[HN Gopher] Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W die shots
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Raspberry Pi Zero 2 W die shots
        
       Author : geerlingguy
       Score  : 175 points
       Date   : 2021-11-08 13:27 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (electronupdate.blogspot.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (electronupdate.blogspot.com)
        
       | anonymousiam wrote:
       | Nice photos!
       | 
       | Off topic, but has anyone else noticed the scarce availability of
       | the "regular" Raspberry Pis? A few can still be purchased at a
       | premium price, but many vendors have no stock. Some vendors (such
       | as Element 14) claim a backlog until 12/2022!
        
         | bliteben wrote:
         | I got a 4gb recently from vilros with no real delays.
        
         | teh_klev wrote:
         | The PiHut (UK) seem to have a pretty good stock of Pi 4 Model
         | B's, though admittedly just the 4GB and 8GB variants:
         | 
         | https://thepihut.com/products/raspberry-pi-4-model-b
         | 
         | I picked one up just recently from them with no delays.
        
         | aVx1uyD5pYWW wrote:
         | https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/supply-chain-shortages-and-...
        
       | syntaxing wrote:
       | It never ceases to amaze me that someone can look at these die
       | pictures and knows what's going on. All I see is a bunch of
       | copper colored squares
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | Its not far off from looking at a circuit board and recognizing
         | layout patterns and chip shapes to get a feel for whats going
         | on. e.g. Larger chips are usually of interest. A larger chip
         | with one or more little rectangular chips next to or
         | surrounding it is likely the CPU and RAM/Flash/ROM. Smaller
         | chips are interface or power regulators depending on their
         | proximity to ports and other components. Groups of inductors,
         | capacitors and transistors are likely power supplies. It all
         | comes with experience.
        
         | hobs wrote:
         | I honestly thought being able to recognize ground up spices by
         | eye was an amazing feat until I started cooking more than once
         | a month.
        
         | 60Vhipx7b4JL wrote:
         | after some time it's fairly easy. E.g. if you know it has a 4
         | core cpu, you're just looking for the same area four times.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | You develop your intuition by looking at (or designing) a lot
         | of these. It's like any other profession, I guess, experience
         | makes pattern matching easier.
        
       | rwmj wrote:
       | What is the silicon spacer used for? And where is it located -
       | there's not a picture of the three pieces of silicon in the
       | package.
       | 
       | Also fun to see this next to the 8086 die shots. How things have
       | progressed in 40 years.
        
         | magicalhippo wrote:
         | You can see an illustration of the RP3A0 system-in-package in
         | the official blog post[1].
         | 
         | From what I can gather[2] the spacer is actually an interposer,
         | which for all intents and purposes functions as a PCB between
         | the two chips, allowing for signals to be routed between the
         | chips. Think of it as two IC's on either side of a PCB with
         | vias connecting them. No expert though so maybe I'm mistaken.
         | 
         | [1]: https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/new-raspberry-pi-
         | zero-2-w-2...
         | 
         | [2]: https://sst.semiconductor-digest.com/2011/06/silicon-
         | interpo... (section "Alternative 3D technology")
        
           | magicalhippo wrote:
           | I was assuming they called it an interposer for a reason.
           | However as the sibling comment by mkoc mentions it might just
           | be a spacer, and the X-ray image[1] of the package seems to
           | confirm that.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2021/look-inside-
           | raspberry...
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | mkoc wrote:
         | have a look here [0], Fig 1; the spacer serves really as a
         | mechanical spacer (if dies are same or similar size); also nice
         | for heat spreading.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Productivity-
         | improveme...
        
       | blamazon wrote:
       | > When one codes on a Raspberry Pi one generally thinks of these
       | CPUs as the core of the device with all the peripherals
       | surrounding them... however the provenance of this chip is much
       | more interesting and the CPUs are actually an afterthought.
       | 
       | > The primary design goal of this chip was for cable TV set top
       | boxes. For that the designers focused on transporting video. The
       | real core of this chip is the "Video Core IV".... it's the actual
       | master.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | And fun fact: when the Pi boots up (all generations so far),
         | the primary bootloader is the VPU (VideoCore), which then
         | initializes the CPU and RAM.
         | 
         | These things are slightly weird in that way.
        
           | riobard wrote:
           | What does the VPU do after boot if the unit is headless?
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | sydney6 wrote:
             | E.g. accelerating video decoding/encoding, OpenGL
             | applications, etc..
        
