View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
homerw500 Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jul 01, 2004 Posts: 22
|
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 7:17 pm Post subject: 300MHz Intel PXA255 or Samsung 266 MHz processor |
|
|
Please can any one tell me which is the best processor out of the Intel PXA255 300MHz or Samsung 266 MHz for a pda and gps setup is one faster than the other or are they about the same.
many thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
What operating system? _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kiwiruss Occasional Visitor
Joined: Nov 11, 2004 Posts: 18
|
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:54 pm Post subject: xcale vs ARM |
|
|
The Samsungs an ARM processor and the intel is an xscale processor.
Thier speeds probably about the same, but what systems are they in ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pocketgps Lifetime Member
Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Posts: 2145 Location: Midlands, UK
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
The original question was which one is better - and without knowing what operating sytem he wants to use there is no easy answer ( a 266MHz ARM running 2003 can easily outperform a 300 MHz XScale running 2002 ) _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DavidW Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: 17/05/2003 02:26:21 Posts: 3747 Location: Bedfordshire, UK
|
Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2004 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The XScale is not only ARM compliant - it is an ARM core (from memory ARM v.5T or v.5TE instruction set). However, some things are arranged differently on the XScale to many ARM processors, which is why certain performance critical code such as MPEG players is often available in an XScale specific version.
If druck is reading, he'll probably have even more details to hand than I do.
As an aside, the SiRFstar IIe/LP chipset at the heart of many of our GPS receivers uses an ARM processor core.
As Lutz says, 2003 tends to run rather faster on the same hardware than 2002 does - it's based on the rather better Windows CE 4.20 (Pocket PC 2002 is based on Windows CE 3.00).
Overall, you're unlikely to see much difference in performance between the two processors. It depends on the rest of the machine as to which is a good option.
David |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gazjen Occasional Visitor
Joined: May 21, 2004 Posts: 11
|
Posted: Sat Jan 01, 2005 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well my old medion ppc 250 (Samsung) ran things a lot better than my new medion 9500 does (intel) so If I had the choice it would be the samsung |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|