Comparison of GPS tracks of UMI Super, UMI C1, MA75 and Cubot Cheetah

JVitor

\n\nNote: these comparisons refer to software version Super v3.01_20160708. At the time of this edition, there is a new software version, v3.02_20160810. Update your smartphone and feel free to continue updating this thread. Thanks.

Hello guys! I have made a navigation track comparison test of UMI Super with UMI C1 which is a GPS only chipset, and with MA75 a 7 inch GPS+GLONASS device with Allwinner CPU, plus Cubot Cheetah, which is also GPS+GLONASS. Basically the results were:

1. UMI Super and Cubot Cheetah have a faster first time to fix position, given that they also use GLONASS satellites and have a good sensitive antenna, and powerful processor;
2. UMI Super antenna sensitivity is better than UMI C1, lesser than MA75 (it's a bigger, dedicated 7 inch device, with better antenna) and slightly lesser than Cubot Cheetah (better antenna/sensitivity);
3. Navigation track of MA75 is seemingly more stable and accurate than both UMI C1 and UMI Super. UMI C1 (GPS only) track is more stable and seemingly more accurate than UMI Super. Track of Cubot Cheetah slightly more accurate and stable than UMI Super.

See results:

Zoom into the lowest point/valley in the track:



Zoom into the 8-like driving pattern:



Video comparison of Cubot Cheetah and UMI Super signal strength:

Cubot Cheetah signal strength and accuracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BU-oPfNwFfI
UMI Super signal strength and accuracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31wk4JJDd3A

Track comparison between Cubot Cheetah and UMI Super:



Conclusions:

UMI Super navigation track is less stable and less accurate then either UMI C1, MA75 and Cubot Cheetah. In rare and optimal conditions of number of available satellites and positions, however, I could get 1 meter accuracy with UMI Super, in a static test, which is quite hard to get with UMI C1 or even MA75. Cubot Cheetah, however, has a better antenna and overall more accuracy than UMI Super (Cheetah easily gets 2m to 1m accuracy in static tests). I think the overall lower stability and accuracy of UMI Super has to do with how it handles combined GPS and GLONASS signals: one can see the difference in the number of satellites used by both devices in the same circumstances. Android location settings were set to "Device only".


Note: abnormal, erratic track results could be related to other problems/issues which were not tested or even observed in this experiment. In this experiment the Android location settings were set to "Device only", instead of the usual "High precision" which uses aditional data of mobile and wifi networks.

JVitor

Added in the first post another comparison with Cubot Cheetah.