Navigator NT vs Non-NT

[+M3J]

I thought I had seen info somewhere but can't seem to find it in a search. Sorry if this is a repeat question...

 

On a Colorado 300, has anyone compared the speed of loading a map (or zooming in and out) on the NT vs non-NT version of City Navigator 2008?

[+PhilAun]

I'm actually wondering about this as well. I have a new 400t that I need to order some City Nav maps for, but after noticing a significant difference in the scroll/draw time of my NT maps vs my friend's non NT maps (on identical etrex vistas) I'm curious if the colorado is going to show as much of a difference.

[+Cache Viking]

I bought the NT maps for my Colorado. It was my understanding that there were fewer map tiles per state than the non NT or the City Select that I used to use. Since I do not have the non NT I can't compare them to verify this but there are definitely far less tiles than my old City Select which made loading much of the Western US very easy. Still want to try and load the whole US and see if there is a performance issue or not.

[TeamEcuador]

I'm actually wondering about this as well. I have a new 400t that I need to order some City Nav maps for, but after noticing a significant difference in the scroll/draw time of my NT maps vs my friend's non NT maps (on identical etrex vistas) I'm curious if the colorado is going to show as much of a difference.

 

What did you notice? Which was slower, the NT or non-NT?

[+PhilAun]

With the HCx units that we have, the NT maps were a lot slower. I didn't really pay this much attention (I just figured it was normal) until using my friend's GPSr with the non NT version installed. He even noticed it as well when he tried using mine once.

 

If the performance difference is going to be the same or similar with the Colorado, I'll probably get the non NT version since space isn't really an issue with this unit. Still I would like to know if anyone else has compared the two and noticed any differences.