Browser bakeoffs are never without a certain amount of
controversy, but we're sort of into Pocketable's latest comparison since the devices on the bench represent three very different points on the spectrum of touchscreen devices. Having used them all, we'll say upfront that the results are surprising: the Archos 5 smokes both the iPhone and the N810, and not always by small margins -- the 5 loaded Engadget 18 seconds faster than the N810. (We did the same test with our 5 and iPhone 3G and the results were basically similar.) Now, that's not to say that makes the 5's Opera-powered browser the best or even the most usable, since in our experience scrolling is painfully choppy and hard to do with the resistive touchscreen, but it's interesting that the hotrodded PMP managed to load pages consistently faster than either the smartphone or the Linux-powered tablet. Take a peek at the full results at the read link.
posted Oct 18th 2008 10:05AM
thats at least a little surprising...........
18 seconds faster?
hmmmm
What's so surprising? It's Opera!
It just shows how overblown this webkit mania is when Opera Mobile 9.5 renders better than the Safari Mobile, scrolls and zooms just as well, has multiple tabs that actually stay open instead of going "white", supports flash and finally allows you to upload and download stuff (unlike Safari), not to mention supports cut and paste of course.
Yet all we hear is that Safari Mobile is the best browser experience - what crap.
You dont understand. Safari will always be the best browser because Apple made it. It doesnt matter that it will probably never support flash, or java, or silverlight or downloads. Yes, Apple will NOT allow downloads on their browser. The only way they want anything going to the iphone is through itunes or the app store. To me, no downloads= automatic fail.
Whattttt??? No downloads on that rotten apple this is new for me, it just makes it suck more.
Surprising? Hardly. The Archos 5 is toting an OMAP3 SoC. That's a Cortex A8 at 600MHz that's at least 2-3x faster than the OMAP2420 (ARM11 @ 400MHz), and at least 2x faster than whatever the ARM11 in the iPhone is clocked at today.
@Surur
No, what it really shows is that CPU speed has more to do with browser performance than any single other factor. ;)
the differences can be for a few reasons, the Archos has the faster ARM Cortex CPU, and an Opera engine, the iphone has webkit and the current n810 OS uses MicroB which is based on Mozilla I believe, the n800s used to use Opera but switched because it adds more compatibility including AJAX and Flash 9 (at the time of the switch Opera could only do 7 but the Archos 5 can also do 9 now). Hardder time scrolling might be because Archos uses a non-capacitive touchscreen and because engadget is heftier than the average size, this why engadget has a mobile and iphone site version, the iphone version would also work well on the n810 and Archos 5, despite both having superior resolutions
"t just shows how overblown this webkit mania is when Opera Mobile 9.5 renders better than the Safari Mobile, scrolls and zooms just as well,... "
except that the entry states "Now, that's not to say that makes the 5's Opera-powered browser the best or even the most useable, since in our experience scrolling is painfully choppy and hard to do with the resistive touchscreen,"
I am referring to my own experience with Opera 9.5 on the HTC Touch Diamond and Pro.
One can compare apples to apples by looking at videos of the new HTC Touch HD vs the iPhone 3G, which demonstrates the same.
http://wmpoweruser.com/?p=1105
Look at the above video for example, where Safari completely mis-renders the page, while Opera Mobile renders it perfectly.
Opera Mobile (for WinMo and Symbian) and Opera for Devices (for Archos, Wii, etc) are quite different, in fact they've only recently overhauled Opera Mobile to work more like Opera for Devices but it is still missing key features like Flash 9 and isn't yet fully stable, non-the-less it looks quite good on the Touch HD
1) The iPhone Safari is still much smoother and more fluid when scrolling and zooming, not to mention offers a much more functional method of doing so with multitouch and the intelligent double-tap zoom.
2) The superior load time of the Archos 5 is obvious - It uses a 600mhz Cortex-A8 processor which is more than twice as fast clock-for-clock than the ARM11 that the iPhone (and every other smartphone) uses...
@surur - That's awesome! Can't wait to buy my HTC Touch HD.... wait... what? they aren't selling it here... wtf?
ugh. HTC is killing me :(
I blame it on the wireless router! ;)
i agree, they must have cheated this test with a crappy internet connection cause everyone knows apple safari is the best mobile browser experience, theres virtualy nothing mobile safari cant do
Apart from flash, right?
AJAX?
NOBODY USES AJAX OR ADOBE FLASH BLOTEWARE thats why safari the best browser, nobody likes flash ad banners
Ocean, I truly hope your just a bad comedian, but sadly I think I'm mistaken.
ocean it's funny you talk about ads, cause they're still there
and it's also funny how you say it's all bloatware cause you'd think without it, it would actually be faster not slower
ocean it's funny you talk about ads, cause they're still there
and it's also funny how you say it's all bloatware cause you'd think without it, it would actually be faster not slower
well safari's made by apple there for its the best mobile browser available, plus john how can u judge mobile safari without using it, ive only ever used safari mobile and i think its the best brower, also easy to type with, easy to use and no restrictions when using it
APPLES SAFARI RULES
who says I never used it? What's good about browsing on the iPhone isn't so much safari invotion as much as "os x for iphone", which runs very stably (partly because it uses the gpu core and party because of its inability to multitask), as well as the fact that safari is missing things like flash, which allow it to run more fluidly than other devices, doesn't make safari perfect as you imply
"how can you judge it without using it, I've only used it and know it's the best"
Am i the only one who sees the hypocrisy there? You can't judge it without using it, yet you can judge every alternative without using them...
iphone all the way for me, I've used all of these products in the past but none have been as reliable and fun as the iphone.
What are you talking about, the iphone has no flash. The archos 5 wins hands down, the resolution blows the iphone away.
to be honest i am not a fan of the iPhone but i do not understand why these companies cant get it through their head to make THINNER products. look @ the Nano, best selling ipod i wonder why?.
Please M$, Sony, Archos etc make your products thinner lets get some real competition.
@ Dave Chapplle
Er... D'you think mabye because it's also the cheapest (screened) iPod in existance?
As far as I can see, the first iPod Nano also had the highest device-destroying damage rate of any iPod in existance.
Archos has lead the way since 2002 but they really need to fix their touch screens
Advertising in posts is bad mkay?
The iPhone is far from perfect, but when it comes to the all-round web browsing experience, it blows everything else out of the water.
So, in other words, iPhone isn't the best in anything, but it's pretty medicore at everything, and it's quite popular, so it's the best?
Oops? No flash? Even my WM6 has flash...
And don't flame me, I use my iTouch alot for browsing.
Nokia N810 has Flash too.
@ avester: Not in 'other words' at all. It's better for my needs than every other handset I've ever used (liberally spread across every major brand of manufacturer and operating system), so I'm happy to overlook it's short-comings on that basis.
If it doesn't do it for you, and/or it doesn't support the functionality you need, that's fine by me. But please don't knock the iPhone, just because it's an iPhone. Recognise it for the breakthrough that it is. We'd never have seen the likes of the G1, the Touch diamond or the Bold without it.
@ the world in general: See, I think the no-Flash issue is a bit of a red-herring. The way I look at it - and let me preface this by saying I'm a digital creative, Flash is my life - if I'm out and about, I'm generally using my phone to draw information, not for entertainment; and now that I've got , the last place I need to go is online for the latter. Even if the iPhone had Flash capabilities, I wouldn't access the majority of Flash content anyway as it tends to be bandwidth intensive, and'll therefore take forever to pull it down, plus will suck battery. If I'm at home, or otherwise within reach of an open wifi node, I've generally got my MacBook Pro on me, so I'd prefer to revert to that in any case, at which point Flash accessibility isn't an issue.
I don't miss Flash on my iPhone *at all*.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't - and routinely don't - recommend the iPhone to everyone. it's just not suited to a good portion of users. There's far too many people who've bought the hype - and I include people on both side's of the fence in that ;)
A-ha, once more the rational pro-iPhone corner gets voted down for no actual, logical reason other than personal preference.
Quite appropriate, because your statement that the iPhone "blows everything else out of the water" seems to be based all on nothing but personal preference.
Or don't you realize most of us are not flash developers sick of flash sitting next to our macbook at home.
@ Paul Evans
Please tell me why Safari is better? It's slower and doesn't support Flash/AJAX. I'll tell you what - I think most people can live without slow load times and multi-touch.
18 seconds to load Engadget is bad.
18 seconds LONGER to load Engadget is embarrassing.
I don't think I'll even bother with 3G connectivity until acceptable speeds are standard. WiFi and WiMax will be fine for now.
