PXA250 & Microsoft Mobile 2003

tfkuerzi · 06-25-03, 11:30 PM

Just wondering if I would notice any appreciable improvement over PPC 2002. Current system (Axim x5 400 PXA 250 chip) runs just fine, WiFi & Networking without any problems.

Does anyone know of any significant differences between the 250 & 255 chip? I couldn't find a comparative analysis on the intel site, but it seems that I remember reading that the 255 chip was supposed to provide better optimization for future OS upgrades.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. I'm not overly anxious to fix something that doesn't appear to be broken. Still, I wouldn't mind any appreciable enhancements or improvements that might prove worthwhile down the road.

Thanks

Pez · 06-26-03, 12:01 AM

Yes because the xscale chips werent optimized for ppc2002 and they are for ppc2003, right now strong arm chips run a bit faster then xscales on ppc2002 amazingly

jeepfaned · 06-26-03, 12:12 AM

funny u made this post...i just called dell about that same thing, customer support was closed but i talked to a guy in tech support and told him that when i bought mine back in feb or march that i thought i was getting the newer one with 255,come to find out i got the runt of the litter...pxa 250 with a01
. i ask if its possible to return it and get the newer unit with 255 cuz i plan on getting the wm 2003 upgrade,he said most likely they would work with me on it!! granted i havent downloaded alot of stuff,taken very good care of it,looks as new and clean as the day i got it...
i have seen posts here in past where some people bought their ax the same time i did and got one with 255 and a02 rom....i feel i got robbed!!
i will call tommorow and post here again

Tokyoboy · 06-26-03, 10:58 AM

PXA255 have a 200Mhz-bus, so it is more optimized for PPC2002/2003...
The PXA250 are not...Sorry!

boycet · 06-26-03, 08:47 PM

You guys are saying it wrong. PPC 2002 wasn't optimized for the Xscale, PPC 2003 is - that is why it is supposed to run faster.

In general, software is optimized for hardware, not the other way around. But there are exceptions which cause vendors to go the other way (hardware to software).

Granted, the PXA255 with the increased bus speed will outperform the PXA250, but not by much.

Maybe we can get the Aximsite Admin to post some benchmarks comparing two Axims with similar loads but different processors (that way we know just how jealous to get of those with the PXA255). Ultimately I don't think it will be that great a difference.

jeepfaned · 06-26-03, 09:14 PM

thanks boycet for phrasing that the right way...i knew what he meant,but was confused by how it was worded.
and yes it would be nice to see some benchmark stats on the 2
hint hint!!

chameleo78 · 06-27-03, 12:00 AM

The thing that needs to be rememebered is that the only bus difference is the core bus speed of the chip itself. The Axim, I believe, is still limited to a 100MHz bus on the board. I could be wrong, but that's the way I understood Intel's site. I still like the idea of getting some benchmark comparisons though.

Pez · 06-27-03, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by boycet
You guys are saying it wrong. PPC 2002 wasn't optimized for the Xscale, PPC 2003 is - that is why it is supposed to run faster.

In general, software is optimized for hardware, not the other way around. But there are exceptions which cause vendors to go the other way (hardware to software).

Granted, the PXA255 with the increased bus speed will outperform the PXA250, but not by much.

Maybe we can get the Aximsite Admin to post some benchmarks comparing two Axims with similar loads but different processors (that way we know just how jealous to get of those with the PXA255). Ultimately I don't think it will be that great a difference.

"You guys?"

Scroll up I said it just right :P

"You guys" need to learn how to read

06-27-03, 12:46 AM

You people need to chill. You can't tell any speed difference between 250 and 255. I have both. The wife has a 255 and I a 250. Games play just as well on mine as they do on hers. Until they redesign the Axim, a 255 is not able to take advantage of anything. :p

If you need a benchmark to tell you a 255 is faster than a 250, you have nothing to worry about.

chameleo78 · 06-27-03, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cageyjames
You people need to chill. You can't tell any speed difference between 250 and 255. I have both. The wife has a 255 and I a 250. Games play just as well on mine as they do on hers. Until they redesign the Axim, a 255 is not able to take advantage of anything. :p

If you need a benchmark to tell you a 255 is faster than a 250, you have nothing to worry about.

Yes some of us would like to have some numbers to support the fact that the 255 is or is not faster than the 250. Some of us haven't had your priveledge of being able to use both devices side by side in a personal comparison. I guess that makes us so much more pathetic that we haven't had the glory of having an Axim in each hand.......

cribbagewiz · 06-27-03, 06:37 PM

Um, it isn't a privilege, you can go buy another Axim and get a 255. Come to think of it, if you buy one now, you'll get PPC2003 also!

Get over yourself and leave CJ alone. What a whiner! Geez!

boycet · 06-27-03, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pez
Yes because the xscale chips werent optimized for ppc2002 and they are for ppc2003, right now strong arm chips run a bit faster then xscales on ppc2002 amazingly

Pez,

I wasn't trying to offend, but to say your statement correctly it would need to be: "Yes because PPC2002 wasn't optimized for Xscale chips and PPC2003 is optimized for Xscale chips, right now Strongarm chips run PPC2002 a bit faster than Xscales amazingly."

I hate being pedantic, but I thought that some of the descriptions were misleading.

Here's an excerpt from a press release on Microsoft's website:

"Windows CE .NET will include an optimized compiler, kernel, and board support package for the Intel® PXA250 and Intel® PXA210 applications processors and Intel DBPXA250 development system in support of Intel PCA, Intel's development blueprint for designing wireless handheld communication devices that combine voice communications and Internet access capabilities. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
cageyjames - thanks for the info. Your qualified assessment is good enough for me. If you can't notice the difference, I doubt any of us will.

jeepfaned · 06-27-03, 08:06 PM

there ya go....i think i can trust cagey on his post...hes always been straight to the point...he has both...i take his word....thank u cj for info
and ill leave it at that

chameleo78 · 06-27-03, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cribbagewiz
Um, it isn't a privilege, you can go buy another Axim and get a 255. Come to think of it, if you buy one now, you'll get PPC2003 also!

Get over yourself and leave CJ alone. What a whiner! Geez!

And I assume you will Paypal me the 3 bills for the new Axim???

I was simply pointing out how his post may have come across. I appreciate his opinion; seeing as how he is the only one that has come right out and said he has both and can't tell the difference. It's good to know that I can upgrade to PPC2003 and I'm not going to regret having the "slower" chip.

P.S. I'm really just giving you a hard time about the cost of the Axim, it's ok really.

***Thinking to self, "Let's see how much trouble I get into this time?"***