Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1.    #1  
    Hi all,

    As per the title really. Been using uberkernal for a few weeks now and would like to step up to 1.7 GHz. Just looking for advice on the best/most stable kernel to try first, and where to find them?

    Cheers.
  2. #2  
    Hi all,

    As per the title really. Been using uberkernal for a few weeks now and would like to step up to 1.7 GHz. Just looking for advice on the best/most stable kernel to try first, and where to find them?

    Cheers.
    I thought that anything over 1.5GHz was considered test/experimental. Maybe even Uberkernal is at 1.5 but it seems stable to me. Guess I'm the wrong person to answer this really since I don't plan to go over 1.5 and in fact I'm not even going 1.5 right, dropped back down to 1.2 for now as I was really questioning if I even need that so testing to see. My thinking is that with some of the performance related patching like minimal logging, removing ripple effect etc might be all I normally need. But I'm still testing and now sure yet.
  3. nToxik's Avatar
    Posts
    74 Posts
    Global Posts
    87 Global Posts
    #3  
    I believe Uberkernal is the only kernal that isn't in the Alpha/Beta stage hence you can easily download it via Preware. For all other kernals, you need to read the wiki page as other kernals are in alpha/beta stage:

    You can read all about it here: Testing Feeds - WebOS Internals
  4. #4  
    I use Warthog. Never tried Uber Kernel, but I've been running Warthog for a good month with no issues at all. I tried both of the "Jet" Kernels, but didn't like the boot code and had a crash or two on them (1.8GHz+ though).
  5. #5  
    Alpha/ Beta test kernels aren't stable, that's why they are still alpha and beta.

    The code that you see on start up was left intentionally to remind individuals that these kernels are indeed, test kernels.
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2 about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  6.    #6  
    Thanks for the info guys. Think I might hang off until the 1.7 kernels are fully tested etc, although I am tempted by warthog! :-)
  7. #7  
    I use F4 and it's been perfectly stable.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchgixer6 View Post
    Thanks for the info guys. Think I might hang off until the 1.7 kernels are fully tested etc, although I am tempted by warthog! :-)
    I've read lots of good things about warthog, just never tried it myself.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by laxx View Post
    I use F4 and it's been perfectly stable.
    On your device.

    For example: on MY touchpad, F4 would on occasion initiate random luna reboots; and at speeds beyond 1.7Ghz would get the 'sparklies' and begin the boot loop process.

    So, yes...F4 is stable on some devices.
    This space for rent or lease. Inquire within.
  10. #10  
    Yea F4 has been the most stable. I've been running it for a month at 1.8. F15 is in alpha and it's the least stable. I also tried warthog for a while but I wanted the full time dual core offered by F4. It's in beta.

    what are sparklies?
  11. #11  
    I had been using warthog kernel for a good while, but after the latest update, the TP froze on me quite a few times. so i decided to give f4 another try. To my surprise, battery life is not as bad as it used to be (like few weeks ago). Its pretty comparable to warthog now.
  12. #12  
    If you set the CPU frequency at on-ondemand (instead of ondemandtcl) both CPU cores become active (I'm using uberkernel).
  13. nToxik's Avatar
    Posts
    74 Posts
    Global Posts
    87 Global Posts
    #13  
    Both cores run in Uberkernal, just that the 2nd core only activates if the demand is there. When not in use, it is saving battery power.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by nToxik View Post
    Both cores run in Uberkernal, just that the 2nd core only activates if the demand is there. When not in use, it is saving battery power.
    uber only runs 1.5, this thread is about best 1.7 Ghz kernal. Also, the other core does not turn on fast enough. It tries to max out one core.

    for example, say 1.5ghz are needed. uber will be running one core at 1.5 while keeping the other core off. I would prefer running 2 cores at .75 ghz, balancing the load, while minimizing heat and promoting longevity
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by mistermojorizin View Post
    uber only runs 1.5, this thread is about best 1.7 Ghz kernal. Also, the other core does not turn on fast enough. It tries to max out one core.

    for example, say 1.5ghz are needed. uber will be running one core at 1.5 while keeping the other core off. I would prefer running 2 cores at .75 ghz, balancing the load, while minimizing heat and promoting longevity
    That is my thinking as well. I can't imagine that the frequent spikes up to max cpu I am seeing are great for battery life. I would prefer to prevent those spikes by having both cores available whenever they are needed. I am curious to hear further opinions on this.
  16. #16  
    If Warthog sorted out its CIFS implementation it'd be a no-brainer for me. But no CIFS means no deal and I'm on boring old Uberkernel. I also tried the two jet kernels and found them too quirky to be daily drivers.

    Apparently the ethos is that Warthog will always be closer to the stable baseline of Uber than the others - although am sure someone more knowledgable will correct me if wrong.
  17. #17  
    You can't easily load balance when almost all your apps run in a single thread in a single process. Dual core is only useful if you have a lot of background services or a mix of web and native stuff

    -- Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities
    Author:
    Remove Messaging Beeps patch for webOS 3.0.5, Left/Right bezel gestures in LunaCE,
    Whazaa! Messenger and node-wa, SynerGV 1 and 2 - Google Voice integration, XO - Subsonic Commander media streamer, AB:S Launcher
    (1:39:33 PM) halfhalo: Android multitasking is like sticking your fingers into a blender
    GO OPEN WEBOS!
    People asked me for a donate link for my non-catalog work, so here you are:
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by eblade View Post
    You can't easily load balance when almost all your apps run in a single thread in a single process. Dual core is only useful if you have a lot of background services or a mix of web and native stuff

    -- Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities
    hey, first post but one has to start somewhere

    I've been running F15C since day 1 for me - about 2 weeks ago at 1.7 on demand without any instability issues at all.

    anyway my 2c

    -D.
  19. #19  
    Installed F4 last night and WOW, a nice difference from 1.5(noticeable to me).
  20. #20  
    F4 @ 1.7 +.. full time dual core. Absolutely no probs so far!
    Now, it MAY only be my 'imagination' but having played and swapped around for brief periods with the various kernels, I sense that I am getting noticable, faster, more immediate and more sensitive 'touch response' from my screen with the full-time dual core, than I am with any ondemand 'single core' priority kernel?

    To those more knowledgable than I.. would that at least fit any logical format/explanation, as an observation?

    It feels as if any potential or minute 'lag' involved in bringing the 2nd core on-line therefore, just isn't there.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions