Hello again,

This weekend I made a post to this effect.  I hope I am not annoying
anyone, but I feel that it is somewhat of importance, considering that
most Squeak-on-PDA users do use various WinCE machines for their
Porta-Squeaking. I apologize if this is annoying, but ignore me if it is.

This Friday, I won a new Dell Axim, believe it or not, at a technology
conference at which I was presenting Dynapad.

The Dell Axim has a 300 MHz XScale processor.  By many accounts, the
current 400 MHz XScale (the 250, not the newer 255) often performs about
the same as the 206 MHz StrongARM, not twice as fast as the MHz value may
lead people to believe.

However, if tinyBenchmarks is any indication (which it isn't necesarily!),
the 300 MHz XScale is actually a bit faster than even a 206 MHz StrongARM.
Under PocketPC 2000, my iPAQ 3150 gets approx 10 million bytecodes/sec and
350k sends/sec.

As I've already brought up, my Zaurus SL-5500 with its 206 MHz Strong ARM,
gets 12.5 million bytecodes/sec and 400k sends/sec.  This was unexpected,
although plesant.

This Axim which I won, the 300 MHz model, is getting approx 13.5 million
bytecode/sec and 420k secnds/sec.  Faster than the Z.  Not by a lot, but
nothing insignificant.  Even so, the Axim feels a lot slower than the
Zaurus in both Dynapad R0.1 and a mostly-stock Squeak 3.4 image.  It feels
about the same speed as the iPAQ.  This is with both the GAPI and non-GAPI
models.

While I know that tinyBenchmarks aren't representative of total
performance, I still think this is a bit odd.   Am I just over-simplifying
things, or could there really be something here?

Are there problems or inefficiencies with the way Squeak does display or
input events on the WinCE version of Squeak? The Axim is evidentally able
to actually process data faster in Squeak- it just seems that Morphic-
somehow- ends up being slower.


Regards,
Aaron

  Aaron Reichow  ::  UMD ACM Pres  ::  http://www.d.umn.edu/~reic0024/
  "the end of the human race will be that it will eventually
      die of civilization. "                          :: r. w. emerson