Globalsat GH-601
5. Performance
- Tests Day One
We tested Globalsat GH-601pitting it against its older brother, the BT-338. Both use the Sirf III chipset, with of course different end target uses. The BT-338 was connected (Bluetooth interface) with a Dell Axim X50v, while the GH-601 was connected to a laptop via USB.
We recorded all data for a pre-selected route with VisualGPSce (free edition) and later analyzed it with GPSLog. All tests ran continuously, under the same environmental conditions (night, cloudy , 15° C), installed in an Audi, model A4 2004.
| Globalsat BT-338 | Globalsat GH-601 | ||
| Time to First Fix (TTFF) | Secs | 38 | 47 |
| Fix | Invalid | 0 | 0 |
| 2D | 0 | 0 | |
|
100 | 100 | |
| Satellites | Average (in view) | 8 | 9 |
| Average (in use) | 6.55 | 5.97 | |
| Average Signal Level (in dB) | Maximum per Satellite | 46.50 | 34.14 |
| Average per Satellite | 39.19 | 28.20 | |
The results showed significant differences, especially in average signal levels. The BT-338 performed better than the GH-601, but that doesn't make its performance was bad by any means. On the contrary, it is sufficient most tasks.
- Tests Day Two
We tested the Globalsat GH-601 against its older brother BT-338. The BT-338 was connected (Bluetooth interface) with a Dell Axim X50v, while the GH-601 was connected to a laptop via USB.
We recorded all data for a pre-selected route with VisualGPSce (free edition) and later analyzed it with GPSLog. All tests ran continuously, under the same environmental conditions (daytime, cloudy , 12°C), all installed in an Audi, model A4 2004.
| Globalsat BT-338 | Globalsat GH-601 | ||
| Time to First Fix (TTFF) | Secs | 39 | 48 |
| Fix | Invalid | 0 | 0 |
| 2D | 0 | 1.9 | |
|
100 | 98.1 | |
| Satellites | Average (in view) | 8.94 | 9 |
| Average (in use) | 7.35 | 5.24 | |
| Average Signal Level (in dB) | Maximum per Satellite | 44.88 | 32.29 |
| Average per Satellite | 34.41 | 25.11 | |
Again the performance of the BT-338 is better.
- Tests Day Four ( Indoor Sensitivity)
We placed both receivers inside a house, close to a big window and monitored their performance. The BT-338 had a rather quick 3D fix, with 8 satellites in view 8 and 5 in use, where as the GH-601's 3D fix had 7 in view and 4 in use.
- Overall impressions
The strength of the Sirf III chipset shows up in these tests. Both the BT-338 and GH-601 had quick TTFF times and good reception levels. As was expected, the BT-338 has better performance, while the GH-601 is perfect for most common tasks. Certainly, the announcement of the release of the GH-602 which includes a barometer, will further adds to the attraction of this device, especially for hikers.
