The Following User Says Thank You to oxym For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-09-16
, 14:32
|
Posts: 805 |
Thanked: 1,605 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Gdynia, Poland
|
#462
|
I know that memory is the bottleneck here.
But regarding Power consumption issue, this page :
http://forums.arm.com/index.php?/top...r-consumption/
States that OMAP4 takes less Power than OMAP3.
So I don't see any disadvantages right here.
![]() |
2013-09-16
, 15:08
|
Posts: 1,431 |
Thanked: 2,630 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Touring
|
#463
|
![]() |
2013-09-16
, 17:45
|
|
Posts: 2,222 |
Thanked: 12,651 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ SOL 3
|
#464
|
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 02:23
|
|
Posts: 74 |
Thanked: 38 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#465
|
Dos1 and me did a little fancy effort to augment/update the http://neo900.org website.
I hope you love it :-)
/j
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 03:32
|
|
Posts: 2,222 |
Thanked: 12,651 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ SOL 3
|
#466
|
The Following 25 Users Say Thank You to joerg_rw For This Useful Post: | ||
AapoRantalainen, chainsawbike, cproc, dos1, endsormeans, Estel, foobar, fw190, handaxe, int_ua, Jordi, jurop88, Ken-Young, klinglerware, koznj, lexik, minimos, OVK, pichlo, reinob, Russe89, The Wizard of Huz, Wikiwide, zod, zoner |
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 10:22
|
Posts: 3 |
Thanked: 3 times |
Joined on Aug 2013
|
#467
|
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 12:33
|
|
Posts: 131 |
Thanked: 170 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Netherlands
|
#468
|
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ffha For This Useful Post: | ||
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 13:43
|
|
Posts: 2,222 |
Thanked: 12,651 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ SOL 3
|
#469
|
![]() |
2013-09-17
, 14:08
|
|
Posts: 102 |
Thanked: 248 times |
Joined on Jul 2012
@ Eindhoven, Netherlands
|
#470
|
It been what I've been told. I think it might be related to GFX core and whatnot else. Sure the *basic* CPU opcode should be portable, but the SoC differs too much - aiui.
If we could guarantee that fremantle incl all blobs can work on a OMAP4, all the better! Nikolaus mentioned that we might even have the needed additional 0.8mm headroom in N900 case that were missing in GTA02 case, so we *could* go OMAP4. Then OTOH I know about SiErr in all OMAP4 that are declared "WONTFIX in OMAP4" by TI. So maybe we do not even want to go for OMAP4.
![]() |
Tags |
neo900, thank you! |
Thread Tools | |
|
But regarding Power consumption issue, this page :
http://forums.arm.com/index.php?/top...r-consumption/
States that OMAP4 takes less Power than OMAP3.
So I don't see any disadvantages right here.
Last edited by oxym; 2013-09-16 at 14:26. Reason: hate virtual keyboard on non N900 decices