Pandora Vs Eee Pc Specifications

[chad78]

Updated a lot more information - found a half dozen or more sources for the Pandora - got rid of most of the stars - made minor corrections and added audio info for Pandora.

Found a lot more sources for Eee PC info, too.

Still not sure where to find all that "Pixel Shading" stuff that's on there. None of my sources mention that - that I can find.

There's a good start! Compare sizes. Let the reader decide what's better for their use, but at least show which is mostly better.

Size is on there now (in inches and mm) - weight is, too - for the Eee PC. No word on the weight of the Pandora.

 

[Adventus]

QUOTE
The bus used for the GPU on the Pandora is so dedicated that it's into the CPU itself! wink.gif

Pandora uses OMAP from TI, OMAP family are SoC. Do you know what means SoC? System on Chip, it means the complete system mostly on the same chip (with some exceptions like RAM, wifi and others...).
Woah, no need to talk down to me. Afterall, I am studying for both a Physics and Mechatronic Engineering degree.

PS: Asfar as I'm aware a SOC doesn't theoretically require it to share the same data path between GPU->RAM and CPU->RAM. Stranger things have happened, though i'll believe you on this one.

 

[Svartalf]

Still not sure where to find all that "Pixel Shading" stuff that's on there. None of my sources mention that - that I can find.

What you'll need to do is go looking up GPU specs.

The eeePC uses Intel's GMA900 GPU. The Pandora uses a PowerVR SGX.

"Pixel Shading" is really an inaccurate term for this. The game dev, graphics accel, etc. crowd call what he's calling "Pixel Shading", Fragment Shading, which goes into the rasterization steps, involving pushing the pixels to the screen based off of vertex, texture, etc. information for each poly rendered to the screen. There's another type of shading- Vertex Shading. This would be transform, clipping, and lighting operations against the polys being submitted for rendering. Without Vertex Shading support, most modern titles will bog down to slide show frame rates. One of the main issues with the eeePC is that the GMA900 does NOT have Vertex shader paths- so many modern games just won't be playable. The Pandora's GPU on the other hand has the ability to provide both types of computation.

Also worth noting, while a chip can have a high fill rate, this is the Fragment Shader output level. If you can't pump the polys to the Fragment processing paths because your transform, culling, or lighting paths can't feed them to the Fragment stages, the fill rate is meaningless.

On top of more transistors it also requires more memory bandwidth, which leads to extremely wide data paths and expensive RAM.

Heh... More and more transistors as you go... >

There's a threshold at which this stuff spins out of control because of the need for more RAM, more bandwidth, more this, more that. Pandora's at the sweet spot for handheld units based on my current understanding of that sort of thing.

 

[icurafu]

I give up.

Just because PowerVR states that they can do 14 million polygons on the GPU, does not mean TI has configured it in that way.

TI states http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/omap3530.pdf

10 Million Polygons a second, by using tile based rendering.

Also the Celeron DMIPS value is just wrong. Unless you can give a good reference, I would delete it.

If you are talking about pixel shaders, it's best to say shaders, because shaders are abstract these days. You can just use TI's quote... "Universal Scalable Shader Engine" But the OpenGL support gives that away what the shader support is. If you want to be 100% accurate, I don't think PowerVR has created an OpenGL ES 2.0 driver yet. I think it is still OpenGL ES 1.1 for now.

There is no reference to the 9 million polygons for the GMA900 on Eee PC. I can't say much about it. I do know that a 3dmark test between a menlow iwht SGX 535 and GMA950 @133 on a McCaslin, show the GMA950 with a significant polygon per seond icnrease. I don't beleive in comparing marketing information to real world results.

Can't we just say, the Pandora will be amazing. And at such a high DPI, we can use less textures and polygons and still look great because of the fillrate. The Pandora is built perfectly for it's purpose as an ultimate handheld game console that can be used as a rather ordinary MID or a sucky UMPC.

