Wednesday, June 12, 2002
More on the X-Scale, and why you might not care so much
Posted by Ed Hansberry in "HARDWARE" @ 10:24 AM
http://www.silicon.com/a53873
"Anyone hoping to buy PDAs with the new generation of Intel processors is likely to be disappointed as there's no software out there capable of using their whizzy new features." The best feature of course is the battery life. The PXA250 X-Scale running at 200MHz can consume 50% of the battery power the current StrongARM chips do, and at 400MHz, it consumes roughly the same power. But to enable these battery saving goodies, the software needs to be optimized for it. Reminds me of the MMX instruction set Intel introduced in the late 90's. Didn't mean much for about 12-18 months when software was written to support it.
"But a source at Intel suggested that the CE.net kernel, on which the next version of PocketPC will be based, wasn't optimized for Xscale either. The follow-up to CE.net, based on a kernel known only by the codename Macallan, is closer to being Xscale optimised. And even that "wasn't where we want it yet," the source said. Macallan is not due out until 2003, and a Pocket PC operating system based on Macallan, and making full use of Xscale's speed enhancements, may not be out until the year after." So, 2004 before we see a Pocket PC device capable of the advantages X-Scale offers? Ewwwww.....
It seems Intel didn't provide the X-Scale chip available soon enough for software vendors such as Microsoft to optimize for them according to the IDC analyst quoted in the article.
"Anyone hoping to buy PDAs with the new generation of Intel processors is likely to be disappointed as there's no software out there capable of using their whizzy new features." The best feature of course is the battery life. The PXA250 X-Scale running at 200MHz can consume 50% of the battery power the current StrongARM chips do, and at 400MHz, it consumes roughly the same power. But to enable these battery saving goodies, the software needs to be optimized for it. Reminds me of the MMX instruction set Intel introduced in the late 90's. Didn't mean much for about 12-18 months when software was written to support it.
"But a source at Intel suggested that the CE.net kernel, on which the next version of PocketPC will be based, wasn't optimized for Xscale either. The follow-up to CE.net, based on a kernel known only by the codename Macallan, is closer to being Xscale optimised. And even that "wasn't where we want it yet," the source said. Macallan is not due out until 2003, and a Pocket PC operating system based on Macallan, and making full use of Xscale's speed enhancements, may not be out until the year after." So, 2004 before we see a Pocket PC device capable of the advantages X-Scale offers? Ewwwww.....
It seems Intel didn't provide the X-Scale chip available soon enough for software vendors such as Microsoft to optimize for them according to the IDC analyst quoted in the article.
