Intel PXA250 XScale Processor [Archive]

Jason Dunn

02-14-2002, 08:08 AM

<a href="http://developer.intel.com/design/pca/prodbref/298620.htm">http://developer.intel.com/design/pca/prodbref/298620.htm</a> Intel has released some detailed specs on the Xscale CPU - this is one bad mother of a CPU. ;-) • Low power, high performance 32-bit Intel® XScale™ core-based CPU (200, 300 and 400 MHz) • ARM** Architecture v.5TE compliant and application code compatible with Intel® SA-1110 processor for rapid upgrade • Intel® Superpipelined RISC technology utilizing advanced Intel 0.18µ process for high core speeds at low power • Intel® Media Processing Technology including 40-bit accumulator and 16-bit SIMD to enhance audio/video decode performance • Low Power and Turbo modes for optimal battery life • 32 KB data and 32 KB instruction caches • 2 KB mini data cache for streaming data "...Integrated Memory and PCMCIA/CompactFlash Controller with 100 MHz Memory Bus, 16-bit or 32-bit ROM/Flash/SRAM six banks, 16-bit or 32-bit SDRAM, SMROM four banks, as well as PCMCIA and CompactFlash for added functionality and expandability..." "...Peripheral Control Module offers 16-channel configurable DMA controller, integrated LCD controller with unique DMA for fast color screen support, Bluetooth* I/F, serial ports (IrDA, I2C, I2S, AC97, three UARTs, SPI and SSP), USB end point interface, and MMC/ SD Card Support for expandable memory and I/O functionality..."

Tari Akpodiete

02-14-2002, 08:51 AM

i'd hope for at least 128 for the rom, at least, and no less than 256 for the ram.

plus, i'd want thinner/lighter too, better button placement, a kickass screen, built-in bluetooth, etc!

and for the iPaq - a BACKUP battery!!

oh yes, under a grand (and the further under the better)!!!

02-14-2002, 04:26 PM

st63z

02-14-2002, 05:30 PM

Ah, as long as we're fantasizing, why no .15 micron process? And hey, where's my OLED screen, hmmm?

Anyways, I wonder what new capabilities the 400MHz PXA250 will enable? I just read somewhere where someone was saying that 150MHz XScale would be similar in speed to 175MHz StrongARM, also that the 400MHz PXA250 can take as much as 30% less power than the 206MHz SA-1110...? Not sure if they're factoring XScale's SIMD into the speed comparison...

How much better will we be able to play MPEG4/WMV? I think full-rate VideoCD MPEG1 will be achievable. Continuous speech recognition, that'd be so cool (but please include much better quality microphone!). Also I hope all the PPC speech/multimedia software developers are already hard at work incorporating XScale SIMD support...

thebrix

02-14-2002, 05:33 PM

The White Paper (same page) is a fascinating read.

Probably most important of all is that USB 1.1 is built into the processor. Thus two devices, or a device and a PC, can sync using a standard cable; I hope all this'll finally fix PPC synchronisation problems ...

st63z

02-14-2002, 05:46 PM

So no direct support for USB-on-the-go (which is the 12mbps peer-to-peer extension to the USB 2.0 standard, which also uses a smaller connector design)?

thebrix

02-14-2002, 05:53 PM

So no direct support for USB-on-the-go (which is the 12mbps peer-to-peer extension to the USB 2.0 standard, which also uses a smaller connector design)?

No, probably because it's too new (I guess the lead time for a processor is easily 18 months or 2 years) ...

zylark

02-17-2002, 01:55 AM

Is there any kind of benchmarking software for the PPC? I'd love to see how it stacks up against my various desktop PCs :D

spg

02-17-2002, 02:21 AM

From all I have heard, and from this information, It appears that the XScale is going to be one killer processor. All I've got to say to that is- COOL! 8)

spg

02-17-2002, 02:26 AM

Is there any kind of benchmarking software for the PPC? I'd love to see how it stacks up against my various desktop PCs :D

There are two benchmarking programs I have heard of-

The GAPI Benchmark -
http://www.itcp.net/~awsh/Speed_Demonz/GAPI_Benchmark/GAPI_Benchmark.htm
And the VOBenchmark -
http://www.voscorp.com/asp/PPC/VOBenchmark/default.asp

Have fun with it!

Dave Conger

02-17-2002, 07:37 AM

From all I have heard, and from this information, It appears that the XScale is going to be one killer processor. All I've got to say to that is- COOL! 8)

It has appeared to be a killer for the last....18 months....though if it actually is will be slightly different. Hopefully Intel tested, tested, and tested some more (I know we did when I was there), cause I would hate for it to be buggy...ick. I also hope the power managment works out well with the various dection for high vs. low usage.

James

02-17-2002, 07:58 PM

It has appeared to be a killer for the last....18 months....though if it actually is will be slightly different. Hopefully Intel tested, tested, and tested some more (I know we did when I was there), cause I would hate for it to be buggy...ick. I also hope the power managment works out well with the various dection for high vs. low usage.