And yes, when you compare power consumption against performance, the CortexA8 will smack the CeleronM@900 around like a little bitch. No point arguing there. .

 

[nubie]

I can't compare the two, one will run WinXP and Win2k (this is important for me), if it would run Dos or win95/98 as well all the better (unsure about support though, it IS an older platform for sure).

The other is a dream handheld/PDA/portable system.

1. native x86 windows support

2. can run my apps, progs, real full Firefox.

3. has VGA output

4. twice as big

5. no runtime

6. already has full-speed n64 and PSX, and a huge load of other games

7. no gaming controls

8. too heavy to play handheld

Pandora:

1. long runtime

2. half the size

3. requires ports of every program/app (I am unsure how the Debian ARM repository may effect this)

4. looks like it has great controls.

5. great as a handheld

6. no x86 native support, no DOS, no Windows (no windows apps and games natively)



I am looking forward to both, and hope to own both. The pandora will be like a proper GP2X replacement, with wifi, a keyboard, and USB inbuilt, as well as the li-ion battery, things the GP2X should have had all along, or on the second/third revisions.

The Eeepc is a replacement for the Toshiba Libretto I had, It is not at all the same thing as a handheld, it is a smaller real full PC, as for gaming, I badly want to interface a geforce into that pci-e mini slot next to the RAM, maybe even a hacked up MXM adaptation (trust me, if there is a will there is a way). If Intel wasn't beating the crap out of AMD maybe we could have an AMD version with 55nm ATI/MD graphics that would really game (at an entry-level of course).

two entirely different machines, and I grant you that the Eeepc has a huge leap on the Pandora with its full on backward compatibility, and huge library of working emulators for all OS's and Consoles. This comes at the rather stiff price of weight, battery life, lack of controls, and price. The benefits include windows XP, and the ability to add a 1GB stick of DDR2, and lets face it, there is just more software out there for a 630mhz-900mhz P3 class processor on a windows environment than there is for an ARM handheld.

I want both (for the entirely different ways they can both go about the same tasks), but with the way ASUS is headed upscale, the Eeepc is more expensive, it is also getting uncool very fast as more and more people have them (and have ridiculous opinions about them), some being perfectly happy to play Halo on it, others trolling because they don't like how Halo2 plays (or doesn't) on it.

The big news is that the Linux kernel is going mainstream for ARM, if we can get enough support on the Pandora all or most of the wins the Eeepc currently has going for it will evaporate. (if the developers can get a full-featured enough OS shipping with the Pandora it will go a very long way toward fixing some of the major problems that new users faced with the GP2X)

 

[AireTamStorm]

Just because PowerVR states that they can do 14 million polygons on the GPU, does not mean TI has configured it in that way.

TI states http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/omap3530.pdf

10 Million Polygons a second, by using tile based rendering.

Thanks, updated.

And yes, when you compare power consumption against performance, the CortexA8 will smack the CeleronM@900 around like a little bitch. No point arguing there. .


Ok, added a ton of GMA 900 Info and sources. Chad78, if you'd reformat your sources like I have them it'll be much easier for someone to confirm / contest the information on the spreadsheet. Asterisks are disappearing left and right, great job so far.

 

[Tinnus]

2. can run my apps, progs, real full Firefox.

Why couldn't the Pandora run "real full firefox"? Craig says at the conference TI was running Firefox at 720p on top of a OMAP 3540.

(or whatever the number for the Pandora SoC might be )

 

[JerryG20]

Actually it's almost double the PSP resolution, 480*272 vs 800*480.

Well... Forgive my error, CraigX. Not owning a PSP or DS (Heh... My EX saw to that story...and for some 8+ years of it at that... > )...I was being cautious.

So, as someone pointed out- nearly THREE times the resolution of the PSP.

