G4X: Connecting the Dots (AXIS integrated Flight Display)

[egdeltur]

You could still buy Z80's until last year. The Z80 was first manufactured in 1976. It was in continuous manufacturing for about half a century. Third-party drop-in clones are still available.

The 430/530 used a Samsung RISC CPU that's no longer made.

But most of Garmin's modern gear uses ARM Cortex family processors, which have been around since the 1990s and are still manufactured in large volumes today. ARM CPUs are in Raspberry Pis, a lot of embedded systems, most Android phones, and they form the base architecture for Apple Silicon processors. There's probably one in your coffee machine. Your car probably has 100 of them embedded in epoxy blobs, sensors, electric window controllers, the ECU, and gawd only knows what else.

(I haven't pulled apart my G3X Touch to try to identify the CPU type

TL;DR: 10 year old CPUs for embedded applications are completely normal across the industry.

- mark

Fair points! The compute is OMAP 4460: https://vansairforce.net/threads/g4x-connecting-the-dots.241376/post-1921942

You're that embedded has a longer lifespan but ARM spreads the gamut from true embedded like IOT to Apple SoCs and the world changes (and EoLs) faster with coprocessors including graphics.

The g3x is more cell phone and other 4460 apps are mobile devices that are all EoL. TI ended OMAP dev work so costs and dev complexity increase significantly.

 

[egdeltur]

Agree 100%. Saving 20% on modern processors means nothing compared to the cost to redesign and recode integrated systems, not to mention the cost of abandoning customers and forcing upgrades. Some industries, like smart phones have a market desiring that, but far from common.

Possibly true pre-COVID but value of code is going to 0 and these chipsets are no longer produced.

 

[BurnieM]

Possibly true pre-COVID but value of code is going to 0 and these chipsets are no longer produced.

Disagree.

Ask any search engine AI about a G3X Touch function, any function.
You will get a very nice response that is 80% correct. Try performing that function while flying.
Take spare underpants.

AI will one day be very useful but is not currently a mature product.
It is particularly weak in technical areas.
The old arguments about believing the marketing hype apply to everything.
Trust but verify.

 

[rcarsey]

Here's the Garmin video detailing everything about the new AXIS system: AXIS Features and Modules

 

[egdeltur]

Disagree.

Ask any search engine AI about a G3X Touch function, any function.
You will get a very nice response that is 80% correct. Try performing that function while flying.
Take spare underpants.

AI will one day be very useful but is not currently a mature product.
It is particularly weak in technical areas.
The old arguments about believing the marketing hype apply to everything.
Trust but verify.

True AI may not know all the G3X functions.

That wasn't quite my point though. The cost of building new software is dramatically decreasing with coding agents: https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-complete-long-tasks/ In parallel chipset are turning over faster so the economics of Garmin maintaining and extending G3X firmware on a dead platform gets more expensive relative to building on current hardware.

 

[tom paul]

the tension is building...9 days out from the big reveal. I have put my project on pause until i learn what (and when!) the new thing is. I was planning to buy the accessories, assuming they would stay the same, but Garmin is using the word "integrated" so some peripheral modules have been optionally included in the display. In the meantime, I am distracting myself by facing the reality that my Titan engine with Nickle cylinders has run well for nearly 1,200 hours, but now is using a ton of oil, and the crosshatching is largely gone so I will likely do a top OH while I wait for the Avionics drama to sort out.

 

[inktomi]

As an RV-8 builder, I am more than willing to upgrade to an integrated screen - particularly if I can no longer need to find a spot for the remote audio panel I've been trying to fit in. That integration would save a lot of space behind the panel.

 

[Brantel]

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would bet that Garmin is gonna basically recreate or repurpose the G900X as a replacement for the Experimental G3X Touch product line. If they do, expect the cost to be many multiples of the current system and with much less flexibility than the current scalable modular design. Not to mention that it will likely result in cannibalization of there certified product lines which has been a big no no for the experimental group in the past. It would also result in orphaned equipment and require significant modifications to existing panels and wiring harnesses. The G900X was basically hand crafted for the very high end of the experimental market and then the intro of the G3X Touch and its modular and scalable design pretty much killed that product line and resulted in incredible growth in the experimental market for Garmin. Why would Garmin reverse directions?

 

[Jonnyb]

I just hope for an upgraded G3X. Better screen, better processors, etc.

 

[Utah-Jay]

I just hope for an upgraded G3X. Better screen, better processors, etc.

I think you will be good to go

 

[Brantel]

I just hope for an upgraded G3X. Better screen, better processors, etc.

Those are definitely reasonable expectations with a high likelihood of becoming a reality.

 

[mstrauss]

I have a hard time understanding why anyone would bet that Garmin is gonna basically recreate or repurpose the G900X as a replacement for the Experimental G3X Touch product line. If they do, expect the cost to be many multiples of the current system and with much less flexibility than the current scalable modular design. Not to mention that it will likely result in cannibalization of there certified product lines which has been a big no no for the experimental group in the past. It would also result in orphaned equipment and require significant modifications to existing panels and wiring harnesses. The G900X was basically hand crafted for the very high end of the experimental market and then the intro of the G3X Touch and its modular and scalable design pretty much killed that product line and resulted in incredible growth in the experimental market for Garmin. Why would Garmin reverse directions?

