Taking another shot at the cheap IP camera, part 2

Re:Taking another shot at the cheap IP camera, part 2 by inoop on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @12:15PM (#50443259)

I bought a cheap 'Noorio' camera based on the Ingenic T41 chipset (Amazon [link](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C8J39JHH)) a while back and it turns out that these have an AI accelerator.

I did a bit of reverse engineering to figure out how the chipset works. Here's a write-up in case this is something you're in to: https://github.com/inoop/t41-pluto

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Taking another shot at the cheap IP camera, part 2 by gregsadetsky on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @12:20PM (#50443317)

Great work! Congrats and thanks on sharing this write up and code

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Taking another shot at the cheap IP camera, part 2 by Namidairo on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @08:39PM (#50448811)

> Profiling shows that memory bandwidth and the CPU shoveling bytes into the NNA is currently the biggest bottleneck.

Well, I imagine the numbers would be even worse on stock images, given that the vendor SDK restricted the 512-bit MXU3 instructions to only run on the first core, if I recall?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Taking another shot at the cheap IP camera, part 2 by inoop on Wednesday November 11, 2026 @07:21AM (#50452581)

The NNA lives outside the MXU3 extensions. On the stock image, they're using 4-bit layers for a big chunk of the inference, and they're actually getting really good framerates (the actual numbers escape me atm). That was always a future work step for me.

[ Parent | on HN ]