             | magicalhippo wrote:
             | Well you could use it for GPGPU[1], for example[2].
             | 
             | [1]: https://www.cnx-software.com/2019/10/10/py-
             | videocore6-raspbe...
             | 
             | [2]: https://github.com/Idein/py-
             | videocore6/blob/master/examples/...
        
       | admin786 wrote:
       | Thanks for visiting
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | > It might grate on some hobbyists who see this secretive
       | approach as the antithesis of open-source but Google Broadcom's
       | stock price and one can see it's been a fabulously successful
       | company.
       | 
       | I am really interested to see what the people on HN will make of
       | this statement.
        
         | LeifCarrotson wrote:
         | I think the two factors being compared - open vs. proprietary,
         | poor vs. wealthy - are orthogonal to each other.
         | 
         | Does the author imply that open-source advocates believe that
         | secrecy is bad for profits and that open-source is a way to get
         | rich? I've not personally heard that. I do recall arguments
         | that opening your source code will not lead to financial ruin,
         | but that still leaves open the possibility that they're
         | uncorrelated or only weakly correlated.
        
           | salawat wrote:
           | Broadcom, as I understand, is as secretive as they are as a
           | defense against patent trolling. When you have NPE's gobbling
           | up garbage patents to sue everyone and their brother with,
           | locking up the IP tightly is one adaptation to defend against
           | that sort of thing. Still pisses me off to the ends of the
           | earth.
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | > Company keeping market leading advances secret brings in
         | loads of money. More at 11.
         | 
         | I'm sure exactly nobody is surprised. Open source is the
         | antithesis of profitability, as such not being open source
         | equals vast amounts of money, on average.
        
         | Buttsite wrote:
         | He sounds like a total moron because the next paragraph talks
         | about how that secrecy lead to this chip being used for cable
         | sets instead of computers until the Raspberry Pi. But pushing
         | back the state of the art must be worth it for the stock price!
        
           | geerlingguy wrote:
           | I think the main reason nobody else picked up these chips was
           | because they're not really made for general purpose
           | computing. Rather, many of the Pi engineers come from
           | Broadcom, so it was probably more familiarity, price, and
           | partnership that were the main drivers for it getting popular
           | on the Pi.
        
         | megous wrote:
         | I certainly don't understand why so many jumped on a bandwagon
         | of a SBC which was basically an obscure GPU with some
         | accidentally attached ARM cores, on an I/O starved SoC design,
         | that still doesn't have a useful opensource bootloader even
         | after 8 years or so,... when much more interesting, more open,
         | and chepaer alternatives started appearing rather quickly after
         | the first Rpis.
        
           | justin66 wrote:
           | If you're actually interested in figuring this out for
           | yourself instead of attributing it to "marketing," compare
           | and contrast with the situation of the Beaglebone boards.
           | Those came out several years prior to the Raspberry Pi, get
           | plenty of PR and press, have received really good updates
           | through the years, have the direct backing of a major
           | manufacturer, are very open, and have a more conventional SoC
           | design. In short, we're talking about stuff that failed to
           | hold back the Raspberry Pi onslaught even though it existed
           | years before the Pi and even though it addresses the stuff
           | you said you care about.
           | 
           | Basically, Pi users want different things than you want, and
           | the Pi people were pretty good at delivering those things. I
           | assume the attention to early education in addition to
           | hackers and makers, and somehow persuading or inspiring some
           | hackers to work on a Debian armhf port with user-friendly
           | features at a time when most people already wanted armhf to
           | just go away and die, were decisive. Those were what really
           | set the Pi apart and served to bring in more and more
           | developers and users. After that's it's a virtuous cycle of
           | more and more content creation and enthusiasm surrounding the
           | platform.
        
             | foxfluff wrote:
             | Anecdotally, Beagle had zero marketing compared to the Pi.
             | Only hardcore geeks had heard of it, whereas when the Pi
             | came out, "normies" wowed at this "cheap credit card sized
             | computer!" that they saw on the news. In schools and
             | workplaces, you could find plenty of people who had heard
             | of the Pi or even had bought one, but they'd never heard of
             | the alternatives. Plenty of people literally think the Pi
             | was the first SBC too. And Pi quickly ended up on the
             | virtual shelves of mainstream electronics stores (along
             | with the Arduinos); the alternatives never came (the only
             | one I remember seeing is the Asus Tinkerboard which I guess
             | has all the marketing power of Asus behind it so that's not
             | too unexpected), and you still have to shop for them on
             | Ebay/Ali*/whatever.
        
