Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro low-profile SBC features Rockchip RK3576 octa-core Cortex-A72/A53 AIoT SoC

Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro, also known as Armsom Sige5, is a low-profile single board computer (SBC) powered by the Rockchip RK3576 octa-core Cortex-A72/A53 SoC for the AIoT market that offers a mid-range offering between Rockchip RK3588 and RK3399 SoCs.

The board comes with 16GB LPDDR4X and 128GB eMMC flash by default, offers dual GbE, WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.2 connectivity, an M.2 2280 PCIe socket for expansion, HDMI and MIPI DSI display interfaces, two MIPI CSI camera interfaces, a few USB ports, and a 40-pin GPIO header.

Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro

Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro specifications:

  • SoC – Rockchip RK3576
    • CPU
      • 4x Cortex-A72 cores @ 2.2GHz, four Cortex-A53 cores @ 1.8GHz
      • Arm Cortex-M0 MCU at 400MHz
    • GPU – ARM Mali-G52 MC3 GPU with support for OpenGL ES 1.1, 2.0 and 3.2, OpenCL up to 2.0 and Vulkan 1.1
    • NPU – 6 TOPS (INT8) AI accelerator with support for INT4/INT8/INT16/BF16/TF32 mixed operations.
    • VPU
      • Video Decoder: H.264, H.265, VP9, AV1, and AVS2 up to 8K @ 30fps or 4K @ 120fps.
      • Video Encoder: H.264 and H.265 up to 4K @ 60fps, (M)JPEG encoder/decoder up to 4K @ 60fps.
  • System Memory – 8GB or 16GB 32-bit LPDDR4x
  • Storage
    • 32GB or 128GB eMMC flash
    • MicroSD card slot
    • M.2 Key-M socket for M.2 2280 NVMe SSD (See Expansion section)
    • Footprint for UFS storage, but apparently unused
  • Video Output
    • HDMI 2.0 port up to 4Kp120
    • MIPI DSI connector up to 2Kp60
    • DisplayPort 1.4 via USB-C up to 4Kp120
  • Audio – Speaker header, digital audio output via HDMI
  • Camera I/F – 2x 2-lane MIPI CSI connectors
  • Networking
    • 2x Gigabit Ethernet ports
    • WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5.2 via Realtek RTL8852BS
  • USB – 1x USB 3.0 port, 1x USB 2.0 port, 1x USB Type-C port
  • Expansion
    • 40-pin GPIO header
    • M.2 Key-M socket (PCIe 2.1 x1)
  • Misc
    • MaskROM button, Reset button, Power button
    • Fan connector
    • RTC battery connector
    • 2x LED
  • Power Supply – 4.5V to 23V via USB Type-C PD port
  • Dimensions: 92 x 62mm (8-layer PCB)
  • Weight – 43 grams
  • Temperature Range – 0°C to 80°C

Rockchip RK3572 SBC
Armsom Sige5 bottom

The Banana Pi BPi-MP5 Pro will support Android 14, Debian 11, and Buildroot through official Rockchip support, as well as third-party Armbian Ubuntu and Debian images. Work-in-progress documentation is available on both Banana Pi and ArmSom websites. I initially thought the latter was better with links to Android, Debian, Ubuntu, and OpenWrt, and some source code, but all those are for older SBCs from the companies…

Banana Pi previously released the BPI-M5 SBC with an Amlogic S905X3 SoC, so you’d assume the Pro version would have many features in common, but the two boards have completely different designs…

ArmSOM Sige5 RK3576 SBC block diagram
Block diagram for ArmSom Sige5 / Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro


The Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro is not for sale on SinoVoIP’s Aliexpress store just yet possibly because the OS images are not available yet, but you’ll find the ArmSom Sige5 Pro Max for pre-order for $148 with 16GB RAM and 128eMMC flash. It does not seem particularly good value as the Orange Pi 5 Pro with similar features (but only one GbE port) and a more powerful Rockchip RK3588S processor goes for $128 on Amazon in the same 16GB/128GB configuration. Maybe it is still worth it for use cases where the low-profile design may be important.

