Perfomance Comparison: Dell Axim X5 / HP iPaq 5455

[RommelS]

Here is a performance comparison between the Dell Axim X5 Advance and HP iPaq 5455. Both devices are running the Intel Xscale Processor 400 Mhz, and have 64 MB of RAM.

I've used VOBenchmark version 3.0 By Virtual Office Systems to gather the numbers for the performance and figures. The test was run 3 times (all after a soft reboot), and the highest number was taken from the test.

CPU Floating Point
<span style='color:red'>Axim: 12.68
iPaq: 12.64

CPU Integer
Axim: 26.93
iPaq: 26.92

Memory Move
Axim: 0.38
iPaq: 0.37

Memory Fill
Axim: 0.94
iPaq: 0.91

BitBlt
Axim: 40.22
iPaq: 39.97

StretchBltUp
Axim: 6.5
iPaq: 61.6

StretchBltDown
Axim: 4.8
iPaq: 27.9

RoundRect
Axim: 1.75
iPaq: 1.61

Rectangle
Axim: 8.81
iPaq: 8.42

Ellipse
Axim: 2.36
iPaq: 2.19

Lines
Axim: 90.8
iPaq: 84.6

GAPI FPS
Axim: 46.86
iPaq: 54.89

GAPI Max Sprites
Axim: 51
iPaq: 66

Text
Axim: 7.6
iPaq: 8.2

Test was conducted by RommelS</span>

[JTMoney]

Thanks. Pretty interesting. What could possibly be the cause of the differences? Chipset? Both have the same OS, and the same processor.

Also interesting was that the iPaq didn't win a lot, but when it did, it seemed to be by a larger margin than the Axim was when it won a particular benchmark.

You've opened a can of worms, though. ComputerNinja is a benchmark head of the nth degree...that guy has fried more CPUs trying to OC them than I've owned computers. He's probably going to go nuts now tweaking his Axim, running benchmarks, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't find a way to water cool the damn thing, just like his desktop.

JT$

[RommelS]

I know that the Axim and iPaq are using the same brand graphics chipset, but I think the graphics chipset that the Axim is using is newer.

The 5400 series was also introduce to the consumer a lot earlier than the Axim,while the Axim was rushed into production. I have to admit that for something that was rushed into production, the only major complaint on the Axim was the D-Pad.

I have to say that was pretty darn good.

[JTMoney]

Now that there are more and more docs about removing the case on the Axim, is there anyone who has a tip on how to fix the D-pad issue? Is it fixable by an Axim owner with a little bit of effort? Or is it a lost cause?

[Niagara_Paul]

very interesting comparison. Considering the difference in price it again appears the Axim is value for its money.

[timothyt]

Hi all,

It appears that nearly all the differences are in the video driver. An interesting thing to note here is that by updating/optimizing their video driver, both Dell and HP (or any hardware vendor) could improve their scores, sometimes dramatically. Since the iPaq has been out a while and the Axim is relatively new, I would imagine that the Axim's video drivers probably have more room for improvement, although this is just a guess...

Cheers,

Timothy

[Computer Ninja]

To restate JTMoney's question: Has anyone figured out a way to fix the flaky and loose d-pad after opening up the Axim?

[vannd]

I have posted the slowness questions of the Axim 400mhz on another site and ran vobenchmark with a little bit different results. All problem appear to be in the graphic side. maybe i did somthing wrong my biggest question is bitblt being so low:

from above: my results locked @400
CPU Floating Point
Axim: 12.68 12.68 same
iPaq: 12.64

CPU Integer
Axim: 26.93 26.96 same
iPaq: 26.92

Memory Move
Axim: 0.38 .39 same
iPaq: 0.37

Memory Fill
Axim: 0.94 .94 same
iPaq: 0.91

BitBlt
Axim: 40.22 .95 ?????
iPaq: 39.97

StretchBltUp
Axim: 6.5 8.1 better
iPaq: 61.6

StretchBltDown
Axim: 4.8 6.7 better
iPaq: 27.9

RoundRect
Axim: 1.75 .29 ?????
iPaq: 1.61

Rectangle
Axim: 8.81 .36 ?????
iPaq: 8.42

Ellipse
Axim: 2.36 .29 ?????
iPaq: 2.19

Lines
Axim: 90.8 .60 ?????
iPaq: 84.6

GAPI FPS
Axim: 46.86 47.125 better
iPaq: 54.89

GAPI Max Sprites
Axim: 51 50
iPaq: 66

Text
Axim: 7.6 1.1 ?????
iPaq: 8.2

Any comments would be appreciated.
Dvann

[RommelS]

BitBlt
Axim: 40.22 .95 ?????

That is definitely low, but I did get a result similar to the one you have. I ran the test 3 times, and I've submitted them to VOS Corp.

I mentioned to them the descrepancy between version 2.x and 3 from some of the benchmark I've seen out there in the Internet. You might want to submit your result to them.

I'm starting to wonder if there is a problem with the version 3.