The ATMega328P on the Nano runs at 16 MHz, has 0.002 MBytes of RAM, is an 8 bit machine.
The RPi Zero runs at a 1000 MHz, has 512 MBytes of RAM, is a full a 32 bit machine,
runs linux if you wish. Not only will it run the C and C++ code we have on the Arduino
(if you port the Arduino libraries), but it has its own compiler for it.
And a compiler compiler to build the compiler with for that matter (yacc).
> I'd consider why the Zero sells for $5.
It sells for $5 because it is of the current decade.
Whereas the ATMega382P is roughly in league with the Z80
I was working with back in the 1970's.
That said, the Nano is a fine choice for the basic uBitx.
Not all that much it has to do.
The RPi Nano would be good if you wish to implement standalone SDR,
with a full waterfall display out to an HDMI monitor.
Or could be used as the Arduino IDE host when programming your Nano.
The top end Rasberry Pi 3 B+ does everything I'd want in a home computer for $35.
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 06:17 pm, Jack Purdum wrote:
I'd consider why the Zero sells for $5. I think the biggest issue is that the Pi is a different animal than the Arduino family. First, it does not have a home in the Arduino IDE, where most of the µBITX work is being done. Second, it doesn't have the depth of add-ons that the Arduinos do. Those that do exist seem to be more expensive. Third, most of the work on Pi is either done in scripting languages or Python, neither of which is popular on the Arduino.
If you need more horsepower, consider the Protoneer (eBay 282786290858). It has 256K of flash, 32K of SRAM (HUGE benefit), and is clocked 3x faster than the Nano at a cost of $15. It looks very promising.