Black. It's good, but as io53 said, they're not in the same league- trying to use the BBB for control applications like an Arduino largely means you have to go through sysfs (a file-system like abstraction layer for the kernel), which is sluggish. Or, you can try and manually thread your way through it's driver architecture, which can be quite a headache.

Additionally, there is the consideration that Linux is a multithreaded OS- while this is good on the face of it, it is fundamentally not 'real time' (although it can get close)- you can't garuntee that the processor will be working on what you want, when you want. Of course, this may not matter to your apploication.

This exactly what I was looking for, thank you all for your help!

I have both and would have to stress that the Beaglebone is about Linux. The processor is faster than the due but throwing Linux in the mix makes it far more complicated as well. There does not appear to be much in the way of easy tutorials or getting started type projects for the Beaglebone. Unless you are familiar with Linux I think the Raspberry pi might be an easier way to get started as there is far more beginner information for it, though it is lacking in I/O compared to the beaglebone. Personally Linux gives me an unpleasant deja vu type feeling but maybe that's just me.

On the other hand I think the Due is excellent and very easy to get started using immediately. The Cortex M3 is very powerful and is relatively easy to manage without an operating system. Not everything Arduino works out of the box, but it is fairly easy to either patch a library or bolt your own routines on to the Arduino environment and get something working. Having an easy to understand, functioning environment to work from is worth every penny.

If there was a way to make the Due even better it would be to enable on-board ethernet and a somewhat faster Cortex M4 with hardware floating point. I think this would be the dream system that would be firmly in between an AVR based arduino and the much more complicated Linux mini-boxes.

Good luck Doug

io53: They are not really in the same league, but to answer the question: The Due is way easier to work with. Try looking for documentation on the BBB, if you are comfortable with what you find then go ahead and get that one.

What is this 'BBB' ?

Beaglebone Black

http://beagleboard.org/products/beaglebone%20black for more info.

Doug,

There is this effort by serveral Fórum members:

Connecting an Ethernet PHY to Arduino Due http://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?topic=142908.90

Peter

Thanks Peter. I will take a look at that version of the board. It's quite a bit cheaper than a Due+Ethernet shield.

Doug PS: If I lived in Alamos I wouldn't be wanting much more either. I visited for a weekend in 1990 wonderful place!

As of Feb 20, Beaglebone Blacks are pretty hard to obtain. All the usual places are sold out.

You might like to look at using a Cubieboard, rather than a RPi or BBB

I bought a Cubieboard2, which has a dual core A7 with 4GB of NAND and a full 1GB of RAM.
I’m in the process of making a panel that has the Cubieboard2 connected to a DUE for a new renewable energy SCADA system for my home setup.

As you may know, the Arduino range of boards are great for all your IO tasks, so reading and smoothing of analogues and detecting interrupts and setting digital outputs and so forth.

A small Linux based board is great for doing the higher level application based tasks.
I’ll be using the Cubieboard2 to be either a Nodejs or Python based real-time TCP/IP server, and have it set up with Debian headless with Nodejs currently for tests.

You can elect to install headless or have HDMI video with a desktop based operating system.
The Cubieboard2 I think has some nice features and looks to be well thought out and designed.

It seems to be amazingly energy efficient as I have it currently on the test bench, where I have the Cubieboard and 80GB SATA drive running Cubian headless all powered via a USB port from another laptop.
As a dual core 1GHz system, this has got be one of the lowest energy consumption systems about.
For use on renewable energy systems, this appears to be close to perfect.

Separating the two tasks and having each system configured to do specific tasks best suited for each board has been a idea I have had for a while now.

I initially researched the various Linux boards and found the Cubieboard2 to be ideally suited to what I need.
It is not unlike the BBB, in terms of physical size and sits well next to the DUE.
Another link for more info;
http://cubieboard.org/

Hope this helps.


Paul