We have some algorithms running on Jetson TK1. Our supplier mentioned Jetson TK1 is purely a development platform, it is not recommended to use it as a final product. But, we don’t have time to develop our own board.
And up to now, we have used Jetson TK1 and we haven’t seen any hardware problem.
So, I want to ask how risky to use Jetson TK1 directly inside a final product? Is it strictly not recommended or it is ok we can use it but just it is better to design our own board? Did you performed the hardware tests of Jetson TK1? Are there any known hardware bugs?
I don’t know what the specific support cut-off date is, but the TK1 does have long term availability. You would need to estimate volume required and ask nVidia what lead times would be for those quantities.
I agree with @cioma, you’d have to mention what your product is to know if a JTK1 is appropriate. E.G., some automobile products might require a larger temperature range tolerance than what a JTK1 provides (or heating)…so some idea of use would be important.
the technical side - which you have already asked the pertinent questions.
the legal side - what happens if someone sues your company due to a fault with the Jetson hardware?
Nvidia have removed their legal obligation to provide a HW platform for after market use by declaring the Jetson TK1 a development platform ONLY.
Is your company prepared to take on the legal liability for the Jetson TK1 ?
(BTW there are a few HW vendors that have ported the JetsonTK1/Tegra-K1 to an Embbeded computer board.
That is what I had been working on. Check out the product I did at Abaco.com - look for ComExpress boards for an Nvidia powered board)
Our applications are based on video processing on Jetson TK1. We connect an IP camera, or USB3.0 camera, do some processing (tracking, segmentation, etc.) and give the output in a compressed format (H.264). We are using both GPU, CPU and hardware decoder/encoder.
These applications can run at two different environments:
We are using a number of Jetson TK1 boards inside a Computer case. And the computer case will be inside a cabinet (temperature-controlled environment)
For the second application Jetson TK1 will exist on a high traffic pole. We will put it some kind of box. But this environment can not have a stable temperature like above application. The outside temperature can change from -40 to +50 centigrade degrees. And I know that the ambient temperature change from 0 to 50 centigrade degrees for Jetson TK1 board to operate. So we need to add cooling and heating elements inside our box.
Actually, my question is not very dependent on the application. We want to learn if Jetson TK1 is verified with hardware tests (EMC, ESD, etc.).
@GE_Chen, as far as I understand from your comments, this board is verified, but NVidia declares this board as development board in order to remove their legal responsibility? Is this the only reason?
I don’t know about legal issues, but I think we can take the legal liability for Jetson TK1. if we design our own board, again we need to take the legal liability.
We know the GE ComExpress boards, we asked their price, but there are two problems. First, they are very expensive when compared to Jetson TK1. Second, it does not include any peripheral components (ethernet, usb, etc.). Again, we need another carrier board to use ComExpress board.
"NVidia declares this board as development board in order to remove their legal responsibility? "
That is my personal opinion.
“Is this the only reason?”
I would not like to comment.
“2) For the second application Jetson TK1 will exist on a high traffic pole. We will put it some kind of box. But this environment can not have a stable temperature like above application. The outside temperature can change from -40 to +50 centigrade degrees. And I know that the ambient temperature change from 0 to 50 centigrade degrees for Jetson TK1 board to operate.”
“We know the GE ComExpress boards, we asked their price, but there are two problems. First, they are very expensive when compared to Jetson TK1”
There is a reason why Abaco charge so much for the board - it is guaranteed to work over the temperature range that you specified (without a heater).
Abaco’s target market is the ‘rugged’ environment. All the boards are design to work in the harshest of environments.
“if we design our own board”
Bear in mind that it took HW 5 engineers over 1 year to produce the Abaco board. Yes it is tiny and yes that did impact the time it took to do the design. The environmental factors also added time to the design. The heatsink on the Abaco board took months of design and verification to get right.
Do not make the mistake that board design is easy - it is not, especially when you factor in the wide temperature range that is required.
Yes, I know that it is not easy to design such a board. And I think that even if we design our own board successfully, that board costs more that Jetson TK1.
The price of Jetson TK1 is so alluring for such kind of a board. But, if the price of the board increases too much, it loses its advantages for our side, because there are industrial Intel processor boards for the same price with your board. And most of our applications are Windows applications. So, the condition for us to use a Tegra K1 board is the necessity of being “cheap”.
Because of all these reasons, it would be very good if we could use Jetson TK1 directly for our applications. But, I still have no idea about the reliability of it…
@fikret, you might end up in situation when your system with Jetson TK1 works “on the table” but “kind of works” in the field. That is likely lead to a lot of headache, overtime, overspend and, usually, to the failure to deliver to the customer requirements. I’d suggest using the right HW for the task (e.g temperature range), even if it’s not based on TK1.