This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Find out more about how to manage cookies, or dismiss this message and continue to use cookies.

power and comparison of gps processors


Good morning all,
are there any databases concerning comparisons for the powers of the processors running Garmin gps?
we find these comparisons for recent phones, but I have never read anything about these gps, is the 66i more powerful than the other models in this 66 range?
ditto for the Oregon series for example, I have a 750 and I tried a 600 and I had the impression that it was less efficient, or in comparison is that the 700 is less powerful than the 750 as it is there anything to manage the camera?
Can touch screens also reduce the performance of the device?
I was wondering since the maps are more and more complete and the information to be displayed more important.

thank you for your information if you have any

Comments

  • Boyd 2002 Points
    edited March 26
    Very good question, but I have never seen antyhing like that, just lots of anecdotal info and opinions. Not only is there no good research on processors, there isn't anything with more basic specs, such as the amount of RAM.

    Awhile ago, I got interested in a project to turn raster imagery into Garmin vector-based maps (.img files). I used a very straightforward method, creating a grid of 15-meter cells covering my region. Then I converted the raster image to a pallette of 81 colors (the maximum number of Garmin polygon types) and sampled it every 15 meters. Made several maps like this to use on a Garmin automotive device, which can't normally use raster imagery. You can download one here

    https://boydsmaps.com/lidar-in-the-pines-sd/

    Why do I mention this? Because it's a good benchmark that you could use to test the processors on different GPS units - it really stresses them! Most Garmin devices just choke on this map and either crash or render in slow motion. However, the newer automotive devices can handle it - I used it on my DriveSmart 61 for example. It's slow to render, but it works. If you zoom out farther than .2 miles however, the device just doesn't draw it. Apparently it is 'hardwired' into these devices not to render very small objects when you zoom out.

    So, my observations are that automotive devices are faster than handhelds, which makes sense because they are designed to operate on external power, unlike handhelds that are optimized for batteries. The newest handheld that I have is a Montana 600. When I got it (8 years ago?) it seemed very fast. But it's an absolute dog compared to the DriveSmart 61, and frankly it's a joke compared to any smartphone.

    IMO, all of Garmin's devices are many generations behind smartphone processors. Smartphone CPU's have geekbench ratings in the laptop class these days. I think Garmin devices are only a fraction of that. But again, this might be intentional, to conserve power - but more likely it is done to save money though. ;) The difference is even greater when you consider the ridiculously low resolution of Garmin screens, compared to 1080p (or better) screens on modern phones.

    Try this test - download my map and view it in Basecamp (or even Mapsource). It works very smoothly and I can zoom/pan quickly on my old 2012 3.4ghz dual-core i5 WIndows PC with HD-4600 graphics.

    Now load the map on any Garmin GPS. The difference is quite dramatic, I'd say the performance on the DriveSmart 61 is no better than 1/10 (maybe less) of my old computer.

    This map is an earlier attempt using a similar, but lower-resolution and less-accurate approach. It uses a grid of 30-meter cells, and it's much more compatible. It worked on all the Garmin devices I tried] - but very slowly on the old ones.

    https://boydsmaps.com/boyds-visual-map-of-the-mid-atlantic/
  • osramini 2 Points
    thank you for these explanations, I always have an "old" Monterra that I keep because it allows me to display all kinds of maps that the most recent Garmin do not display to me / more, in addition I broke one of the legs connection of the batteries, I no longer operate it with batteries, so it is worth nothing ... or almost and therefore it is quite slow to start but I have never had problems displaying maps ,
    I also have an Oregon 750 which displays "almost" all the cards and it is quite fast with the Topo Garmin cards, but I had tested an Oregon 600 and I found the start-up very slow (the screen boot black stayed on for a long time) and I had copied the same cards as on my 750, but I was not satisfied ...
    I called today the Garmin France sav, which did not give me much more explanation and also did not know what was given as specifications on the devices, too bad ...
    they just told me that the most recent gps were more efficient, "necessarily" ...
    I was looking for the difference between an Oregon 750 and 700, I would buy one or the other and I was wondering if the processors were equivalent?
    maybe the 700 has a less powerful processor since it doesn't have a camera to "run", at Garmin they told me that it "should" be the same ... touch screens should also affect processors compared to the 66 range for example ...
    I have an Inreach Mini and I am thinking about buying a 66i, I had the opportunity to try one but I had problems with the connection with my S10 +, when I looked in my directory to send an sms via Inreach, the Explore application had a lot of trouble finding the right contact (I also have a lot) and that made me squarely crash the phone and moreover I find this bulky antenna quite bulky, but the little that I have tried the 66i I was happy with it, I did not have it long, I rented a Mini to try the Inreach system and as the dealer knows me, he lent me a 66i, so I did not want too handle in ...
    I will try to dig a little more, but I think I will take a 750 or 700 if I manage to find tests that suit me,
    I'm afraid of making a mistake with a 66i and I like the Ineach mini, the Earthmate application works very well on my S10 + and I will test it on my S20 Ultra received today, but there is no reason that it is not the same as on the S10 + ...
    I will still test the cards you indicate, I will not buy and resell several devices just to test them ...
    but it's a shame that nobody does tests or comparisons on Garmin, even if they are not devices as sold as phones ...

Sign In or Register to comment.
↑ Top