Power management is the defnite killer, and about the only thing Palm has left they can claim to be better at. If they get the power management solid, Palm's dead...oh wait, Palm's dead anyway, so hopefully they do power management anyway :lol:

spg

02-17-2002, 08:12 PM

It has appeared to be a killer for the last....18 months....though if it actually is will be slightly different.

Yes it has been for a while, I was just stating it again. Never hurts to hear a good thing twice!

Power management is the defnite killer, and about the only thing Palm has left they can claim to be better at. If they get the power management solid, Palm's dead...oh wait, Palm's dead anyway, so hopefully they do power management anyway

I wouldn't say Palm is dead yet... and even if the company goes bankrupt and shuts down, Palm won't ever be dead. We must not forget that Palm was the one who really got the whole PDA idea to take off! And still today, I will be using my iPAQ (which is definitly not a Palm) and people will say -"Whatcha got there, your Palm Pilot?". Now I am not trying to defend Palm, but I really think it will be a very long time before Palm will go bankrupt.

Dave Conger

02-17-2002, 08:15 PM

Power management is the defnite killer, and about the only thing Palm has left they can claim to be better at. If they get the power management solid, Palm's dead...oh wait, Palm's dead anyway, so hopefully they do power management anyway :lol:

I don't think they can get power management that solid. And I don't think Palm can keep it that solid. Pocket PC's suck down much more power then Palms...and since everyone is telling Palm, we want a better OS and we want better technology, power is going to be used. I think we are just going to start seeing optimization on various products, like lower powered screens and the processors with various power management tools.

James

02-17-2002, 09:02 PM

I wouldn't say Palm is dead yet... and even if the company goes bankrupt and shuts down, Palm won't ever be dead. We must not forget that Palm was the one who really got the whole PDA idea to take off! And still today, I will be using my iPAQ (which is definitly not a Palm) and people will say -"Whatcha got there, your Palm Pilot?". Now I am not trying to defend Palm, but I really think it will be a very long time before Palm will go bankrupt.

Palm OS will live for a long time (and it's a separate company now isn't it?), but Palm the hardware company is on borrowed time...

spg

02-17-2002, 09:10 PM

Palm OS will live for a long time (and it's a separate company now isn't it?), but Palm the hardware company is on borrowed time...

Palm OS is now owned by Palm Source Inc. which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Palm Inc. the hardware company. And I will agree with you on that, I have always liked Handspring's and Sony's Palm OS handhelds better. The hardware company is still there thanks to the software company :?.

Dave Conger

02-17-2002, 09:31 PM

Palm OS is now owned by Palm Source Inc. which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Palm Inc. the hardware company. And I will agree with you on that, I have always liked Handspring's and Sony's Palm OS handhelds better. The hardware company is still there thanks to the software company :?.

I am sorry, but that is such a crock. PalmSource is just their "fake" company I feel. I mean, the Palm OS didn't really break away from Palm, they are still owned by Palm. It kind of is like if Pocket PC became Pocket PC Inc. but was still owned by Microsoft, it would still be a Microsoft product...not really a "Pocket PC Inc." product. I feel like Palm is just trying to be doing something, but isn't really doing anything. Maybe a subsidary was more profitable then cutting more jobs.

spg

02-17-2002, 09:42 PM

I am sorry, but that is such a crock. PalmSource is just their "fake" company I feel. I mean, the Palm OS didn't really break away from Palm, they are still owned by Palm. It kind of is like if Pocket PC became Pocket PC Inc. but was still owned by Microsoft, it would still be a Microsoft product...not really a "Pocket PC Inc." product. I feel like Palm is just trying to be doing something, but isn't really doing anything. Maybe a subsidary was more profitable then cutting more jobs.

That is exactly what I meant by saying "Wholly Owned Subsidiary". I was not implying that it is a second company.

Dave Conger

02-17-2002, 09:45 PM

I wasn't saying what you said was a crock...just stating that I think PalmSource is a load of...something that isn't so great.

James

02-18-2002, 03:19 AM

I wasn't saying what you said was a crock...just stating that I think PalmSource is a load of...something that isn't so great.

I bet They'll either get absorbed back in, or sold off in the next 18 months

Dave Conger

02-18-2002, 03:39 AM

I bet They'll either get absorbed back in, or sold off in the next 18 months

I give it 12. 2003 at the time, I don't think PalmSource will be around or the Palm hardware division won't be around. Somehow they will be absorbed or sold.

Dave Conger

02-18-2002, 09:26 AM

spg

02-18-2002, 04:42 PM

Here was a little article from the USA Today about the handheld markets. It specifically talks about some companies including how Intel and AMD are trying to capitalize on the mobile market right now.

"Handheld computers take focus from PCs" - USA Today 02/17/2002
http://www.usatoday.com/money/tech/2002-02-18-handheld.htm

Interesting read, thanks for tip :).

I give it 12. 2003 at the time, I don't think PalmSource will be around or the Palm hardware division won't be around. Somehow they will be absorbed or sold.

