Benchmarks Of Pocket PC 2002 and 2003 iPAQ 3970

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.gpspassion.com/fr/articles.asp?id=60">http://www.gpspassion.com/fr/articles.asp?id=60</a><br /><br />Guillaume has obtained a ROM upgrade for his iPAQ 3970 and has run some benchmark tests comparing the Pocket PC 2002 OS to the new Windows Mobile 2003 for Pocket PC OS. For good measure, he included a 2002 Axim X5 (400MHz) and a new iPAQ 2215.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2003/20030705-3970benchmarks.gif" /><br /><br />Overall, there is a 12% increase in the 3970's performance, but if you read the whole article and look at the half-dozen images, you will see where the 3900 series really shines.

[gpspassion]

Just to clarify, the 2215, 3970 (2k2) and Dell results are from the SPB database.

I think the best news here is that WM2003 really breathes new life into the good ol' iPAQ :lol: When I use my Dell Axim it really feels sluggish now!

[Fabulas]

That's what I'm talkin' bout! :way to go:

[sponge]

Wow the 3970 dominates the 2200 in the Graphics index.. now what does that even test for? Anyone have any PocketQuake benchmarks?

[Trokair]

I too have manged to get my hands on a ROM update for my 3970, and was quite amazed to find how fast everything is. To put things to the test, I used the good ol' Chrono Trigger/PocketSNES: Bleeding Edge combination, and lo and behold, it ran at 25-30 FPS! Everything certainly feels much snappier. :D

-Kyle

[TawnerX]

So much for the official party line to blame everything on "Intel" chip design, and there is nothing can be done on the OS side.

[gpspassion]

Now for the really good news (for GPS fans of course). I'm finding that Intellinav (OEM for Routis, MyNavigator and iGuidance) calculates routes about 5 (yes five) times faster under WM2003 :mrgreen:

I nearly peed my pants when I looked at my stopwatch ;-)

[Ed Hansberry]

I'm finding that Intellinav (OEM for Routis, MyNavigator and iGuidance) calculates routes about 5 (yes five) times faster under WM2003 :mrgreen:
Pocket Backup on a 2003 device backs up 20MB in 2 minutes vs 10-13 on a 2002 device. :D

[Macguy59]

I'm not getting the graphics index. From everything else I've read about the 2215, it should have come out on top in this to. Confused :roll:

[sponge]

The 2215 uses that damned MediaQ chip, which no one can seem to find a decent use for yet.

[Sslixtis]

So much for the official party line to blame everything on "Intel" chip design, and there is nothing can be done on the OS side.

Amen! :beer:

Not that I believed it for one second, but it sure is nice to have some supporting Data.

I'm really impressed with 2215 so far and am glad to see MS take advantage of the Xscale (ARMv5). I just wish they wouldn't lie about such things. All they have to say is be patient we're working on it!

Oh well, it's here now, maybe people can finally quite bashing on Intel and enjoy their PPCs more. Once they get the new OS anyway. :wink:

[Janak Parekh]

I'm really impressed with 2215 so far and am glad to see MS take advantage of the Xscale (ARMv5). I just wish they wouldn't lie about such things. All they have to say is be patient we're working on it!
Actually, from what I've heard Pocket PC 2003 is more ARM-optimized, but not specifically XScale-optimized with the exception of WMP9. It so turns out the API performance improvements make any unit feel snappier. The 2215, BTW, outpaces the 3970 in most benchmarks (excluding graphics) because of its 200MHz internal memory bus, something that was enabled via use of the PXA255.

--janak

[gpspassion]

200mhz internal memory bus on the 2215? Didn't Jason correct that initial assumption in his 2215 review.
I for one believed that all PXA255 devices would have a 200mhz bus but it seems it's not a given...

[Ed Hansberry]

I'm really impressed with 2215 so far and am glad to see MS take advantage of the Xscale (ARMv5). I just wish they wouldn't lie about such things. All they have to say is be patient we're working on it!
Actually, from what I've heard Pocket PC 2003 is more ARM-optimized, but not specifically XScale-optimized with the exception of WMP9.
Agreed. PPC 2002 was still very much PPC 2000 at the core, complete with the same WinCE 3.0 code. They just quit messing with multiple processors and never built a non-ARM version. Doesn't mean it was ARM optimized by any stretch.

