PicoScope 7 Software
Available on Windows, Mac and Linux
2208B effectively slower than 2205A
2208B effectively slower than 2205A
When I use normal block-mode with simple triggering, the 2205A has no problem in recording pulses with 25MHz and transferring the block of data to the PC, before rearming again.
But with the 2208B (which is supposed to be faster!), I can't even get close to that. From 100 pulses (even at 25MHz!) it only gets around 30 most of the time.
The code is basically the same, except for the API calls: With 2205A, the GetValues call also has the buffer as a param, but with the 2208B, you have to set up the buffers before calling GetValues.
Is this an expected behaviour? Why can the 2205A transfer data faster than it's 'bigger brother'?
P.S.: The rest of the setup (cable, USB-port, etc.) are exactly the same for both tests.
But with the 2208B (which is supposed to be faster!), I can't even get close to that. From 100 pulses (even at 25MHz!) it only gets around 30 most of the time.
The code is basically the same, except for the API calls: With 2205A, the GetValues call also has the buffer as a param, but with the 2208B, you have to set up the buffers before calling GetValues.
Is this an expected behaviour? Why can the 2205A transfer data faster than it's 'bigger brother'?
P.S.: The rest of the setup (cable, USB-port, etc.) are exactly the same for both tests.
Re: 2208B effectively slower than 2205A
Can you post a video?
And what CPU did you use?
And what CPU did you use?
Re: 2208B effectively slower than 2205A
It would be more useful to see the code you are using in both cases. If necessary you can send this to support@picotech.com if you do not wish to post here.
Martyn
Technical Support Manager
Technical Support Manager