setting "oversample" versus PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE

Post general discussions on using our drivers to write your own software here
Post Reply
heng
Newbie
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:08 pm

setting "oversample" versus PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE

Post by heng » Tue Jul 31, 2012 12:42 pm

My scope is a 3000 series scope.

Could someone explain any difference between setting the oversample argument and using PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE when copying the data from the device (indeed, being a long, it seems that the latter has more flexibility).

I initially thought that the oversample used less memory as, in principle, the data is never stored, but ps3000aGetTimebase2 tells me that the max samples goes down by, say, a factor of 10 if I use a 10 times oversample.

Cheers,

Henry

heng
Newbie
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:08 pm

Re: setting "oversample" versus PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE

Post by heng » Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:04 pm

Right, so I've now read 2.1.6 with the following:
Note: This feature is provided for backward-compatibility only. The same effect can be
obtained more efficiently with the PicoScope 3000 Series using the hardware
averaging feature (see Downsampling modes).
I guess that answers my question.

Cheers,
Henry

Martyn
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3333
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 8:15 am
Location: St. Neots

Re: setting "oversample" versus PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE

Post by Martyn » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:23 am

I was about to post those exact words yesterday afternoon but got called off on to something else :)
Martyn
Technical Support Manager

heng
Newbie
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:08 pm

Re: setting "oversample" versus PS3000A_RATIO_MODE_AVERAGE

Post by heng » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:35 am

Thanks Martyn. I'd read it before, but managed to forget it in this context.

Post Reply