Groundspeak Forums: Anyone do a side by side comparison of a SiRF 60csx with MediaTek version? - Groundspeak Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Anyone do a side by side comparison of a SiRF 60csx with MediaTek version?

#1 User is offline   jmak10 

  • Tadpole
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 31 July 2009 - 09:28 PM

The new 60csx are using the MediaTek MT3329 chip that is advertised as being more sensitive than the SiRF chip. The results of a side by side test under heavy canopy would be interesting.

#2 User is offline   gallet 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 09-May 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 04:12 AM

View Postjmak10, on Jul 31 2009, 09:28 PM, said:

The new 60csx are using the MediaTek MT3329 chip that is advertised as being more sensitive than the SiRF chip. The results of a side by side test under heavy canopy would be interesting.

http://gpstracklog.c...tek-gps-ch.html

not sure if that's the right mediatek

#3 User is offline   NordicMan 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1499
  • Joined: 09-July 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 04:45 AM

Interesting comparison.. it appears to end in a tie. Despite the fact the test gets a bit jumbled because the 60CSx has a Quad Helix antenna & the Vista HCx has a patch, so that adds an extra spin to the ball.

So bottom line, did Garmin switch to a different chipset because the new one was 1) cheaper or 2) better? Or is it possible 3) both??

#4 User is offline   MtnHermit 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1817
  • Joined: 17-January 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 04:56 AM

View Postgallet, on Aug 1 2009, 04:12 AM, said:

View Postjmak10, on Jul 31 2009, 09:28 PM, said:

The new 60csx are using the MediaTek MT3329 chip that is advertised as being more sensitive than the SiRF chip. The results of a side by side test under heavy canopy would be interesting.
http://gpstracklog.c...tek-gps-ch.html

not sure if that's the right mediatek
That's a test from 2007, so while interesting, not the same Mediatek chip going into the 60/76.

#5 User is offline   gallet 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 09-May 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 04:57 AM

View PostNordicMan, on Aug 1 2009, 04:45 AM, said:

Interesting comparison.. it appears to end in a tie. Despite the fact the test gets a bit jumbled because the 60CSx has a Quad Helix antenna & the Vista HCx has a patch, so that adds an extra spin to the ball.

So bottom line, did Garmin switch to a different chipset because the new one was 1) cheaper or 2) better? Or is it possible 3) both??


probably a combination of those and other business/political reasons also it was a power usage issue too.. I've done extensive test with the 60's qh vs the vista patch and there is basically no difference, the vista can be upside down hanging from your neck or held flat, same difference.

just found these buried away thought I lost them

http://www.naviboard...ead.php?t=21730
http://www.gpspassio...?TOPIC_ID=67511
http://www.gpspassio...p?id=175&page=5
http://www.gpspassio...p?id=175&page=7

#6 User is offline   MtnHermit 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1817
  • Joined: 17-January 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 05:00 AM

View PostNordicMan, on Aug 1 2009, 04:45 AM, said:

So bottom line, did Garmin switch to a different chipset because the new one was 1) cheaper or 2) better? Or is it possible 3) both??
4) None of the above.

SiRF was sued by Broadcom for patent infringement and lost. Garmin was forced to use another chip other than SiRF.

BTW, SiRF has been sold to another company since the patent suit.

#7 User is offline   NordicMan 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 1499
  • Joined: 09-July 07

Posted 01 August 2009 - 06:44 AM

.. yes and CSR has recently released SiRFstar IV :D

http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/07...tar.iv.gps.chip

#8 User is offline   jmak10 

  • Tadpole
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 01 August 2009 - 02:40 PM

Thanks for the replies and links. Although the links are interesting I think a side by side test of the different 60csx models would be a more realistic apples to apples comparison.

I took my Mediatek version out for a walk today on a hilly ATV trail under fairly thick canopy. I walked for half a mile and retraced part of my track back to the house. The two tracks matched fairly well, deviating by at most 12 feet. This unit is light years ahead of my old Meridian Gold unit. I am leaning towards keeping it.

#9 User is offline   Grasscatcher 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1045
  • Joined: 25-August 01

Posted 02 August 2009 - 12:01 PM

Per the OP's original request, I also think a side by side comparison between old chipset vs new chipset -----in the same model GPS----would be a real eye opener. Time will also serve the same purpose.

I'll go on record (ahead of time) and predict that new (chipset) 60 CSx's will slowly start showing problems previously non existent on models with the SIRFlll chipset. Every other GPSr model that has a/the Mediatek "high sensitivity" chipset is prone to problems with "drift" while logging tracks, reception under heavy cover, WAAS reception, etc......... The Cartesio chipset in other models has proven to have some of the same problems.

I still use a 76CSx (SIRFlll chipset) coupled with a high mounted external antenna to log extremely accurate and repeatable tracks. Up until the conditions get Extremely unfavorable to GPS reception, the tracks as recorded are as accurate (sometimes more accurate) than any available maps to print them on.