               | justin66 wrote:
               | > Anecdotally, Beagle had zero marketing compared to the
               | Pi. Only hardcore geeks had heard of it, whereas when the
               | Pi came out, "normies" wowed at this "cheap credit card
               | sized computer!" that they saw on the news.
               | 
               | I remember those times, and I'm not sure how to quantify
               | this stuff, and it's not like I know about marketing in
               | general. But...
               | 
               | I'm not sure the Pi had _more_ marketing. I 'm very sure
               | it had _more effective_ marketing. It seems to me like
               | there are probably some lessons there if somebody wanted
               | to dig into it. I mean honestly, the Pi guys were like a
               | handful of Cambridge people with no money and an in with
               | Broadcom in the beginning. I 'm pretty sure I found out
               | about the Beagle from none other than _Texas
               | Instruments._
               | 
               | It seems to me like the one-offs, clones, and general
               | other stuff that came after Pi and Beagle are
               | deliberately targeting the Beagle-type people rather than
               | the Pi-type people, and there are just fewer of those
               | people. All the industrial sales of Pi hardware suggest
               | that once you've grown the user base beyond a certain
               | point, you can target the Pi-type people all day long and
               | the hackers and industrial customers will hop on board
               | because they value the volume of what you're producing.
        
           | bigiain wrote:
           | $35
           | 
           | (At least that was the "Holy fuck, really? I gonna get one of
           | those" thing for me.)
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | > _when much more interesting, more open, and chepaer
           | alternatives started appearing rather quickly after the first
           | Rpis_
           | 
           | Like what?
        
           | ArgyleSound wrote:
           | Which ones? I'm only aware of boards that aren't anywhere
           | near the PS5-35 price class the Raspberry Pis inhabit, and
           | even then there's just absolutely nothing like the third
           | party ecosystem that the Pis have.
        
           | cillian64 wrote:
           | Because I can google "How to drive addressable LEDs from
           | Raspberry Pi", for example, and find a lot of example
           | projects and blog posts and not have to reinvent the wheel.
           | It's inelegant for sure, but great for prototyping or duct
           | tape projects where you want to stand on the shoulders of
           | others and just get something working quickly.
        
             | megous wrote:
             | You can google the exact same phrase and just use the Rpi
             | solution/code on any other Linux based SBC, because gpio
             | has a standard userspace API on Linux. All you change is
             | pin mapping at most.
             | 
             | Though yeah, if you don't care about the SBC capabilities
             | at all, and your goal is to just drive some LEDs from
             | Linux, you can just as well buy whatever is familiar to
             | you, regardless of any shortcomings.
        
               | monocasa wrote:
               | The addressable LEDs aren't typically just bit banging
               | GPIOs. There's no clock line with common protocols in the
               | space like the WS2812, and they're very susceptible to
               | jitter. Twiddling GPIOs from user space is basically a
               | non starter.
               | 
               | I've had success though with using the MOSI line from a
               | SPI master and carefully crafting the bit pattern and
               | timing to get the waveform I want. It takes some manual
               | work though, more than what you get from user space.
        
           | geerlingguy wrote:
           | IMO, it comes down to the support and ecosystem. Even though
           | it would be nice to have something more open than Broadcom's
           | chips, the corporate/foundation backing of the project, and
           | the broad adoption after those first few revisions (coupled
           | with the fact that Pis are still some of the cheapest options
           | around) means that someone can come into the ecosystem blind
           | and not have to spend hours or days just figuring out how to
           | get an OS running on the darn thing.
           | 
           | And then the fact that you can still run a supported modern
           | OS on an almost 10 year old board... that doesn't seem to
           | happen with other SBCs (most are basically shelved after a
           | couple years), and you end up running ancient OSes on them or
           | obscure community-driven OSes that break in a hundred
           | different ways.
        
             | megous wrote:
             | There are a lot of boards that have mainline u-boot/Linux
             | support, don't need neither any wonky 4MiB binary firmware
             | which does who knows what, nor any vendor specific tools to
             | control basic things like HDMI, or CPU frequency, and just
             | work for years with any arm based distro.
             | 
             | Personally I think it's just a better marketing.
        
               | forty wrote:
               | You can boot your rpi to mainline uboot (it does not
               | remove the wonky firmware though :) )
               | 
               | I feel wonky firmwares are pretty common in the arm world
               | though (and in other worlds too)
        
               | floatboth wrote:
               | You don't need vendor specific tools. Especially not on
               | the pi 4 but even before that. The RPi foundation stayed
               | on a 32 bit distro with the proprietary graphics stack
               | forever due to some silly fear of breaking.. something
               | (?) or whatever but mainline linux has been able to
               | manage everything about graphics and display with the vc4
               | drm/kms driver for ages. CPU frequency has _of course_
               | been controlled by a mainline kernel driver for ages -
               | heck that 's supported in all of the BSD OSes as well.
        