I own unlimited 3G data plan (384k/384k, 80ms latency), and I don't see almost any difference between 3G and landline on PC, it's the mobile devices that are slow to handle that data.
I like my iPhone, but the fact that the browser can't stay open longer than 5 minutes of browsing is something Apple should be embarrassed about.
@Ross - I completely agree. I like my iPhone for a lot of reasons, but on it Safari is crash-happy and quite often frustrating to use. In particular, in my experience it has a nasty habit of crashing with most types of form entry. I would love Apple to focus on the stability of Safari in one of the next iPhone firmware updates.
16GB 3g Iphone user speaking here. You know, safari crashes are a LOT less frequent if you don't jailbreak the iphone. I jailbroke mine the day I got it (yeah, for "fun"). I was bitching about the latency of opening apps and stability of safari. Ultimately I screwed up some file permissions when I SSH'd into the phone so I restored it. I didn't jailbreak for a few days and the difference was *astonishing*. Apps load MUCH faster and while it sucks not being able to SSH/SFTP into the filesystem, with the App store, I can live without the jailbreaking "fun".
About the browser topic: I think and I'm happy to see some competition to Mobile Safari ... its about time too. More competition = good. Safari's been out for 1.5 years and I'm a little surprised Apple hasn't bumped it up to the next level. Personally, I dislike NOT having flash content. Apple, youtube isn't the only flash site you know. My WM6 phone had that a year ago; of course Opera (back then, not now) couldn't really use it too well (rendering issues with older versions in 2006). Like I said, I don't care about Apple or MS ... may the best product win - lets see WM7. FYI, I was inclined to buy the Touch HD but the inconsistent "curtains on top of Windows Mobile UI" killed it ... several apps revert to the 'regular' WM6 interface. At the same time, I can see the buggy Exchange integration on the iPhone a deal breaker for other users.
@siddharth s
I haven't Jailbroken my iPhone, just to let you know, I'm sure everybody that hasn't jailbroken it will agree that it's still crashes every time you want to fill out a UPS pickup form to send back my USB power adapter (no joke intended)
But thanks for the heads up about Jailbreaking making the apps go slower :)
ha ha ha silly humans dont they know the iphone is just a figment of thier imagination
ha ha ha silly pandas are too awkward to mate so they're dieing off . . .
Silly pander bear, panda bears dont use internet or iphones
I think Archos has a very much smarter name for his devices than PMP ...
It's a MIT it is design to browse the internet as much as to use the PMP's function and it's a shame engadget can't realize this..
The result's seem understandable to me : The archos 5 is optimised to use wifi and has a better CPU.
(not to mention the 4,8 inch screen just KICK the lama's ass.)
Too bad the Archos is comparatively heavy, ugly, and has an amateur GUI, otherwise I would be interested in switching.
she has the 250gb drive version. the 60gb version is a lot thinner and smaller
Note: Nokia N810's power-saving mode was enabled for these tests because it is the default setting.
It's a good idea to make devices slower in benchmarks "since it's the default setting"
Wow they did?
What's the idea with that!?!
One other thing to note is that if you example turn N810 to dumb(turn flash off and javascript) browsing like on Iphone. Load times come down alot.
The idea was to run everything as off the factory as possible I think. While having power saved enabled seems a bit silly, if you change it it's not running on its default setting, and then you might as well swap out the inbuilt browser for something faster too.
on my n810, power saving mode actually made pages take longer to load. the only ways to speed it up was turn off java/flash
Typical unscientific test. They are trying to test browser but they are actually testing browser X CPU X Wifi module.
Wrong. The test is a test of the devices themselves in an unaltered fashion, not a test of the browsers that come with them.
Nice comparison. However, speed for loading a web page is not worth much unless access to the internet is available. With my Nokia (N800 actually) if I am out of WiFi range, I can quickly tether it, via bluetooth, to the data plan on my cellphone. Surprisingly quick page loads and extremely useful. That is why it is in the glove box of my car at all times.
Agreed. It's THE best feature of Nokia's internet tablets. Tethering is incredibly useful and easy!
One thing is clear to me: Engadget needs to steamline the crap on its site so that it loads faster! It's even slower to load than CNET, and CNET is totally bloated with crap ads!!
If I wanted a device that only worked on a wifi network, I would have bought a netbook.