Call me a Palm defender if you want, but I have a feeling that it won't be anywhere near that soon. Now I will admit this, I am a little less of a Pocket PC only guy than the rest of you so it may just be me. I just have that feeling that Palm will start becoming more and more of a real threat to the Pocket PC platform. Now they may not succed, the innovation move may have come to late but I would say they have at least 12 months to prove that they really can innovate. And if they prove that, I give them another 2 years to try stop the market share landslide. Ok I just really backed Palm up there, I know I am going to get blasted. I'd better lay low for a while :wink:.

James

02-18-2002, 06:10 PM

just really backed Palm up there, I know I am going to get blasted. I'd better lay low for a while :wink:.

I view it as a matter of choice. Palm is completely inadequate to my needs. Everyone has different needs and thus mileage varies.

:wink: Besides, the Constitution protects your right to choose poorly :lol:

Dave Conger

02-18-2002, 06:25 PM

Ok I just really backed Palm up there, I know I am going to get blasted. I'd better lay low for a while :wink:.

I am not completly pro Pocket PC, I think Palm OS based devices have great applications for certain people. I don't see the point of someone buying a iPAQ 3800 if all they need is contacts and a calendar. A cheap Palm can do that just fine and still give them some expandibility. That is why I have always kept my site open to both because you can't just say "everyone should get a Pocket PC."

spg

02-18-2002, 11:33 PM

just really backed Palm up there, I know I am going to get blasted. I'd better lay low for a while :wink:.

:wink: Besides, the Constitution protects your right to choose poorly :lol:

lol, Well I have both and but I use Pocket PC more. So I don't really choose poorly... :D.

I am not completly pro Pocket PC, I think Palm OS based devices have great applications for certain people. I don't see the point of someone buying a iPAQ 3800 if all they need is contacts and a calendar. A cheap Palm can do that just fine and still give them some expandibility. That is why I have always kept my site open to both because you can't just say "everyone should get a Pocket PC."

That is the reason my site caters to both as well. When there are two options out there I don't think there is any reason to bash the other, and we must not forget Palm still has a larger market share :). Opps, probably shouldn't have said that. :wink:

Dave Conger

02-19-2002, 12:29 AM

When there are two options out there I don't think there is any reason to bash the other, and we must not forget Palm still has a larger market share :). Opps, probably shouldn't have said that. :wink:

Yeah, I really don't like how Palm is states how big there market share was. I have a feeling if you look at it a couple years ago compared to now you will see that they have lost ground. More then the share, I think the tends are what really matter. Increased/Decreased sales or changes in market share really tell you about if a compaq is doing things right.

There is always a reason behind one "side" bashing the other, but don't you think that commentary is helpful in many cases? To admit your product is inferior doesn't really help you to get more people to back your product, and with this argument from both side, it gives people the idea that they need to look for themselves instead of taking someone elses work for things. When I get asked to recommend a product, I almost never give product names or model numbers. An iPAQ was the right solution for me, but it isn't going to be right for John Doe necessarly.

I know that strays a little from your comment about market share, but hey, it is a Thought.

James

02-19-2002, 05:40 AM

To admit your product is inferior doesn't really help you to get more

It depends on how you admit inferiority (or perhaps even how you define it). Certainly you aren't going to win fans by having your marketing group tell the world that your products sucks, but if you admit to yourself that your product sucks in some area(s), you're far more likely to improve it...

Dave Conger

02-19-2002, 09:17 AM

It depends on how you admit inferiority (or perhaps even how you define it). Certainly you aren't going to win fans by having your marketing group tell the world that your products sucks, but if you admit to yourself that your product sucks in some area(s), you're far more likely to improve it...

True...True...

(yes, an I agree I know...sorry)

James

02-19-2002, 04:15 PM

True...True...

(yes, an I agree I know...sorry)

This is getting to be quite scary - way too much agreement going on around here :lol:

spg

02-19-2002, 05:31 PM

Yeah, I really don't like how Palm is states how big there market share was. I have a feeling if you look at it a couple years ago compared to now you will see that they have lost ground. More then the share, I think the tends are what really matter. Increased/Decreased sales or changes in market share really tell you about if a compaq is doing things right.

There is always a reason behind one "side" bashing the other, but don't you think that commentary is helpful in many cases? To admit your product is inferior doesn't really help you to get more people to back your product, and with this argument from both side, it gives people the idea that they need to look for themselves instead of taking someone elses work for things. When I get asked to recommend a product, I almost never give product names or model numbers. An iPAQ was the right solution for me, but it isn't going to be right for John Doe necessarly.

While it is true Palm has lost ground, their sales are still higher every month. And while tRends do matter (you said tends), if you are sliding but still have a lead it is easier to stop sliding. And yes commentary is helpful, I agree with what James said as well. If you admit your product is inferior and your customers know as well, when you fix that and start innovating it will get all the more attention than if you never said it was inferior.

That may not make sense, but at least I tried. (I'm kinda out of it at the moment, my news database on my site just went kaput and I had to start from scratch, uggghhh! :x )