In theory shouldn’t an integrated solution be cheaper than an à la cart? An integrated solution will also provide greater automation, and reduced panel space. Not sure why the G900X was so expensive, maybe to not piss off the G1000 customers. I hope that a “G4X” with integrated navigator and transponder, would be no more expensive than a G3X, GTX345, and GNT650xi. I also don’t understand how an integrated solution would be less flexible in the ways the EAB world needs. Lastly, you do know there is such a thing as a certified G3X?

 

[Brantel]

In theory shouldn’t an integrated solution be cheaper than an à la cart? An integrated solution will also provide greater automation, and reduced panel space. Not sure why the G900X was so expensive, maybe to not piss off the G1000 customers. I hope that a “G4X” with integrated navigator and transponder, would be no more expensive than a G3X, GTX345, and GNT650xi. I also don’t understand how an integrated solution would be less flexible in the ways the EAB world needs. Lastly, you do know there is such a thing as a certified G3X?

IMHO, it is unlikely that an integrated solution will be cheaper for everyone than a modular and scalable solution. I believe that is because not everyone wants or needs all the items included in the integrated solution. The price comparison of integrated vs modular only works if the customer wants and needs a certified IFR navigator included. The trend is moving toward building the hardware capable of all options that can be enabled with an upgrade token. I expect that trend to continue and expand. That means people that don't want those options are forced to help subsidize the cost of the hardware for those that do. I suppose it is possible that Garmin may offer plug and play expansion boards or cards for certain options but I would not hold my breath.

Of course I know there is a certified version of the G3X, I have only been around this product line....since the beginning. I was mostly referring to cannibalization of Garmin's certified IFR navigators which the current G3X does not include as an integrated product. Also, the typical certified G3X system install did not cannibalize much if any of Garmin's comparable certified product lines because most of those are going into aircraft that would have never been upgraded in the absence of such an upgrade path. In many cases where some overlap occurs like with their xponders, certain features are not necessarily allowed to exist on both sides of the fence and why they still offer models that are for experimental use only.

 

[Bavafa]

As an RV-8 builder, I am more than willing to upgrade to an integrated screen - particularly if I can no longer need to find a spot for the remote audio panel I've been trying to fit in. That integration would save a lot of space behind the panel.

Your wish will come true, of course I am just speculating

 

[Bavafa]

IMHO, it is unlikely that an integrated solution will be cheaper for everyone than a modular and scalable solution. I believe that is because not everyone wants or needs all the items included in the integrated solution. The price comparison of integrated vs modular only works if the customer wants and needs a certified IFR navigator included. The trend is moving toward building the hardware capable of all options that can be enabled with an upgrade token. I expect that trend to continue and expand. That means people that don't want those options are forced to help subsidize the cost of the hardware for those that do. I suppose it is possible that Garmin may offer plug and play expansion boards or cards for certain options but I would not hold my breath.

Of course I know there is a certified version of the G3X, I have only been around this product line....since the beginning. I was mostly referring to cannibalization of Garmin's certified IFR navigators which the current G3X does not include as an integrated product. Also, the typical certified G3X system install did not cannibalize much if any of Garmin's comparable certified product lines because most of those are going into aircraft that would have never been upgraded in the absence of such an upgrade path. In many cases where some overlap occurs like with their xponders, certain features are not necessarily allowed to exist on both sides of the fence and why they still offer models that are for experimental use only.

You are assuming that the offering will be only the integrated system. Lets not discount the idea that they could offer one as base model and then with the add on of the XYZ components such as a navigator, radio, audio etc. Then people have the choice of which to buy and save on panel space, wiring and hopefully $$$$.

 

[inktomi]

I love that Google's AI overview on search is now quoting us from this thread as if we know exactly what we're talking about

 

[mstrauss]

Of course I know there is a certified version of the G3X, I have only been around this product line....since the beginning. I was mostly referring to cannibalization of Garmin's certified IFR navigators which the current G3X does not include as an integrated product. Also, the typical certified G3X system install did not cannibalize much if any of Garmin's comparable certified product lines because most of those are going into aircraft that would have never been upgraded in the absence of such an upgrade path. In many cases where some overlap occurs like with their xponders, certain features are not necessarily allowed to exist on both sides of the fence and why they still offer models that are for experimental use only.

I figured you did, I was just trying to make the point that the two worlds are not isolated. I'm registered for the webinar on the 9th. Hopefully we will get a clearer understanding. Until then, I guess we'll just have to debate the unknown.

 

[egdeltur]

As an RV-8 builder, I am more than willing to upgrade to an integrated screen - particularly if I can no longer need to find a spot for the remote audio panel I've been trying to fit in. That integration would save a lot of space behind the panel.

That would be epic- I wonder how they can handle the user experience of all that functionality in the same screen.

I love that Google's AI overview on search is now quoting us from this thread as if we know exactly what we're talking about

Wow! You weren't kidding, hi Google! I'll update the thread title to AXIS integrated Flight Display

 

[egdeltur]

I suspect what we're looking at is an experimental version of the G3000 Integrated flight deck where the com panel is merged in:

 

[jliltd]

Maybe. The “path to upgrade” from the GMC 307 to the far superior GMC 507, which was introduced not long after the 307, was “buy a 507 at full retail.”

Right? Aside from the Track button I can't find an operational difference between the GMC 307 and GMC 507. Both provide the same audio alerts with the 307 using the GDU to deliver them while the 507 has actual audio out circuits. I know the 507 incorporated CAN Bus but in use there is no real difference.