Only one of these devices works (without tethering or additional add-ons) during the 90% of the time you're not near a wifi hotspot, so it's a rather silly comparison.
That same device is also the only one that requires you to pay a monthly cost.
You can use the Archos 5 with a USB 3g adapter, or get the one with built in 3G...
How many people who buy a Nokia N810 won't already own a Bluetooth-enabled cell phone? I'd guess zero.
P.S. It also supports WiMAX for when you're out of WiFi range.
The iPhone has a known bug which causes it to work much slower when connected to 802.11g networks when compared to 802.11b. It has existed for months, yet Apple doesn't seem to be give a damn (they have an open issue, which they are aware of - since they flag further submissions as duplicates of Bug ID #6222136).
Seeing as how 802.11b's theoretical 11MBps is probably fast enough for what you'll usually get coming in downstream from The Internets, I wonder how they would fair in the comparison if 802.11b was used.
And the N810 works better when it's power-save mode is turned off.
Why don't we make this really unfair, and use different sites for each device?
The whole point of a side-by-side (-by-side) test is that they're all set to use the pre-determined paramaters, if the iPhone has a bug that doesn't allow it to run 802.11g properly, than it's a problem with the device, not with the test.
Archos 5g all the way
Doesn't the Archos 5 have both 600 Mhz and 430 Mhz CPUs inside that split the load for various tasks? I think that might be kinda critical when mentioning this comparison or summing up its conclusion.
If so, I'm a bit less impressed that a device that looks to be nearly twice the side of the iPhone (with a single 600 Mhz CPU underclocked to 420 Mhz) and a bit larger than the 810 is rendering that quickly. It's all about context; you won't see anyone jamming that Archos 5 in their jeans pocket in lieu of an iPhone.
If I'm not mistaken the 430MHz DSP only specializes in media decoding and other specialized tasks, and won't help in rendering of websites.
And yes, I have to agree that the iPhone is smaller than the Archos, but also consider that the Archos has an 800 x 480 screen (which is more than twice the number of pixels on the iPhone at 480 x 320) - surely more processing power would be required to display web pages on the Archos screen than the iPhone's screen.
The Archos 5 screen is 100% larger then the iphone screen, yet the footprint is only 40% larger, mostly due to being a bit wider. Check a picture of them next to each other: http://archoslounge.net/local/cache-vignettes/L500xH400/jpg_IMG_0202_light-384b7.jpg
The Archos 5 even with its much better larger higher resolution screen, even with its potentially 10x more hard drive based storage, even with all it's extra video playback features is still very pocketable.
@Surur
Have you actually tried them? I have used both Opera, a few build in Nokia browsers and Safary on my iPod Touch. The double tap auto zoom works very well. So well in fact, that browsing on the Touch is my best mobile browser experience. Regarding downloads, ok thats a plus, but I dont really care, as i prefer to download on my PC instead.
Double tap to zoom? I don't know about the Archos but zooming is totally redundant on the N810. The screen resolution is high enough to render the whole page with readable text.
I can't web browse with anything less than VGA.In the past I've used QVGA and an iPhone (HVGA) demo, both doesn't give satisfying web experience ever since I got my HTC Universal a few years ago which is now running Opera 9.5 of course.
I now own a HTC Touch Pro and the experience is just awesome as I can still read all the text @100% zoom on the 2.8" VGA. Speed is even slightly faster.
The videos of 800x480(WVGA) devices posted on web like the HTC Touch HD is mind-blowing really! Can't wait to get one!
I just don't understand why anyone would 'enjoy' browsing on a low-res device like the iPhone. People need to open their eyes and not stuffed up Lord Job's ass.
Meh, my Omnia is QVGA and it's fine because it has a 3.2 inch screen and resizes the text on zoom.
Opera 9.5. It's the dog's bollocks.
Omnia is, i believe, some non-standard thing... not QVGA... larger...
WQVGA
you're supposed to say FIGHT!!!!!
I've been using the Microsoft Origami browser (similar to the Archos browser pictured), and it rocks. Viewing RSS feeds is smooth, you can take snapshots, visual favorites, history, and search, etc. Oh, and it can run Flash, ActiveX, Silverlight, whatever because it's based on IE7. Though it's only available for Tablet versions of Windows, which is too bad because Microsoft's own implementation on WinMo phones is crud, and there isn't even one period on the Zune.
