locked Re: WSJT Sensitivity V MSHV #why ?


dk1wb
 

Jim, thanks for reminding us of JTDX.

I am a long-time user of WSJT-X since it appeared and I do like it. Recently I heard from other 6m DXers that they heard more DX with JTDX than me. Then I benchmarked the latest versions of WSJT-X (V2.4.0) and JTDX (V2.2.0) for FT8 performance. My PC should be no limitation due to plenty of compute power and memory. On 6m and ES DX conditions I found that substantially more weak (< -18dB) signals were decoded by JTDX than by WSJT. On the other hand on 20m on a very crowded band JTDX gave me between 45 and 50 decoded signals whereas WSJT rarely yielded 30 signals. This indicates that JTDX is indeed better optimised to decode weak or disturbed FT8 signals than WSJT-X.

I would like to invite others including the WSJT developers to try JTDX. I hope that the FT8 performance of WSJT can be improved further. It is nice to see new modes such as Q65 appearing but FT8 is the mainstream and should be kept competitive as well. JTDX installations can co-exist with WSJT-X and even run in parallel.

73,
Hans, DK1WB

Join main@WSJTX.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.