YouTube video player

Share this:
FacebookTwitterHacker NewsSlashdotRedditLinkedInPinterestFlipboardMeWeLineEmailShare

Support CNX Software! Donate via cryptocurrencies, become a Patron on Patreon, or purchase goods on Amazon or Aliexpress

ROCK 5 ITX RK3588 mini-ITX motherboard

28 Replies to “Banana Pi BPI-M5 Pro low-profile SBC features Rockchip RK3576 octa-core Cortex-A72/A53 AIoT SoC”

  1. Looks good but I will never buy a not ripe banana. Sinovoip is just horrible with their Software part, even the own wiki is wrong in vast parts. They are just a joke – expect NO support at all.

    1. They sell hardware and don’t care about software. Orangepi has even bigger trash and nobody seems to care.

      1. Its the SoC manufacurer that should continue the support of the hardware. Like on GPU cards. You get the PCIe GPU card from for example Asus, but the drivers are never from Asus but from the ASIC manufacturer.
        Here its Rockchip that should provide the software support.
        The single thing you need is the typical for ARM based devices the hardware description file to boot your linux.
        If you like automated updates, then add the board you like to the armbian build service.

      1. @tkaiser
        I am waiting for your bench results of the RK3576. Thanks for the great database i use regulary to compare the speed of different SoC.

        1. > I am waiting for your bench results of the RK3576.

          Then you better ask the Banana people to run sbc-bench and publish the results URL? But I think there’s nothing great to expect. It’s four old and boring A53 combined with four old and boring A72, both with slightly higher clockspeeds than usual.

          If the memory controller can’t keep up with cpufreq I don’t see this thing excel with multi-threaded workloads (single-threaded it’s maybe 110%-120% of an RK3399/OP1 AKA dog slow by today’s standards)

  2. I’m not seeing any value in this chip in the first place. It’s just what the RK3399 ought to have been 8 years ago when it was released, but now it’s too late. It’s still heavily missing I/Os for example. I don’t expect anyone to invest much time trying to get that totally outdated beast on par with modern designs. And it’s even more surprising that an SBC vendor adopted it!

    1. You are completely missing the points of the RK3576. Its the most modern SoC that can run on 100% free Software. Its based on same 8nm like the RK3588.
      The RK3399 was really slow and produced much heat because of the old manufacturing process. The Amlogic based Odroid N2 was much better then the RK3399 when using it daily as a computer. The RK3588 series sadly needs for a working GPU closed source software. If you dont need any GPU power but most possible CPU power, just take the RK3582. In general you can unlock the two disabled CPU cores on the RK3582 but the GPU is in most cases really broken but when you want to run free and opensource software you of course dont want use it either ways. On the RK3582 you still have 8k graphics output without GPU.

      1. > In general you can unlock the two disabled CPU cores on the RK3582

        But you may end up with one or even two of those disabled A76 still not being enabled due to having failed factory QA testing and marked as broken. And in that case not even Jianfeng’s u-boot patch will help.

        1. @tkaiser
          Is there any other 8nm or smaller manufactured SoC that can already run its GPU and hopefully everything else with fully free software?
          Thanks for mentioning the raminit. I hope there are experienced people working on making this also free.
          I would really like to see some more recent hardware with 8nm or less working just with free software. If you have some greater overview of what is currently available, i would be happy to read about it.

          1. > Is there any … SoC that can already run its GPU and hopefully everything else with fully free software?

            AFAIK the only ARM SoCs able to run a fully FOSS software stack are from Allwinner thanks to awesome linux-sunxi community. Mainlining efforts take usually until the hardware is obsolete and no idea which marketing BS wrt process node Allwinner is generating.

          2. Alllooser is a terrible company. One of the worst from the free software community view. They have for example violated GPL and instead of fixing this violation, they tried to hide it better. Noone should use their products. They dont support or benefit the free software world. One of the best instead is for example NXP. They contribute and mainline often themself their SoC’s.

            I am looking for a powerfull SoC that can run a daily linux desktop computer with no closed source parts.

          3. > Alllooser… blablabla

            I tried to explain which ARM SoCs may run with a fully open software stack (including those hidden processors that really control all the hardware) and you reply with Wikipedia nonsense tracing back to linux-sunxi wiki (that is the awesome community doing the reverse engineering and mainlining work for these SoCs)

          4. There have been also ‘sources’ in the past claiming RK3568 would be on a more advanced process node than RK3566 but both share same DVFS OPP: 825.0 mV @ 408 MHz and 1050.0 mV @ 1800 MHz. While the A55 in RK3588 use 675.0 mV at 408 MHz but also 1050.0 mV at 1800 MHz.