I have seen some fantastic performance increases on a 206MHz device that has had 2002 and now 2003 on it. I think that 2003 is ARM optimized, plus the inclusion of a new generation of CE - 4.2. Given that 2003 runs just fine on ARM v4 devices - like the 1930/40 series from HP, I'd say it continues to point to non-v5 optimization.

[ombu]

Good for 3970 users, this brings back some value.

Hope we can see some benchmarks for iPaq 555x, I'm curious.

Regards.

[Janak Parekh]

200mhz internal memory bus on the 2215? Didn't Jason correct that initial assumption in his 2215 review.
I for one believed that all PXA255 devices would have a 200mhz bus but it seems it's not a given...
Definitely, not all PXA255 devices have a 200MHz memory bus (e.g., the Axims just retrofitted with the new processor). However, I believe that was reconciled further -- the new PXA255 devices still have a 100MHz system bus and a 200MHz memory bus, if I understand correctly.

--janak

[Jason Dunn]

So much for the official party line to blame everything on "Intel" chip design, and there is nothing can be done on the OS side.

We never said that - we simply said that optimizing for Xscale was NOT the solution. You'll find similar (and even more dramatic actually) gain on a 3650 with a 206 Mhz StrongARM going from 2002 to 2003, so this is about builing a better OS for ALL CPU types, not just for Intel's Xscales.

[ctmagnus]

You'll find similar (and even more dramatic actually) gain on a 3650 with a 206 Mhz StrongARM going from 2002 to 2003

What apps are in ROM with the 3600s and WM2003? Same as PPC2002 on the same device?

[ctmagnus]

Hope we can see some benchmarks for iPaq 555x, I'm curious.

I just ordered one. I hope it's comparable to the 2215s.

[TawnerX]

So much for the official party line to blame everything on "Intel" chip design, and there is nothing can be done on the OS side.

We never said that - we simply said that optimizing for Xscale was NOT the solution. You'll find similar (and even more dramatic actually) gain on a 3650 with a 206 Mhz StrongARM going from 2002 to 2003, so this is about builing a better OS for ALL CPU types, not just for Intel's Xscales.

nice touch,
but I believe the contention is why 2k2 was performing so badly on the new Xscale. One proposal was that the OS can still be optimised, adapting to the new pipelines structures or using Xscale instructions among others.

but this new benchmark indicates that even without Xscale etc, there is upward of 10% improvement instead of previous claim.

1. Microsoft wrote a PR that there is not much they can do to make the OS faster,.. or some similar BS like that.

THOUGHTS: Some industry analysts have said that Microsoft doesn't have any fix in place because Intel couldn't get the chips out in time.

SUWANJINDAR: “We have implemented and released specific software changes that our hardware partners are implementing without breaking compatibility for our OEMs and users. While we believe there may be incremental gains that could be had via small optimizations we are not convinced there are across the board improvements that would amount to any kind of dramatic system wide speed up. We have to develop software based on the processor architecture that offers the broadest compatibility for developers and when we shipped Pocket PC 2002 as it still is today, that was ARM V4.”
http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1772

Then people just start parroting, no gain on the OS side is possible period. It's too minute. gotta change the bus or break the OS compatibility via the Xscale implementation. It's all intel's fault.

..mkay whatever...

just waiting for SA on 2k3 post. (tho' it'll be pretty darn impossible to come by since no manufactuer is upgrading SA with 2k3.

[Janak Parekh]

Then people just start parroting, no gain on the OS side is possible period. It's too minute. gotta change the bus or break the OS compatibility via the Xscale implementation. It's all intel's fault.
Evidently, MS was able to optimize their APIs a lot more than they were willing to let on, but the fact that non-XScale 2003 units are coming out (like the 1940s) is clear indication that they didn't make their code exclusively ARMv5/XScale optimized.

just waiting for SA on 2k3 post. (tho' it'll be pretty darn impossible to come by since no manufactuer is upgrading SA with 2k3.
Incorrect -- HP will be releasing a Pocket PC 2003 upgrade on the 3870, which is a StrongARM-based unit.

--janak

[kzemach]

While I'm happy for all of you who now have speedier 3900s, I STILL can't seem to find the right order page from HP. I want to join the club. Where are you getting this illustrious update? I'm more than happy to pay HP for it, if they would sell it to me.