WVGA's actually a NICE resolution, really. I've been playing Zelda: Twilight Princess at 480i- and it's VERY nice
and immersive. Why people think that high resolutions and all mean better immersion, is beyond me. UT2k4's
more immersive than UT3 for all of it being intrinsically an eye candy update of the same engine. UT2k4's more
fun to play than UT3 from what little exposure I've had of it, not being able to buy a Linux version as they
promised us.

Eye candy, in and of itself, does NOT make for a game. So far, there's only been a couple of PS3 titles that've caught my attention and most of the 360 titles just don't interest me much.

Besides, I still stand by my claim here. More resolution means more transistors. What we're seeing here is the peak performance space. Higher resolutions past what we're seeing here with Pandora means higher power consumption or lower gaming capabilities. In a handheld, more juice means hotter running, less runtime to play with. A full-on laptop makes more sense for anything past this one right at the moment- and the eeePC isn't that class of machine yet.

I don't think the Pandora will have THREE times the resolution of the PSP...did you do your math right (Pandora's resolution is NOWHERE near 1440*816...) ?

 

[AireTamStorm]

I don't think the Pandora will have THREE times the resolution of the PSP...did you do your math right (Pandora's resolution is NOWHERE near 1440*816...) ?

((800*480) / 480) / 272 = 2.941176470588235294. Nearly three times the resolution.

 

[chad78]

I don't think the Pandora will have THREE times the resolution of the PSP...did you do your math right (Pandora's resolution is NOWHERE near 1440*816...) ?

You square with you deal with 2 dimensions - otherwise known as a plane.

look - a 2 x 2 square is 4 times bigger than a 1 x 1 suqare

1 x 1 square
._
|_|

2 x 2 square
._ _
|_|_|
|_|_|

See?

 

[AireTamStorm]

Whew. Lots of edits, lots of incomplete fields. The DS isn't the only console going there, I'm adding the GP2X, PSP, iPhone. NO I'm not re-adding the Gamecube since our Subject of Comparison section rules it out!
If you collaborate you can add your own devices and their specifications / features&benefits / etc. I can't keep track of everything in this thread (I'll try ).

Mods, if you would kindly rename the thread to something more like "Mobile Device Comparison" as the spreadsheet intends to go beyond the original context of just EEE vs Pandora, and more importantly, go beyond simple specifications. Read the top section of the document for more info.

 

[icurafu]

Pandora does not have a SSD, it just has a 256 MB NAND chip. SSD is defined as more than just flash, however it uses NAND in most cases. This goes the same for the DS for all I know.

It's Cortex-A8, not Cortex8.

Looking good.

 

[AireTamStorm]

Pandora does not have a SSD, it just has a 256 MB NAND chip. SSD is defined as more than just flash, however it uses NAND in most cases. This goes the same for the DS for all I know.

It's Cortex-A8, not Cortex8.

Looking good.

I debated changing it to flash, and now I've got a reason. Cortex line corrected too.

And thanks

 

[AireTamStorm]

Ok guys, this is where we really need a bit of assistance. I've added an emulator grid, and what we're going for is the name of the emulators that run on the system. Since there is a huge amount of information in the grid, and I really don't have the experience with alot of these devices I won't be able to do all of it.

Format:
So for the EEE, we can put an entry like:

Snes9x, ZSNES

But for the GP2X we would put

SNES9x

Because while most games do not run fullspeed they're still playable.

With the source at the bottom, and preferably a source that confirms playability / full speed.

We need more collaborators. Looking in particular for anyone in the PSP or NDS modding scene, and people to edit / check / add sources.
Request an invite via google docs if you're interested.

Thanks!

 

[bnolsen]

Yup this really is futile. This week I got to "borrow" a pink 2G surf for a trade show (bought as a prototype machine for our construction photogrammetry product). I was able to do some programming on it and was starting to get used to the stupid right shift deal. It was awesome for carrying around on the trade floor, showing off some light duty opengl stuff for the real product (which runs on an 8 core box).

