gopigo has ATMEGA328 micro controller (as per link) so this is more precise and fast for sure.
Connecting the RPI3 are we losing the fast execution and precise input output ?? as RPI3 is microprocessor.
Does it make sense to use dexter OS via usb for python and remove the RPI3 will it increase performance to communicate with sensors?
/Chetan S.
I cannot understand the statement “use Dexter OS via USB and remove the RPI3” (The ATMEGA328 does not run DexterOS and does not have a USB interface, so the RPI3 cannot be removed.)
As to “remove the RPI3 [to] increase performance to communicate with sensors”, I would counter that everything on the GoPiGo3 has its design purpose, performance, and limits that most users have found not to prohibit use as it is designed.
So the answer to every “Does it make sense to [change XYZ] of the GoPiGo” becomes, “it depends on your specific application”, but for the majority of users, especially those the business model/plan is serving, the answer will be “No, it does not make sense.”
Is your question theoretical or do you have a specific problem you are trying to solve?
Sorry my bad …
Was idiotic that didnt observe gopigo there is no usb port tho… without RPi cannot worked …
Reason i posted because today got Ardino UNO which has same micro controller but uno is more faster and precise than RPI …as per some blogs
Just learning…
@cyclicalobsessive thanks always helpful … learning lot from u all
There is some overlap between micro controller and general purpose computing architectures, that make one, or the other, or a combination of both the right answer for each specific application.
This morning I was reviewing some of Rodney Brook’s writings about the lure of general purpose reasoning in the control of robots, vs more narrow, specific environment reasoning. The emergence of vision processors will eventually make a three or four layered robot more common - microcontroller for motors and safety, vision processor to understand the environment, audio processor, and a general processor to interface with humans and beyond.
(Privacy in speech recognition and speech generation will probably cause the audio processor to be common.)
At a HUGE cost of 5 to 10Watts for the Jetson Nano.
I’m finding the 2 to 3 watt Raspberry Pi 3B, as my vision processor, audio processor, event and goal processor, and desktop/remote interface manager to be a great combination in size, power consumption, and capability exceeding my robot’s current utilization.
It’s all about the compromises.
Congratulations. That is a hot item to be working with these days.
Chetuk,
Here you misunderstand the use for the different controllers.
The Atmel processor on the GoPiGo board is designed to be an embedded controller with a very specific and limited functionality: Taking signals and commands and interfacing them to whatever main microcontroller you want to use.
This works in a very similar way to something like a hard drive or graphics controller card. The card itself has a pretty powerful processor, but it is specifically designed and programed to work with hard drives or graphics in a very specific and efficient way. The main CPU on the motherboard may not be more “powerful” or “faster” than the dedicated processors, but it is designed to be much more general purpose and be able to do more and different things.
The Atmel chip on the GoPiGo board provides the “muscle” (so to speak) and the Pi provides the “brains”. Of course you can use something else - I want to try a Jetson Nano - instead of a Raspberry Pi. If you do, let us know what happens.
In fact, it is very common nowadays to see a project like a robot, (or a 3D printer!), use something like a Arduino for the low-level logic controller and a Pi as the higher level interface to the real world.
You’re on the right track. Write back and tell us how you’re doing!
Jim “J.R.”