I'm sure I'm not the only one... Thanks!

[ppcsurfr]

Description of Change to the Customer:
There are both functional & errata fix differences between the PXA250 B1, B2 & C0 to PXA255 A0 (formerly referred to as PXA250 C1) steppings. The C0 stepping was provided as an engineering sample only. Although the PXA255 A0 is a new die (compared to the PXA250 B1, B2 & C0) it can function as a drop-in replacement, with the exception of the ID Register. Hardware changes to the system are required to take advantage of the new enhancements / features.

The PXA255 A0 provides the following new enhancements / features to previous releases:
• Hardware Universal Asynchronous Receiver / Transmitter (HWUART)
• Low Power SDRAM Mode Register Set Configuration Register
• 400 Run Mode / 200 PxBus
o Core Clock Configuration Register (CCCR)
o Core Phase Locked Loop
• UDC Control Function Register (UDCCFR)
• NSSP

Okay... so while retrofitted devices may still have the old 100MHz bus, how about the ones designed with PXA255 in mind? I guess they'd come up with a 200MHz bus for it right?

Anyone want to come up with a tabulation on which PPCs have a 200MHz bus here?

Mabuhay! ~ Carlo

[gpspassion]

It is getting a bit confusing since the info you put above seems to indicate the PXA255 works with a 200mhz bus...but maybe it's compatible with a 100mhz too...
As far as I know the only PocketPC on the market with a 200mhz bus is the Tohsiba e755.

[Ed Hansberry]

Then people just start parroting, no gain on the OS side is possible period. It's too minute. gotta change the bus or break the OS compatibility via the Xscale implementation. It's all intel's fault.

..mkay whatever...
And they changed to a new OS didn't they? CE 4.2 is a huge jump from CE 3.0. Why do you doubt not much could have been done with the CE 3.0 core?

[Ramin]

just waiting for SA on 2k3 post. (tho' it'll be pretty darn impossible to come by since no manufactuer is upgrading SA with 2k3.

FYI - according to the http://www.hp.com/sbso/special/ppc_upgrade.html HP is releasing a Wndows Mobile 2003 update for the iPAQ H3800 series. Suggestion: Why not do a little reading before posting something which may mislead others? ;)

[SilverSealAMW]

Now I'm really not happy, I gave up my 3950 for the speed of the 2215, but still missed everything else from the 3950, now I find I could have just kept it and got the speed right there :cry:

[gpspassion]

well the 2215 is probably still speedier ;-) and has more built-in features.
What do you miss from your 3950, screen, sleeves?

[SilverSealAMW]

well the 2215 is probably still speedier ;-) and has more built-in features.
What do you miss from your 3950, screen, sleeves?

Yeah, I'm glad I have it, but I miss the screen and speaker of my 3950 a lot.

[gpspassion]

Yeah the 39xx's still stand out as the best PocketPCs ever, especially with the WM2003 upgrade.
Is the screen of the 2215 really that inferior or is it just the smallers size?

[SilverSealAMW]

Yeah the 39xx's still stand out as the best PocketPCs ever, especially with the WM2003 upgrade.
Is the screen of the 2215 really that inferior or is it just the smallers size?

The screen really is worse, I don't really know how to describe it, but it gets what I've seen called a "gridline effect", which is not very noticble, but kind of annoying. Never had that with my 3950.

[gpspassion]

Sounds like my Dell Axim..."gridline", "graininess"...still it's better than on my "late" 3670 ;-)

[rlobrecht]

FYI - according to the http://www.hp.com/sbso/special/ppc_upgrade.html HP is releasing a Wndows Mobile 2003 update for the iPAQ H3800 series. Suggestion: Why not do a little reading before posting something which may mislead others? ;)

and
You'll find similar (and even more dramatic actually) gain on a 3650 with a 206 Mhz StrongARM going from 2002 to 2003, so this is about builing a better OS for ALL CPU types, not just for Intel's Xscales.

Why isn't HP releaseing the 2003 upgrade for the 3600 devices when they've obviously created it?

[sponge]

They may have not created it. May be a typo too. Are you using the 3800 flashed on? I've got a 3600 here that I don't care about.