Galileo and 5x

So with the GPS capability of the Fenix 5x proving to not be best in class (cough) and Galileo GPS being available in the new iPhone etc. Are we likely to see that as an option to enable soon? Apparently it would help a lot where the mere sight of a structure seems to cause the 5x to draw maps like a five year old trying to draw between the lines.

I don't know the GSP chipset in the 5x so couldn't see if it was a support model on the Galileo website.
  • Not so much as just adding but replacing one of the others in a combination choice - The increased 1m accuracy of Galileo and its higher positioning to help in more narrow situations is what's interesting.

    The neighbor has one of those Apple 3 watches. Might see if can get some ride compares going to see what difference it makes.
  • The mediatek chipsets are not the problem. For example, the garmin fenix 3 is using a mt3333 gps chip.
    Chip specifications: https://labs.mediatek.com/en/chipset/MT3333


    Fenix 5X has MTK3333 too, and high probably other Garmin's too. But watches with accurate GPS from Suunto and Polar have Sirf chipsets inside. And people associate better GPS performance of very old Garmin watches to use of Sirf chipsets. And I share this belief too.

    Thinking Galileo, I'm not sure they'll enable it in our watches. But I'd prefer it enabled. Only then we can see if it'll make a difference.
  • I think garmin will turn on Galileo but not on fenix5x.I think they will release another fenix5x with plus or something like that and there will be Galileo enabled.This is just for making more money.But this is just my humble opinion.
  • Was looking at that chipset spec - the amount of stuff it does in a 4.3 mm x 4.3 mm space is pretty amazing! Now, switch it (Galileo)on! :-)
  • Fenix 5X has MTK3333 too, and high probably other Garmin's too. But watches with accurate GPS from Suunto and Polar have Sirf chipsets inside. And people associate better GPS performance of very old Garmin watches to use of Sirf chipsets. And I share this belief too.

    Thinking Galileo, I'm not sure they'll enable it in our watches. But I'd prefer it enabled. Only then we can see if it'll make a difference.


    It is my belief, too.
    I'd just add that some of the inherited difference can be eliminated by playing on the software side, but not all of them. And I guess even if the displayed numbers can be tweaked, the recorded trackpoints may be transposed by the software only realtime just considering some obvious (ok assumed :-) ) reflection, but not transposed ex-post. The CPU would be tortured by this sort of extra job.

    So the tracklog (the snail slime as we call it in Hungarian) shows how good the antenna is.

    Sirfstar still rulez!
  • It is my belief, too.
    I'd just add that some of the inherited difference can be eliminated by playing on the software side, but not all of them. And I guess even if the displayed numbers can be tweaked, the recorded trackpoints may be transposed by the software only realtime just considering some obvious (ok assumed :-) ) reflection, but not transposed ex-post. The CPU would be tortured by this sort of extra job.

    So the tracklog (the snail slime as we call it in Hungarian) shows how good the antenna is.

    Sirfstar still rulez!


    Actually GPS chip is almost more powerful than the main CPUs. :D Its a 150 MHz ARM7 chip. :D Yes, they can do some software clean up, and probably doing. But it's not enough. As soon as I start to think it does a decent or good enough job, it does some madness and make me regret. :D
    For example, in my bike activities it sometimes records excessively high max. speeds, especially during pausing and starting. But the watch can't eliminate them, even Connect web servise doesn't eliminate them. But Strava does, then I have to look at Strava to see my real max. speed. :D This should be easy to do on the software side, even in the watch CPUs.