But honestly I don't "get" the EEE at all as a gaming machine. The 2G surf for me seemed to be an honestly very good product for what it's for, especially after I tossed on eeedora with the dev tools I need for the product. Didn't even come close to using even 1/2 the memory on it even with firefox.

So really for gaming we really should just can these discussions. That's what pandora is for and I see it as being a good machine for light internet communications, bringing into the kitchen as an electronic recipe card or using in the garage as a car computer analyzer. Very different machines

 

[JerryG20]

I don't think the Pandora will have THREE times the resolution of the PSP...did you do your math right (Pandora's resolution is NOWHERE near 1440*816...) ?

((800*480) / 480) / 272 = 2.941176470588235294. Nearly three times the resolution.

I don't think the Pandora will have THREE times the resolution of the PSP...did you do your math right (Pandora's resolution is NOWHERE near 1440*816...) ?

You square with you deal with 2 dimensions - otherwise known as a plane.

look - a 2 x 2 square is 4 times bigger than a 1 x 1 suqare

1 x 1 square
._
|_|

2 x 2 square
._ _
|_|_|
|_|_|

See?

If you're multiplying the horizontal and vertical pixel amount, you'll have a square unit. You'll thus have to take a square root to get back to the original unit for comparison (we are comparing display resolution), and you'll get something like 1.715, which matches Craig's "almost double the PSP resolution" quote. 2*2 is twice the resolution of 1*1. Doubling the resolution will result in four times the number of pixels per square unit area. Resolution is the "number of distinct pixels in each dimension" (Wikipedia).

See?

 

[Balzac2m]

If you're multiplying the horizontal and vertical pixel amount, you'll have a square unit. You'll thus have to take a square root to get back to the original unit for comparison (we are comparing display resolution), and you'll get something like 1.715, which matches Craig's "almost double the PSP resolution" quote. 2*2 is twice the resolution of 1*1. Doubling the resolution will result in four times the number of pixels per square unit area. Resolution is the "number of distinct pixels in each dimension" (Wikipedia).

See?



We're talking pixel here.
Pandora: 384000
PSP: 130560
So we can agree that the Pandora has 2,941x the number of pixels of the PSP.
And this matters. You get nearly three times the information on the screen.
I know of nobody but you who thinks that pixel count and resolution aren't the same, but i think it doesn't matter anyway.

 

[JerryG20]

If you're multiplying the horizontal and vertical pixel amount, you'll have a square unit. You'll thus have to take a square root to get back to the original unit for comparison (we are comparing display resolution), and you'll get something like 1.715, which matches Craig's "almost double the PSP resolution" quote. 2*2 is twice the resolution of 1*1. Doubling the resolution will result in four times the number of pixels per square unit area. Resolution is the "number of distinct pixels in each dimension" (Wikipedia).

See?



We're talking pixel here.
Pandora: 384000
PSP: 130560
So we can agree that the Pandora has 2,941x the number of pixels of the PSP.
And this matters. You get nearly three times the information on the screen.
I know of nobody but you who thinks that pixel count and resolution aren't the same, but i think it doesn't matter anyway.

I agree with you that we're talking about minor details here. I just wanted to point out that Craig was correct in his assertion that the display resolution of the Pandora is almost twice as much as the PSP's display resolution. Pixel count and display resolution will both give you an idea of the quality of the display, but the two are not the exact same thing (doubling resolution results in quadrupling pixel count, so they are not equivalent).

 

[jaycee900]

My PSP cant play emulators out of the box, you need to correct that in the grid with an asterix or remove it because without either knowhow pandora (coincedence?!) battery or additional hardware emulation cant be done on the PSP!

Plus I see you put Gameking in on the others emulation sections! hey don't worry about 2 of the most influential systems in history the Amiga 500 and Atari ST!

 

[JerryG20]

You should expand the criteria for emulators as it makes it seem that SNES emulation on the PSP is perfect, even though compatibility/performance for special games isn't full (such as Super Mario RPG, which doesn't run full speed and definitely isn't just an obscure game in terms of compatibility).