06-28-2002, 06:48 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
|
|
Intel: It is up to developers to optimize for X-Scale
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=73&e=1&cid=73&u=/zd/20020628/tc_zd/940329
"Intel says that software developers will bear the burden of boosting performance on newer models of Pocket PC handhelds, as manufacturers move from Intel's StrongARM SA1110 processor to a new Intel architecture called XScale. "
The more I learn about this whole thing the less I know about it. Bus width, bus speed, onboard cache, PIII-PIV similarities, ARM4, ARM5, blah blah blah.  "Intel, however, says that it will be a simple matter for software makers to release new versions of their software optimized for XScale, without needing optimised [sic] Pocket PC software and without running the risk of fragmenting their software. Intel compared the process to the introduction of any new architecture, including the Pentium 4. "Optimized software that takes full advantage of the XScale microarchitecture will occur over a period of time, like any new processor microarchitecture transition," said Intel representative Mark Miller. "
Thanks to Dazz for the link.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 07:16 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,329
|
|
The question of the month. Is this FUD or fact? Is Intel trying to shift the blame or are they giving us the straight skinny?
If this is true then the focus is going to instantly move to Microsoft to release a SDK\OS that is X-Scale optimized. I am going to be supremely interested in seeing how well X-Scale sales do now that the cat is out of the bag and everyone knows about X-Scale performance. The OEM's may lean HARD on MS to fix this. Again assuming this isn't a chip issue.
What a mess. :roll:
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 08:12 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 486
|
|
Well, I've been asking around for an XScale compiler or something for two months now. Nada. Maybe its changing now...
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 08:52 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 400
|
|
Exactly what I've been saying all along!! This truely is how things are done in the computer industry. It's just that we have come to expect so much from our little Portable friends and want so much for them that led us to have unrealistic expectations for the the Uber-chip. Just look at the Loox :wink: Benchmarks, the Optimization is already starting. In six months everyone will be using the Tosihba debacle as "What not to do" to try and garner market share, and everyone will love their X-Scale PPCs just as they love their StrongArms 
|
| |
|
|
|
06-29-2002, 01:04 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
|
|
I hatue being right all the time ...
Well, the skinny is out and what I told EVERYONE is 100% correct. One cannot assume that software will necessarily scale with higher processor speed.
Even if the software is optimized, I doubt that you will experience a proportional gain in most applications, especially if Microsoft does not recompile PocketPC to X-Scale. Even if they did, the performance gains would probably be marginal in most applications as most PocketPC apps are I/O bound, not CPU bound.
Those gamers out there will be much better served by waiting for integrated 3D acceleration rather than a faster CPU. Your PocketPC is a full blown computer, it cannot operate the same way as dedicated hardware like Game Boy.
As far as power is concerned, it's still a big wash. The display on PocketPC far outpaces the CPU consumption. The CPU goes mostly idle in any case when "No-Op" instructions occur. Any CPU intensive application will crank the processor speed up to 100%. Since the display is ALWAYS on and performing refresh when in use, it will likely dominate power consumption until true ambient-lit solutions are available (Organic LCD).
|
| |
|
|
|
06-29-2002, 02:48 AM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
The problem with this....
The problem and fuss hasn't been about who is responsible for optimization, but that NO ONE said anything about it before shipping products.... as if Intel, MS, and the PDA builders had no idea......
They let expectation and reality become mismatched.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-29-2002, 06:46 AM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 548
|
|
So what do you want it to be?
I've been readin all theposts on X-Scale... Intel says it, Microsoft says it, and software developers say it too.
Coming up with an OS which is for X-Scale only will turn all Pocket PCs based on StrongARM obsolete.
Optimizing apps to run on X-Scale seems to be a better choice... DO we get maximum improvemet? Probably not... Will it perform better than StrongARM devices... chances are.
Give those who got SA devices a chance to make full use of their investment... Does that look like another 18 months of no OS support for X-Scale? Maybe...
|
| |
|
|
|
06-29-2002, 08:00 AM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
still an Intel/MS task at hand
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ppcsurfr
Optimizing apps to run on X-Scale seems to be a better choice...
|
Now, to make this shift in responsibility would mean that development tools should be readily available that expose the enhancements. I am not aware of any such things in the platform sdk or any incremental libraries, etc that would allow a developer to take advantage without going through extraordinary effort to make this a reality. Someone, please correct me if I am wrong and MS/Intel have already released such enhancements for the standard development environments.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-29-2002, 08:18 AM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 548
|
|
Looks like ther are no tools yet available to do just that... unless www.inakicastillo.com knows something all other developers don't know.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-09-2002, 08:38 AM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 574
|
|
Hi PPCSurfr, nice to see you on the other side...
I saw on www.firstloox.org (news, 2nd of june) that microsoft has changed the OS to provide better support, and that WMP will be released for XScale as well.
Jaap
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
