03-17-2003, 11:30 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
First Intel PXA255 Benchmark Results?
I think it's still too early to put much stock in these benchmark results, for but for better or worse, go check out the site. I'm not sure whether I should be excited or depressed. :? System performance is always more about more than the CPU though, so for now I'm going to remain cautiously optimistic.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-17-2003, 11:33 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
Games
I saw a similar thread sparked by the webmaster of this site somewhere else (I think it was pocketmatrix or pocketgamer. It may be early to condemn the 255, but it sure does not look promising. :-(
__________________
Jonathan (JonnoB)
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke
|
| |
|
|
|
03-17-2003, 11:38 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 64
|
|
According to this source (the author of PocketTV)
http://discussion.brighthand.com/sho...threadid=74892
the new XScales perform significantly better. The PocketTV team really knows their stuff, and I would believe them before anyone else.
To sum things up, they state that when properly configured the new 300MHz XScale outperforms the old 400MHz XScale by up to 20%. They don't have a 400MHz one, but it's safe to assume it will perform at least as well, and probably better.
They also claim that it's not guarenteed that manufacturer's have their processors properly configured, but that it can be done by the end user in software.
I think the new chips are a significant improvement.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-17-2003, 11:57 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11
|
|
Intel says the PXA255 is able to be dropped in to replace the PXA250, so perhaps the device used in this test was originally designed to use a PXA250 and has not been modified to take advantage of the 200MHz FSB?
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 12:08 AM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 864
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DareDevilNZ
Intel says the PXA255 is able to be dropped in to replace the PXA250, so perhaps the device used in this test was originally designed to use a PXA250 and has not been modified to take advantage of the 200MHz FSB?
|
Great point I tend to agree... Pocket PC Techs had said they are working on the drop in upgrade to PXA255 on an "old" 3970...
The mem move numbers are identical... there is no way that is a 200mhz bus...
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 12:18 AM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by entropy1980
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DareDevilNZ
Intel says the PXA255 is able to be dropped in to replace the PXA250, so perhaps the device used in this test was originally designed to use a PXA250 and has not been modified to take advantage of the 200MHz FSB?
|
Great point I tend to agree... Pocket PC Techs had said they are working on the drop in upgrade to PXA255 on an "old" 3970...
The mem move numbers are identical... there is no way that is a 200mhz bus... |
Just because the CPU is a drop-in replacement does not mean that the board the CPU sits in provides a 200Mhz bus circuitry. In fact, it may be that you get a 255 with some improvement over the 250 with just CPU replacement and then you get huge leaps of performance improvements when the host of the CPU is designed to be a 200Mhz FSB.
__________________
Jonathan (JonnoB)
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 12:21 AM
|
|
Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 864
|
|
I know that I was just citing the fact that it could be done....although supposedly it has lower power consumption so you might see something there....
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 03:00 AM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 541
|
|
Actually, one of PocketMatrix's members have gotten access to a 750, and snuck PocketQuake on there. We have 11.7FPS on an optimized config, in which the E-200 scored 10.4 FPS on. Keep in mind the e750 I believe is still using the Imageon chip, slow as it's always been.
Basically, a 1.3FPS increase from one of the faster 206MHz ARM increase, on a slow Imageon chip.
I'm VERY excited about the PXA255.
http://forums.pocketmatrix.com/viewtopic.php?t=8858
List of PocketQuake benchmarks, mainted by yours truly.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 05:01 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 381
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sponge
Actually, one of PocketMatrix's members have gotten access to a 750, and snuck PocketQuake on there. We have 11.7FPS on an optimized config, in which the E-200 scored 10.4 FPS on. Keep in mind the e750 I believe is still using the Imageon chip, slow as it's always been.
Basically, a 1.3FPS increase from one of the faster 206MHz ARM increase, on a slow Imageon chip.
I'm VERY excited about the PXA255.
http://forums.pocketmatrix.com/viewtopic.php?t=8858
List of PocketQuake benchmarks, mainted by yours truly. |
is that score really good? especially since it's an optimized config... not sure though... gotta go check the benchmarks later!
Anyway, the e750 has been available for a week now @ Fry's and other places. People at brighthand already have them and have done numerous tests. They are faster. The benchmarks above are fruitless, imo 
|
| |
|
|
|
03-18-2003, 06:13 AM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 102
|
|
Hi I am the guy how made the Bench and indeed It is not the paradise if we use the OEM CPU settings BUT !
As said in this thread here, the PocketTVTeam by using PHM, achieved some very nice results...
the settings under PHM are:
L=45, M=2, N=1
with a memory controller speed at 166 MHz (L=45). So the Problem is that not all PPC got the same Memory maker and this may vary all the time... Until someone don't try all new PPC with the PXA-255 we are not sure which one will be faster or slower.
I just hope it will be an Ipaq 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