Opera's Mobile browser is pretty nifty, I must admit, and it's versatility on a wide number of devices probably does make it the best all-around browser there is. I hope they all get MS to push a better internet browser for their own devices.
always remember that comparing the zune to an itouch is meaningless. they are in different classes of consumer electronics.
the zune competes with the ipod classic, and it is remarkable that at the same price, it has significantly greater functionality. obviously the ipod touch is better, except that it has 1/4 the memory and significantly more expensive per GB.
comparing a device intended primarily for music with video as a bonus feature to a device that is intended primarily for videos and youtube with a semi stable browser as a bonus is sort of awkward.
lastly, the zune's screen is too low res to display web pages. I'm not upset at all about that. I've used the zune, the ipod touch, the n810 and the n800, and personally, I think the nokia is the best. it isn't exceptionally big, is expandable, and has a real browser. I don't hesitate to believe that the archos is faster; it's more powerful, and the n810 could be faster simply b/c Nokia won't upgrade to the more efficient javascript engine that the mozilla devs released right after the n810. the n8xx is real purty too.
Opera will be rocking Tegra phones.
Waiting to see how Firefox mobile changes things like it did on the computers before Chrome came in.....
It's going to take a while, because the Mozilla engine is far more bloated than either WebKit in Safari or Presto in Opera. Safari can barely stay open for more than 10 minutes on an iPhone, imagine how much longer it will take for Firefox to render pages. I can imagine Firefox closing as soon as it loads, which will be more than a few minutes on a device similar to an iPhone.
It's funny because my job is in the automotive field and the consumer choice is the exact same as in tech. There are plenty of products on the market that grab the customer in a way that no other product can. I actually like products that are low maint. because with a large family I don't have time to figure out workarounds. I constantly have PC friends telling me how I can do everything I want with my TV,Computer,Printer and Xbox and proceed to tell me how and after 10 min. of terms that I partially get I have to tell them that I am not interested anymore in even attempting it. So when a company such as apple comes in later and says they can do what my friends were telling me and it works great and all you do is touch here and here on our devise) I AM SOLD! So when my tech friends tell me there is something else out there that does more, they don't seem to understand, I HAVE NO DESIRE TO WORK WITH TECHNOLOGY TO FIND THE POSSIBILITIES. I have a job,family and and a desire to get something that appeals to me and can do what I need it to with minimal time put in. Phone,Lectures,Bible,Music,Movies,Books,Email,Web,Text,Games,Notes all in one, not too big or too small and looks great. Thats what drives my choice on who gets my money.
The iPhone gives the best overall experience. It's good at everything it's designed to do and has an above average customer satisfaction. Hyundai just introduced a new challenger to BMW, Mercedes and Lexus. In one of the company's ads, it claims to out-accelerate the Bimmer, and that's all. The bimmer experience is more than acceleration. It's the overall experience. The same with the iPhone. The browser experience is better than any other mobile browser! On any mobile phone! From any developer. Hands down. There is none better, period. It's been over a year and no one even comes close the overall experience.
Hey what about Pocket Internet Explorer on Windows Mobile? Its a good b....brows......*busts out laughing*. Sorry I tried. I really did.
One thing that the Pocketables article doesn't talk about is actual partial page loading time required to start reading, clicking or scrolling on the page.
I got the Archos 5 right here and it loads Engadget.com in about 4 seconds to the point where I can read the articles, start scrolling down on the page and click on any article to load the comments.
So really, no need to wait the 25 seconds on the Archos 5 for the Engadget.com page to fully load (with all advertisments and pictures all the way to the bottom of the page), 4 seconds is enough to start using the page, thus over 5 times faster then on the iPhone 3G and the Nokia N810.
Scrolling is fine, even though they could perhaps upgrade scrolling to include iPhone like momentum scrolling (which Archos already has in other places in its interface when scrolling long lists of files, long lists of emails in the email client or long list of functions in the settings menu. Typing on the Archos is better and faster since the screen is twice as big as on the iPhone. Archos 5 will support USB keyboards in a firmware upgrade, so you can carry around a full sized foldable USB keyboard in your other pocket if you want full productivity to type comments, blog posts, emails and forum posts in the browser.
I only hope Mozilla release their mobile version soon. Firefox FTW! Then we will witness some serious browsing power!