               | michaelt wrote:
               | That wasn't my experience, pre-raspberry-pi.
               | 
               | There were projects, sure - but they rarely sold in large
               | volumes. That meant not many paid developers. And if you
               | had a problem you'd be lucky if someone online had even
               | experienced the same problem, let alone found a fix for
               | it.
               | 
               | Every chip vendor seemed to have their own kernel fork
               | with their own patches, and didn't much care to get them
               | upstreamed. And of course, their kernel would be ancient
               | - they're selling it for things like automotive
               | infotainment systems which don't give a shit about
               | security.
               | 
               | Want to attach, say, a battery-backed RTC to your SBC? I
               | hope you know the difference between a dtc and a dtbi.
               | And even if someone else has been nice enough to get the
               | same part working on their SBC, just because a TI
               | processor needs the line 'dmas = < 0x21 0x1c 0x00 0x21
               | 0x1d 0x00 >;' doesn't mean you can copy that to a
               | Freescale processor and expect it to work.
               | 
               | More than once I brought SBCs that came with a connector
               | for a MIPI camera - but no camera available, and no
               | software either. You want a camera? Plug in a USB webcam.
               | 
               | And let's be honest: If you want features like wifi and
               | hardware h264 support you're going to be dealing with
               | wonky binary firmware anyway.
        
       | pixelpoet wrote:
       | > Taking the die off the board and flipping it over reveals the
       | typical beauty of an RF design.
       | 
       | Knowing basically nothing about electrical engineering, what does
       | this refer to?
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | RF would stand for radio frequency I guess, so I suppose it's
         | the wifi module or something.
        
         | GeorgeTirebiter wrote:
         | RF usually has not too many transistors, but sometimes a lot of
         | coils and capacitors. You can see the coils in the design,
         | somewhat snake-like. Capacitors can be realized in many ways,
         | conducting material over a dielectric.
         | 
         | Bulk capacitors are external (as you can see). Matching LC are
         | external because those depend on the antenna; I'm a little
         | disappointed there wasn't more detail given of the antenna,
         | because this type I believe is a 'first' for the RPi 'in-board'
         | antennas, in that they have two lines of series-connected
         | capacitors inside the 'triangle'. I don't yet know how this
         | works.
         | 
         | RF ICs are usually hand-routed, too. So you get to see some
         | real 'Art'.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Not an RF engineer, nor even electrical engineer, but from what
         | little I know, if you think computer networking is voodoo magic
         | (as I do), RF design (especially in tiny couple-mm-square
         | chips) is like black arts mixed with ancient mythology.
         | 
         | RF does weird things, and controlling it so it can be useful
         | for high speed networking in the wacky environments where we
         | put computers is IMO a pretty big feat of modern engineering.
         | 
         | But the chip design is just pretty in its own right, with the
         | layers coming through.
        
       | Namidairo wrote:
       | > The only downside is that external light can actually affect
       | the chip operation (light hitting the die releases electrons at
       | PN junctions creating errors in circuit operation ) .. .however
       | here the Faraday metal shield helps prevent this.
       | 
       | Brings me back to when it was discovered that high intensity
       | flashes could make a Raspberry Pi 2 reboot...[1]
       | 
       | [1] https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/xenon-death-flash-a-free-
       | ph...
        
         | squarefoot wrote:
         | Many PN junction based components such as diodes and
         | transistors are photosensitive; I recall after reading this as
         | a kid on an old electronics magazine, I took a 2N3055, a pretty
         | common power bipolar transistor back then, uncapped it to
         | expose the die then connected it to my analog tester and saw it
         | generating current when exposed to a lamp. The effect is common
         | also in devices one could never suspect to be sensitive to
         | light such as LEDs. They can produce light but also detect it.
         | A few years ago someone published a project online of a MCU
         | based keyboard (actually a button board) made of PWM driven
         | LEDs that can both produce light and during their off cycle
         | detect it, so that one turns them on and off just by touching
         | them with a finger screening them from surrounding light. I
         | attempted to search for that project without luck.
        
           | daniel_reetz wrote:
           | I remember that project too. Might have been Paul Dietz at
           | MERL.If you're curious, look up Paul Dietz "low cost
           | bidirectional sensing using LEDs" and Forrest Mimms "LED Sun
           | photometry".
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | > Forrest Mimms
             | 
             | There's a name I haven't seen in a long time. Source of
             | endless insight into electronics parts and schematics.
        
               | avhon1 wrote:
               | He did a series of columns for Make Magazine. A
               | compilation book titled "Make: Forrest Mims' Science
               | Experiments" was published in 2016.
               | 
               | https://www.makershed.com/products/forrest-mims-science-
               | expe...
        
           | dangets wrote:
           | A self-directed project I did for a university course was to
           | make a Morse code transmitter and receiver. I was able to use
           | the same LED for both.
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | By using the same LED as a receiver too?
             | 
             | https://makezine.com/projects/how-to-use-leds-to-detect-
             | ligh...
        
       | bigbaguette wrote:
       | Between the pictures of the 8086 from 40 years ago and this, it
       | makes me wonder what die shots will look like in 2060. Will we be
       | slicing compute cubes?
        
         | vbezhenar wrote:
         | We're using 2D schemes because we live in 3D world and we can
         | move heat into third dimension. With 3D circuit you won't be
         | able to transfer heat from the insides. I guess it could be
         | possible with some integrated cooling nano pipes, but it's hard
         | to imagine how that would work.
        
           | Causality1 wrote:
           | Always been fascinating to me that we only bolt a heat sink
           | onto one side of the board. Nobody's come up with a circuit
           | board material that's electrically insulating but thermally
           | conductive so we could sink an appreciable amount of heat out
           | of the back side?
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Yeah especially with something like the Pi, you could
             | effectively double the core count by slapping another chip
             | on the other side and add another heatsink.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | _> Nobody 's come up with a circuit board material that's
             | electrically insulating but thermally conductive so we
             | could sink an appreciable amount of heat out of the back
             | side?_
             | 
             | In applications like high-power LED lights, you'll often
             | get 'Insulated Metal Substrate' PCBs where the printed
             | circuit is on an aluminium or copper board, separated by a
             | very thin electrically insulating layer. [1]
             | 
             | However, this has a few downsides: The electrically
             | insulating layers aren't perfectly thermally conductive,
             | meaning a directly attached heatsink will usually perform
             | better; if you make a complex board with 8+ layers of
             | copper (like a modern motherboard) you end up with 8+
             | layers of insulation; and it's nigh-impossible to use
             | through-hole components.
             | 
             | For LED lighting those are non-issues and, a top-mounted
             | heatsink wasn't an option anyway.
             | 
             | [1] https://dm.henkel-
             | dam.com/is/content/henkel/Bergquist%20Comp...
        
             | CamperBob2 wrote:
             | Interestingly, thermal and electrical conductivity is
             | highly correlated. You don't see a lot of materials that
             | conduct heat well but behave as good electrical insulators,
             | or vice versa. Both mechanisms benefit strongly from the
             | availability of highly-mobile electrons, which is another
             | way of saying "metal."
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | nanomonkey wrote:
             | There are in fact thermal PCBs (a.k.a. MCPCB) used for LEDs
             | and other electronics that need to dissipate heat. They
             | have an aluminum or copper layer that supplies rigidity and
             | a heat path out the backside or center of a PCB.
        
             | StillBored wrote:
             | I put a fairly large/flat heatsink on the back metal of the
             | heatsink support bracket on my intel (overclocked) desktop
             | a few years back it pulled the temps down a couple degrees
             | when a fan was blowing at it under moderate load.
             | 
             | I've been thinking about this for my ryzen lately too,
             | since it appears keeping the top of the die cool is
             | unusually challenging. A lot of mobile/etc parts use the
             | PCB ground plane as a heatsink, so it makes sense that if
             | you can attach a larger heatsink to the back of a normal PC
             | board you should be able to pull heat out of both sides.
             | Particularly in a water cooled system where the top of the
             | heat spreader is remaining fairly cool but the surrounding
             | board is heating up (like my ryzen).
        
             | kortex wrote:
             | Oh, that is in fact an important heat path on all but the
             | most intensive components. But with high power components,
             | the heat flux is pretty insane. You can move a huge amount
             | of heat with heat pipes, and it's just easier to move heat
             | out the back.
        
           | FrostKiwi wrote:
           | Many pieces of circuitry on different scales are already 3D.
           | On the big side, PCBs are printed in multiple layers, going
           | smaller we have 3D NAND flash, micro processors are very much
           | printed in "layers" with components being connected "one
           | story up" and those layers are again connected "two stories
           | above". Finally you might argue on the atomic scale,
           | individual transistors are very much 3D as well, with how
           | source, gate and drain are constructed. But I get your point,
           | you can't _just_ stack those layers ad infinitum.
        
             | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-08 23:02 UTC)