I personally don't feel that there is a more accurate consumer grade GPSr /chipset on the market. That applies also to the earlier 60x series. (ie 60Cx,60CSx, 76Cx,76CSx), since internally, they are the same.

Not even the most recent models by any of the manufacturers can compare to the accuracy and repeatability in adverse conditions. Forget "paperless" and all the other convenience frills, only think GPS feature functionality.

I was really hoping that Garmin would change the chipset for the Oregon 550. I would love to be able to NOT have to carry and extra camera and use additional software to be able to geotag photos at specific points along a track/trail.

This post has been edited by Grasscatcher: 02 August 2009 - 12:03 PM


#10 User is offline   roybassist 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 25-January 08

Posted 02 August 2009 - 07:10 PM

View Postjmak10, on Jul 31 2009, 11:28 PM, said:

advertised as being more sensitive than the SiRF chip.
Where is the MediaTek being advertised as more sensitive than the SiRF? Can you post a link?

#11 User is offline   jmak10 

  • Tadpole
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 23-June 09

Posted 02 August 2009 - 07:56 PM

Requested MediaTek sensitivity link
http://www.gpspassio...cles.asp?id=258

MediaTek news release
http://www.mediatek..../info.php?sn=15

#12 User is offline   roybassist 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 368
  • Joined: 25-January 08

Posted 03 August 2009 - 05:26 AM

Thanks for the links. Interesting at first skim. I look forward to reading the GPSPassion article more carefully when I have more time.

#13 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 09 February 2010 - 10:27 AM

Is there a review comparing the two versions?

#14 User is offline   DustyWalker 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 196
  • Joined: 05-September 01

Posted 09 February 2010 - 01:29 PM

My old CSx died last fall and I replaced it with one with the newer chipset. The old machine generally gave me 3 to 4 m accuracy, the new one frequenty gives me 2 m accuracy. Or so it says. I can't say as I see a difference between the two in normal use.

#15 User is offline   ecanderson 

  • Premium Member - This Space for Rent
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 3505
  • Joined: 13-January 08

Posted 09 February 2010 - 08:15 PM

I have only one unit with a Mediatek chip, but it's one of the v1 models -- it's in my Summit HC. It's been positively rock solid in side by side performance with my buddy's older (SiRF propelled) 60CSx. My new Dakota 20, on the other hand, doesn't settle nearly as quickly to a decent EPE using the Cartesio chip -- that determined in numerous side-by-side tests.

If the weather EVER clears around here and I'm back from vacation, I plan to do a serious comparison test between a unit with the SiRF iii, v1 Mediatek and the ST Cartesio. Yeah, they'll all be in different units - no getting around that - but I really do want to establish some solid baseline data about both accuracy and repeatability of these three. I've seen some of the strange tracks that stationary handhelds produce, and have already done some preliminary work while trying to set up the test methodology, and I think there may be some surprises when it's all said and done.

#16 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 10 February 2010 - 07:06 AM

I'm trying to find one 60csx with the new chipset to buy, but all sellers I contacted say the chipset is sirf3.
And I canīt get a answer from garmin

#17 User is offline   briansnat 

  • Eight time US Geocacher of the Year
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 38099
  • Joined: 14-September 01

Posted 10 February 2010 - 02:23 PM

View Postdreamfalcon, on Feb 10 2010, 10:06 AM, said:

I'm trying to find one 60csx with the new chipset to buy, but all sellers I contacted say the chipset is sirf3.
And I canīt get a answer from garmin


As I understand it Garmin hasn't shipped units with the SiRF for quite some time so the sellers are either giving you bad information or they have older units laying around.

#18 User is offline   seldom_sn 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 03-November 07

Posted 10 February 2010 - 03:21 PM

View Postbriansnat, on Feb 10 2010, 05:23 PM, said:

View Postdreamfalcon, on Feb 10 2010, 10:06 AM, said:

I'm trying to find one 60csx with the new chipset to buy, but all sellers I contacted say the chipset is sirf3.
And I canīt get a answer from garmin


As I understand it Garmin hasn't shipped units with the SiRF for quite some time so the sellers are either giving you bad information or they have older units laying around.



That's what I understood too but Garmin doesn't list the chip manufacturer on the spec page.

Check this out:

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Garmin-GPSMAP-60...ng-Case/5334279

I suspect that they just haven't gotten around to updating their distribution specs or packaging.

This post has been edited by seldom_sn: 10 February 2010 - 03:25 PM


#19 User is offline   Redwoods Mtn Biker 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 2563
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 10 February 2010 - 06:55 PM

Bingo.

#20 User is offline   JSWilson64 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 464
  • Joined: 19-June 05

Posted 11 February 2010 - 08:15 AM

I ran into this some time ago on NewEgg - their Specs tab for the 60CSx says SiRFstarIII. After a couple of chat sessions with customer service, they couldn't confirm whether the ones they have are that chipset or not. The DID confirm that if I bought one and it had a different chipset than the specs page, tough luck - it can't be returned to NewEgg for that reason. I guess it depends on what you're after - if you REALLY want a SiRF III unit, better hold it in your hand and power it up before buying.

