Results 1 to 15 of 15
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By etx
  1.    #1  
    I'm running Uberkernel on 3.0.2 at 1.2ghz and I just got a score of 2876ms. If I remember right I got over 4000ms on 3.0.

    Well done HP!
    diddly4 likes this.
  2. diddly4's Avatar
    Posts
    158 Posts
    Global Posts
    164 Global Posts
    #2  
    I'm not familiar with sunspider or what those scores mean? Can you shed any light?
  3. #3  
    .9 or .9.1?

    huge improvement but still needs some more to get even with some competitors.
  4. #4  
    just checked the scores from Anandtechs review.

    0.9 = 5083ms
    0.9.1 = 3890ms

    your score puts us in the same league as the competition, although still trailing slightly.
  5. #5  
    Your numbers are off. (etx)

    SunSpider with webOS 3.0.2 running warthog @1.782GHz returns 2744ms.
    Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/warthogkernel

    Experimental warthog kernels for webOS devices. Patches such as Muffle System Logging, Max Blocker etc.

    Donations go towards further experimentation.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by codecrumb View Post
    Your numbers are off. (etx)

    SunSpider with webOS 3.0.2 running warthog @1.782GHz returns 2744ms.
    Tried your newly updated warthog kernal @1.782 ghz and it keeps freezing after a couple minutes, sadly it's not stable for me . Going back to F15C for now, but keep up the good work! Looking forward to your future releases .
  7. #7  
    So is it off or not?

    Ps, my fx 5 gave a score of 1852ms on eeepad. I think hp needs to court other browser vendors to increase webOS attractiveness.
  8.    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by codecrumb View Post
    Your numbers are off. (etx)

    SunSpider with webOS 3.0.2 running warthog @1.782GHz returns 2744ms.

    Those are the results I had. Here is a screenshot.





    Edir: I just OC'd to 1.7ghz with warthog and I got 2811ms.
    Last edited by etx; 08/03/2011 at 10:09 AM.
  9. ninjps's Avatar
    Posts
    15 Posts
    Global Posts
    16 Global Posts
    #9  
    I don't think it's so much a testament to HP as it is to the folks behind Uberkernal. Stock Touchpad kernel on 3.0.2 still comes in at a meager 3842.8ms
  10.    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by ninjps View Post
    I don't think it's so much a testament to HP as it is to the folks behind Uberkernal. Stock Touchpad kernel on 3.0.2 still comes in at a meager 3842.8ms
    Ah, thats a bummer!
  11. #11  
    i dont think this benchmark does much besides tell us the browser renders a second slower than the others
    @agentmock

    Audiovox SMT5600 (WM) --> Cingular 8125 (WM) --> Sprint Mogul 8525 (WM) --> Palm Pre (webOS)- --> Sprint Franken Pre2 (webOS) + 32gb Touchpad (webOS)
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by 65fastback View Post
    i dont think this benchmark does much besides tell us the browser renders a second slower than the others
    Thanks for speaking English to us non-techie folks....lol. I have NO idea what any of this means, but hopefully things will continue to get better ota sooner than later.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by 65fastback View Post
    i dont think this benchmark does much besides tell us the browser renders a second slower than the others
    It is significant if the whole OS is leveraging on jsjsjs.
  14. #14  
    Since a lot of us will eventually overclock to 1.78Ghz with stability soon, it will become a moot point. The guy on Zdnet said he skyped for an hour overclocked to 1.78 and it went down to 92 percent battery. Good enough for me.
  15. #15  
    now thats bizarre, sunspider is CPU sensitive, and you are saying even when you OC almost 600 Mhz, or 40%, from 1.2 to 1.8, there is only miniscule improvement in SS score from 2870 to 2810?

    something is missing here.

Posting Permissions