            Let’s wait for the public appearance of rk3576.dtsi and stop spreading rumours for now.

          5. I don’t think there is a way to really tell from the dtsi file, but there are two hints in the block diagram showing the same NPU as RK3588 and an LP-DDR5 memory controller, both would be strong hints that it uses the same process as well. The memory controllers tend to be built specifically for one process for the external I/O side I’m not aware of any 22nm (or even 12nm) SoC with LP-DDR5. The NPU is similar to the one in the 22nm RK356x, but is several times larger, which would justify going with a smaller process.

      2. Well, all that will not turn an aging A72 into something suddenly great. It will still remain an old slow CPU core for todays software. A good hint usually to see that a CPU core is getting old is that RPi adopts it. And here, it’s the code of the previous generation of RPi, that says a lot. I’m not even speaking about the 4 totally useless 12 years-old A53 cores that accompany them.

        And regarding the “100% free software” claim, given that it’s not yet even known from the latest 6.9-rc kernel, you’ll be stuck with a proprietary BSP kernel for a while!

        They’d rather have refreshed the 3399 in 8nm and bumped its frequency if they wanted to improve it, called it “3399-refreshed” or “OPi-2” or something like this. Anyway, not much important, it will just be running bananaware so who cares.

        1. The only way I can think of that this design made any sense is if the per-chip royalties that Rockchip pays for four Cortex-A72s are substantially less than what they would pay for two Cortex-A76 (as in rk3582). They probably get a similar die area and multi-thread performance (depending on cache and memory interface), but the A72 is still slower on single-thread work.

          The bit that I can’t explain at all is how they got an 8nm hard-core version of the A72. It was designed for and widely deployed built on the 16/14/12nm generation of processes (and some notable examples on 28nm). My understanding here is a bit limited, but I always assumed that making a 10/8nm version of an older core requires a huge investment, and I have not seen anyone else ship one. Any ideas?

          1. I am also really interested to see a answer on this question.
            Could someone else also shrink even older CPUs? NXP or Amlogic have never done this? Nxp i.mx8 in 8nm would be interesting.

          2. It’s common for a popular SoC series to get one shrink (rarely more), but that often involves changing some third-party IP blocks. E.g. i.MX6 went from 40nm to 28nm.
            I don’t think there is a point in shrinking any of the i.MX8 down to 8nm though:

            • The i.MX8M (Cortex-A53) line already go a shrink from 28HPC to 14LPC. The next step from that would be Samsung’s 11LPP, but then they already have i.MX9 with its A55.
            • The large i.MX8QM with its Cortex-A72 is obsolete, and should be replaced with a high-end i.MX9 variant using a modern big core, and this could go to 7nm if they stay with TSMC.
            • The smaller i.MX8QXP (Cortex-A35) are on Samsung 28FDS, and probably don’t want to go to to FinFET (16nm and below) since that would increase leakage current. Going to 22nm FD-SOI would be an option, but that is still exclusive to GloFo.
            • iMX8ULP is probably already small enough that doing a 22FDX version would be unprofitable.
          3. That’s a very good point and I agree with you. The smallest A72 I was aware of was NXP’s layerscape at 16nm. Maybe some phones have known smaller ones but I don’t know. And I agree that shrinking the process must cost an arm (no pun intended), it’s not necessarily worth it for an older core. What sometimes happens is to grow an older design when you want to send it to space, but that’s different, and the costs are covered by a monster budget anyway.

  3. RK3576 ? is it new ? whats the nm ? and how much amper ?I like the flat design anyway! could have usbc only… and also the M2 could be positioned like the ethernet ports.

    1. Yes, brand new. 8NM modern like rk3588 but the gpu on rk3576 can run fully with free Software.

  4. I have an older SBC from Sinovoip, and the lack of support for Debian updates is off putting. Debian 12 has been out for over a year now, is this board out of support even as it is being launched?

    1. Yes, in general this hardware manufacturer just create some distro’s at sale time and then go on creating new hardware. If you want ongoing software support for the hardware, you have to mainline it yourself. If you prefere debian, add your board to the armbian build platform.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Khadas VIM4 SBC
Khadas VIM4 SBC