Oh btw I love my Opera Mini though!
You guys should of thrown in a Diamond with latest Opera.
I love my Nokia N810 and all (it's my main GPS and mobile IM device now), but some of the Hildon quirks are really starting to piss me off, and it's been a PITA to customize and move system files around (to move some of the files off the small internal flash to the "internal" 1GB card). The main OS storage area is too small to fit just my multimedia apps and the OS updates -- and it doesn't have an option to put the updates elsewhere. MicroB isn't bad, but I still want some options, and hope they integrate the latest Mozilla FF3-related optimizations soon. I would use this as my main multimedia and web portable, if these were fixed. I might try flashing it with Android.
In all, the best thing about the N810 is the external design -- screen, keyboard, size, and sturdiness. USB slot and SD slot and positions kind of suck. If someone else can make a very similar phone/mid, but with a better LiMo-ish stack (like Android with BT tether perhaps), a better processor, and better internal storage (and user-accessible SD slots for both OS and space upgrades) I'll be all over it. That may well be the N830, but with Nokia's slow progress on Hildon and MicroB, I'm starting to doubt it.
I'm kinda hoping for an HTC HD-Pro (keyboard version) with Android CDMA/WiMax/WiFi phone. I'm not holding my breath, obviously.
One quick comment... while I agree that the test comparison is fair (using the default web browser of each device with default settings), there is one morsel of information missing from the article that a gadget-conscious outfit like Engadget should not have overlooked (which makes me think it was left out intentionally). At the time of publishing, Mozilla had already released their mobile version of Firefox for the Nokia N800/N810, codenamed "Fennec".
I used to own a Nokia N800 (that when upgraded to Nokia IT OS2008 is identical in performance to the N810), and I'm actually very surprised to hear of the long load times experienced on sites like CNET and Engadget. That was a year ago, and perhaps the website complexity has increased since then, but I don't remember ANY website taking 44 seconds to fully load on the N800, no matter the Java or Flash content (at 44 seconds, we're talking slow dial-up speeds). By comparison, my Nokia E71's included web browser fully loads Engadget in under 15 seconds, and Opera Mini does so in under 10 seconds (and that's with an inferior processor and less available memory).
This makes me wonder two things - what would the comparison be like with the Nokia N810 running Fennec, and, during these tests, how are the connectivity options configured on Nokia device. It's possible the load times are higher because the Nokia device is first connecting to the wireless access point before loading the page content (Nokia is horrible in this dept... even with my E71's browsers set to always use the same connection, they have to reconnect to the access point each time the browser is launched anew). Other apps on my E71 exhibit the same behavior. I'm guessing this was implemented intentionally to save on battery life. Just food for thought...
hey hey hey... when will there be a firefox mobile?
:) ... and yeah.. agreeing with some... this not really the comparison of the browser but the power of the processor in these devices..
btw. imo Safari can go sulk in a corner because ill take opera over it anyday
The guys at mozilla had a browser called minimo for windows mobile a few years ago, and it sucked.
I'm not sure if they're working on another one, but I do know that minimo was abandoned for massive suckage.
The better benchmark would be how fast and number of times Safari crashes on simple pages. Bet that will always come in at #1. And this is on a standard non JB'ed unit.
What's really funny about safari and flash is that Engadget has articles from 2007 saying that flash is coming soon to the iphone.
It's almost 2009 and it's still not here, and is not going to ever be here. It's a closed platform, and it sucks. Every single piece of software on it sucks, because it's sandboxed and can't do anything productive. End of story.
Anyone who owns an iphone is a tool. As a matter of fact, anyone who buys ANY apple products is a tool. And since 95% of articles on engadget are about the gay ass iphone, they are tools as well.
...K...?
I think the real measure here shouldn't be speed. That's not the major pain point I have browsing on my cell / portable device.
The main issue is the limited I/O options you have. Most websites don't fit on the small display properly, the keyboard is limited too - which leads to a poor browsing experience. Solve THAT and you'll have a winner.
Ehrm, use a netbook/subportable/laptop/desktop/projector?
Obviously something pocketable is not your thing.
For the Web browser application the memory bandwidth (DDR bus with and the size of the cache) is more important than the CPU clock speed. The ARM Cortex performs more MIPS/MHz than the ARM11.
:o
No Skyfire?