Results 1 to 13 of 13
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By misterdiapers
  1. smatofu's Avatar
    Posts
    36 Posts
    Global Posts
    86 Global Posts
       #1  
    I compared speed of 2 HP TouchPads:
    overclocked 16GB 1.7GHz
    vs regular 32GB TouchPad.

    Both have WebOS 3.0.2 and basic optimization patches.

    Results: overclocked 16GB 1.7GHz and regular 32GB TouchPad have the same speed.

    Web browser starts with the same speed on both.
    Websites load and are rendered with the same speed.

    Is the 32GB TouchPad sold with higher speed processor?
  2. #2  
    If I'm not mistaken it ramps up to speed as needed.You would need to run a bench test.I saw a comparison some where of stock verses the different kernels,I'll try to fined it.I think all the touchpads have the same processor,just different amounts of memory.
  3. #3  
    After going through my latest doctor, I only applied the F15C kernel set to 1.728 ondemandtcl. I have the Make Advanced Browser Default, and Increase Touch Sensitivity......10.

    I feel virtually no difference in performance without those extra patches from the "My TouchPad is running so fast thread"....and I've had those installed for the last month up until Saturday.

    I forgot to install Throttle Download Manager and Reduce Minimum Brightness.

    Between the kernel and those 4 patches....oh and forgot about Advanced Reset Options....5 patches....it feels just as quick as before with 10~patches. Time will tell, I suppose. I've always gone overboard with patches on my Pre-, but I'm sure it won't hurt trying the minimalist approach for awhile.
    Last edited by sledge007; 08/30/2011 at 04:54 AM.
  4. #4  
    They both have the same processors.

    You're doing it wrong.
    WinstonSmith likes this.
  5. smatofu's Avatar
    Posts
    36 Posts
    Global Posts
    86 Global Posts
       #6  
    [[You're doing it wrong. ]]

    Hmmm... Why am I doing it wrong? Isn't the point of overclocking to get a better user's experience = better speed?

    My overclocked and regular-clock devices work with exact same speed!

    Possible explanation for higher benchmark numbers and negligible real-life speed difference may be that benchmarks stress only certain parts of the system (for example CPU), when real-life testing stresses all parts (CPU + memory + graphic + internet speed).

    cnet.com took about 33 seconds to fully load on both devices (until the blue loading bar disappeared)

    engadget.com took about 27 seconds to fully load on both devices (until the blue loading bar disappeared)
    Last edited by smatofu; 08/29/2011 at 10:09 PM.
  6. #7  
    it took me 41 seconds to load CNET on my 32g with 1.5 oc while engadget took 31 seconds. Hmmmm

    just ran another test. Deleted cache and cookies and installed ad blocker patch (I had previously removed it because it prevented playing videos on IMDB). Now CNET loaded in 16 seconds and engadget in 26 seconds. Big improvements. I'm going to stick with ad blocker.
    Last edited by next_milenium; 08/30/2011 at 04:41 AM.
  7. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by smatofu View Post
    [[You're doing it wrong. ]]

    Hmmm... Why am I doing it wrong? Isn't the point of overclocking to get a better user's experience = better speed?

    My overclocked and regular-clock devices work with exact same speed!

    Possible explanation for higher benchmark numbers and negligible real-life speed difference may be that benchmarks stress only certain parts of the system (for example CPU), when real-life testing stresses all parts (CPU + memory + graphic + internet speed).

    cnet.com took about 33 seconds to fully load on both devices (until the blue loading bar disappeared)

    engadget.com took about 27 seconds to fully load on both devices (until the blue loading bar disappeared)
    Also there could be an element on the page that is taking longer to load (ie it is waiting for the server to "server" the content). I know at some sites the page will be fully loaded but the blue bar is yet to disappear that is because there is a rouge ad loading somewhere and it is there end that is slow (I am currently sitting on the backbone with 1000Gb connection at work, which my means my wifi network is my bottle neck..)

    I also have a 16 and a 32 (that one is going to be my sons) and I can see a speed difference in page rendering speed (swiping while loading) on his stock there is a noticable lag. I have been comparing it to see if I did want to overclock his (christmas gift)...and 100% I am going to. Loading Apps is faster on mine. Going between different tasks is better on mine and so on.

    Overall there is a light lag with 3.0.2 with and without patches and overclock. Saying there isn't just isn't the case.Benchmarks show that. And timed real world loading and multitasking will show that...
  8. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by smatofu View Post
    I compared speed of 2 HP TouchPads:
    overclocked 16GB 1.7GHz
    vs regular 32GB TouchPad.

    Both have WebOS 3.0.2 and basic optimization patches.

    Results: overclocked 16GB 1.7GHz and regular 32GB TouchPad have the same speed.

    Web browser starts with the same speed on both.
    Websites load and are rendered with the same speed.

    Is the 32GB TouchPad sold with higher speed processor?
    What makes you think it would run faster on the overclocked one?

    Loading a web browser is probably IO bound, as opposed to CPU bound.
  9. Jawbox's Avatar
    Posts
    91 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #10  
    There may be a mistake in your basic assumption. The 64GB 4G Touchpads were supposed to have a faster processor, not the 32GB versions.
  10. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jawbox View Post
    There may be a mistake in your basic assumption. The 64GB 4G Touchpads were supposed to have a faster processor, not the 32GB versions.
    They all have the same processor.

    Let me repeat that... they all have the same processor.
    Neo Enyo 2.0 Twitter App: NOW AVAILABLE | WON REVIEW
    clearview - clear card app for HP TOUCHPAD
    Wild'n Video Poker - AVAILABLE FOR ALL WEBOS DEVICES! | follow for latest updates - @fxspec06

  11. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by fxspec06 View Post
    They all have the same processor.

    Let me repeat that... they all have the same processor.
    They all have the same processor, but the 16/32GB versions are downclocked to 1.2GHZ, where as the 64GB runs at 1.5GHZ, but they are still the same processor.
  12. #13  
    I would have thought loading web pages came down to internet speed you are using,if I've got cable and you have slaw adsl I would expect my cable to be faster at loading.
    Cheers
    John

Posting Permissions