# Pine64 Board Comparison: RockPro64 vs Quartz64-B ## Executive Summary This comprehensive review compares two Pine64 single-board computers: the RockPro64 running FreeBSD and the Quartz64-B running Debian Linux. Through extensive benchmarking and real-world testing, we've evaluated their performance across CPU, memory, storage, and network capabilities to help determine the ideal use cases for each board. ## Test Environment ### Hardware Specifications #### RockPro64 (10.1.1.130) - **CPU**: Rockchip RK3399 - 6 cores (2x Cortex-A72 @ 2.0GHz + 4x Cortex-A53 @ 1.5GHz) - **RAM**: 4GB DDR4 - **OS**: FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE - **Storage**: 52GB UFS root filesystem - **Network**: Gigabit Ethernet (dwc0) #### Quartz64-B (10.1.1.88) - **CPU**: Rockchip RK3566 - 4 cores (4x Cortex-A55 @ 1.8GHz) - **RAM**: 4GB DDR4 - **OS**: Debian 12 (Bookworm) - Plebian Linux - **Storage**: 59GB eMMC - **Network**: Gigabit Ethernet (end0) ## Performance Benchmarks ### 1. CPU Performance The RockPro64's heterogeneous big.LITTLE architecture with 2 high-performance A72 cores and 4 efficiency A53 cores provides a unique advantage for mixed workloads. In our simple loop benchmark: - **RockPro64**: 0.92 seconds (100k iterations) - **Quartz64-B**: 0.99 seconds (100k iterations) The RockPro64 shows approximately **7.6% better single-threaded performance**, likely benefiting from its A72 cores when handling single-threaded tasks. ### 2. Memory Bandwidth Memory bandwidth testing revealed a significant advantage for the Quartz64-B: - **RockPro64**: 1.7 GB/s - **Quartz64-B**: 3.7 GB/s The Quartz64-B demonstrates **117% higher memory bandwidth**, indicating more efficient memory controller implementation or better memory configuration. This advantage is crucial for memory-intensive applications. ### 3. Storage Performance Storage benchmarks showed contrasting strengths: #### Sequential Write (500MB file) - **RockPro64**: 332.8 MB/s - **Quartz64-B**: 20.1 MB/s #### Sequential Read - **RockPro64**: 762.5 MB/s - **Quartz64-B**: 1,461.0 MB/s The RockPro64 excels in write performance with **16.5x faster writes**, while the Quartz64-B shows **1.9x faster reads**. This suggests different storage subsystem optimizations or potentially different storage media characteristics. #### Random I/O (100 operations) - **RockPro64**: 0.87 seconds - **Quartz64-B**: 0.605 seconds The Quartz64-B completed random I/O operations **30% faster**, indicating better handling of small, random file operations. ### 4. Network Performance Using iperf3 for network testing showed comparable gigabit Ethernet performance: #### Throughput (TCP) - **RockPro64 → Quartz64-B**: 93.5 Mbps - **Quartz64-B → RockPro64**: 95.4 Mbps Both boards achieve similar network performance, approaching the theoretical maximum for 100Mbps connections. The slight variations are within normal network fluctuations. ## Use Case Analysis ### RockPro64 - Ideal Use Cases 1. **Build Servers & CI/CD** - Superior write performance makes it excellent for compilation tasks - 6-core configuration provides better parallel build capabilities - FreeBSD's stability benefits long-running server applications 2. **Database Servers** - High sequential write speeds benefit transaction logs - Additional CPU cores help with concurrent queries - Better suited for write-heavy database workloads 3. **File Servers & NAS** - Excellent sequential write performance for large file transfers - 6 cores provide overhead for file serving while maintaining responsiveness - FreeBSD's ZFS support (if configured) adds enterprise-grade features 4. **Development Workstations** - More CPU cores benefit compilation and development tools - Balanced performance across different workload types - FreeBSD environment suitable for BSD-specific development ### Quartz64-B - Ideal Use Cases 1. **Media Streaming Servers** - Superior read performance benefits content delivery - Efficient Cortex-A55 cores provide good performance per watt - Better memory bandwidth helps with buffering 2. **Web Servers** - Fast random I/O benefits web application performance - High memory bandwidth helps with caching - Debian's extensive package repository provides easy deployment 3. **Container Hosts** - Docker already configured (as seen in network interfaces) - Better memory bandwidth benefits containerized applications - Efficient for running multiple lightweight services 4. **IoT Gateway** - Power-efficient Cortex-A55 cores - Good balance of performance and efficiency - Debian's wide hardware support for peripherals ## Power Efficiency Considerations While power consumption wasn't directly measured, architectural differences suggest: - **Quartz64-B**: More power-efficient with its uniform Cortex-A55 cores - **RockPro64**: Higher peak power consumption but better performance scaling with big.LITTLE ## Software Ecosystem ### FreeBSD (RockPro64) - Excellent for network services and servers - Superior security features and jail system - Smaller but high-quality package selection - Better suited for experienced BSD administrators ### Debian Linux (Quartz64-B) - Vast package repository - Better hardware peripheral support - Larger community and more tutorials - Docker and container ecosystem readily available ## Conclusion Both boards offer compelling features for different use cases: **Choose the RockPro64 if you need:** - Maximum CPU cores for parallel workloads - Superior write performance for storage - FreeBSD's specific features (jails, ZFS, etc.) - A proven platform for server workloads **Choose the Quartz64-B if you need:** - Better memory bandwidth for data-intensive tasks - Superior read performance for content delivery - Modern, efficient CPU architecture - Broader Linux software compatibility ### Overall Verdict The RockPro64 remains a powerhouse for traditional server workloads, particularly those requiring strong write performance and CPU parallelism. The Quartz64-B represents the newer generation with better memory performance and efficiency, making it ideal for modern containerized workloads and read-heavy applications. For general-purpose use, the Quartz64-B's better memory bandwidth and more modern architecture give it a slight edge, while the RockPro64's additional cores and superior write performance make it the better choice for build servers and write-intensive databases. --- ## Benchmark Summary Table | Metric | RockPro64 | Quartz64-B | Winner | |--------|-----------|------------|--------| | CPU Cores | 6 (2×A72 + 4×A53) | 4 (4×A55) | RockPro64 | | CPU Speed (100k loops) | 0.92s | 0.99s | RockPro64 | | Memory Bandwidth | 1.7 GB/s | 3.7 GB/s | Quartz64-B | | Storage Write | 332.8 MB/s | 20.1 MB/s | RockPro64 | | Storage Read | 762.5 MB/s | 1,461 MB/s | Quartz64-B | | Random I/O | 0.87s | 0.605s | Quartz64-B | | Network Send | 93.5 Mbps | 95.4 Mbps | Tie | | Network Receive | 94.1 Mbps | 92.1 Mbps | Tie | ![Performance Comparison Charts](/images/pine64_comparison.png) --- *Both boards tested on the same local network segment* *All tests repeated multiple times for consistency*