This post has been edited by JSWilson64: 11 February 2010 - 08:17 AM


#21 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 11 February 2010 - 08:25 AM

The MediaTek is more sensitive, but because of that, has some multipath problems.
I have a Holux M-1000c with MTK MT3329, is great getting a fix and under trees, but near buildings has serious problems.
A review of the two versions would be great.

#22 User is offline   Tui Chub 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 50
  • Joined: 23-July 07

Posted 11 February 2010 - 09:14 AM

View Postecanderson, on Feb 9 2010, 08:15 PM, said:

If the weather EVER clears around here and I'm back from vacation, I plan to do a serious comparison test between a unit with the SiRF iii, v1 Mediatek and the ST Cartesio. Yeah, they'll all be in different units - no getting around that - but I really do want to establish some solid baseline data about both accuracy and repeatability of these three. I've seen some of the strange tracks that stationary handhelds produce, and have already done some preliminary work while trying to set up the test methodology, and I think there may be some surprises when it's all said and done.

I'll be looking forward to your tests.

#23 User is offline   Entropy512 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 253
  • Joined: 27-December 01

Posted 11 February 2010 - 09:33 AM

View Postgallet, on Aug 1 2009, 04:12 AM, said:

View Postjmak10, on Jul 31 2009, 09:28 PM, said:

The new 60csx are using the MediaTek MT3329 chip that is advertised as being more sensitive than the SiRF chip. The results of a side by side test under heavy canopy would be interesting.

http://gpstracklog.c...tek-gps-ch.html

not sure if that's the right mediatek

If 2007, that's almost surely the first MTK chipset, not the new one which is often referred to as "MTK2".

I bought an MTK2-based puck last summer after reading a bunch of reviews of its performance (don't have the links at the moment though), it definately seems significantly better than either of my StarIII pucks.

I think the reviews and comparisons were somewhere on gpspassion.com - I think the original MTK was the first chipset to compete with the StarIII in sensitivity, and the MTK2 is a significant improvement.

#24 User is offline   xyzee 

  • Geocacher
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 06-March 10

Posted 08 March 2010 - 01:12 PM

I got a 60Cx, with the MTK chip, Ver.4.10 - 2.20m, to compare with the 60Cx that I got 4 yrs ago. Always hope to find a new "something" that is just a little more accurate, steady, with better returnability/repeatability, etc. No under the trees comparison yet, still under too much snow here above the 6500 ft elev in Ut. From test with both units connected to external antennas on the roof, and one outside walk around, before the snow got too deep. The MTK is alot more steady than the Sirf, especially noticed in the Battery Save mode. Gets a littly jumpy for a few sec, then settles down like in the GPS 60/ 60CS units. The "walk around" the circle driveway around the Mobile Home (soon to be mud) seemed to favor the SiRF a tad. Holding each in my hand about a foot above my head, so as not to loose Sat lock, I got about 200 ft before I reversed the walk. Set the tracks to one sec timeing, or distance to yards, then to .01 yards, seems to work better than auto. When hooked to the roof ant's, the MTK is a lot less jumpy. More noticeable with the units set up to display the position in Grid feet, from the User Grid. Also, with the units measuring in feet, from the SW corner of this 10 acres, it is easier to see the difference between WAAS and no WAAS after the 3.5+ min have passed. Like Garmin said in the emails that they sent to some of us in the spring of o6, that they found only about half a foot better accuracy with WAAS, so they planned on dropping WAAS later on.
They were right for my units, no change in the old Cx. The MTK change shows up as 2 ft in the accuracy box, with a change of a ft or 2 in th N/E Grid feet. The MTK dosn't like to "do" WAAS either. Want to start out with fresh search at 33, with most start ups. The bar goes crazy looking for 35 and 47, put to sleep back in 07, I think. Even when I power off/on,or GPS Off, and get 51 on overnight, when I change the batts, it wants to start with 33 and the long search for every SBAS SAt. But off/on several times gets the bar to show up normal like. Tried to discuss with the Garmin reps, but they say that it is properietary, and they are not allowed to talk about it. One did say that it wasn't the chip, just do the hard reset thing, which I had already done several times.
Need for the snow to melt, so I can get to my backyard waypoints, and a nearby surveyed point, to do more comparing. No SiRF icon or mention on the box; replaced with High Sensitivity GPS receiver.
And, when I came back inside that day, the W's stayed on longer in the MTK equipped unit.

#25 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 08 March 2010 - 01:21 PM

xyzee thx for the review <_<

#26 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 29 March 2010 - 02:07 AM

I received a new unit from amazon uk and its sirf3 ( 3.00s ) :wub:
A good review of the two units would be great.

This post has been edited by dreamfalcon: 29 March 2010 - 02:43 AM


#27 User is offline   dreamfalcon 

  • Premium Member
  • Group: +Premium Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 12-March 09

Posted 30 March 2010 - 12:51 AM

I possible to get the DOP values in the track logs?

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic