Looking for a single board computer that works wit on Wed, 10 Dec 2014 02:21:30
I'm looking for a single board computer that supports Kinect 2.
I only need to send obtained depths and RGB images to a server via LAN. Everything else is unnecessary including the motion capture and image output.
Or would a computer always require a GPU that’s DirectX 11 capable in order to work with Kinect2?
I'm hoping to find one that meets my minimal requirements as listed above at the lowest price possible.
I'd appreciate it if anyone could give me the product name and its price, thanks.
Brekel on Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:53:49
A DX11 GPU is a minimum requirement.
Seems like an Intel NUC i5 works quite well for your purpose.
ealltech1 on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 02:38:14
Arduino, netduino, graperain, beagleboard or raspberrypi etc ... These quad core single board computer are able to meet your needs
NPatch on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 08:52:45
Have you actually tested the above?
Phil Noonan on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 09:47:47
This thread seems to have been resurrected from 2014. But Brekel's point basically still stands. You need USB 3.0 (intel or renesese controller) and as of 2016 the pi/arduino other ultra low cost stuff doesnt have this requirement.
Shows some issues running it on a TK1 using libfreenect2.
Brekel on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:05:06
None of those mentioned will work.
Arduino/netduino is just a micro controller, doesn't even run an OS.
Raspberry Pi is vastly underpowered and the Win10 build for it most probably doesn't support the Kinect v2 drivers anyway.
Things like an Up and Voyo v3 mini do work (they run full win10 and come with x86 CPU), however you will most probably not be able to reach 30fps.
An Intel NUC i5 should be fast enough though.
NPatch on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:14:14
Isn't the requirement for Kinect v2 to have an 64bit processor(for Up and Voyo v3 mini)?
Also most of these will probably not have a good enough gpu and like you said won't be able to reach the 30FPS.
Brekel on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:22:03
I have tried both the Up (1st revision, not the upcoming 2nd one) and Voyo v3 Mini and the Kinect v2 works on both.
With my (C++) software I wasn't able to run at 30fps but of course that also depends on the complexity of the software and what it's trying to compute.
NPatch on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:26:06
Ok...so the specs aren't as definitive as they seem to be?!
Also when talking about the gpu, I was talking about the KinectService part which processes the IR frame to give you depth frame, body,body index etc. Even without your software it would probably falter. Kinect Verifier would show <30 FPS.
Brekel on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:33:59
DirectX11 GPU is mandatory, internally the code to generate depth from IR and some of the tracking codes runs on the GPU.
The CPU/memory requirements are there to give an indication of a system that can run at full framerate.
The SDK comes with both x64 & x86 libraries.
You're right about KinectService needing enough compute power. It's just that any custom code shares the same resources, so inefficient code or heavy visualizations just make the entire system slower.
NPatch on Fri, 09 Dec 2016 11:02:52
Yeap, that's what I meant about the skeleton tracking thing, that it runs on GPU,which btw I learned about recently,not as documented as it should. Could help many people understand why they don't get optimal FPS when they use ,for example, an old Intel HD which is DX11 but not powerful enough.
Also bummed me out, the fact that the sensor sends stuff to CPU, the service sends them to GPU(some of them) and then back to CPU for you to send most of them back to GPU many a time. Talk about a round trip...
Totally agree with you(could have done better phrasing it, I guess).
I work with the 64bit libs and had completely forgotten that they ship x86 libs as well and with the 64bit processor thing in the specs, had the wrong idea in my head.My bad. :P
PS: Info like the above should be in a mega thread alone with Carmine's troubleshooting thread and stickied.