View Single Post
Old 10-20-2021, 02:52 AM   #3
davidfor
Grand Sorcerer
davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 24,907
Karma: 47303748
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Device: Kobo:Touch,Glo, AuraH2O, GloHD,AuraONE, ClaraHD, Libra H2O; tolinoepos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deobulakenyo View Post
However, the screen doesn't seem all that faster - the refreshes seem to be quicker but when having the same book opened and going forward with the buttons at the same fast pace (like 1-2 pages per second), the Libra 2 would get an edge but then somehow the H2O would catch up.
The first part of that is pretty much how I expected it. The has been a lot of comments about the Carta 1200 screen being faster. But, the way that the ereaders use the screens isn't going to show that. I'd expect the difference to be noticeable if they played a video. But, ereaders render the page and then send that to the screen. Then render the next when requested and sends that. The CPU, storage access and RAM etc are all going to be more important than the screen.

And the difference in the hardware between the Libra H2O and Libra 2 is pretty small. It's the case, the screen, storage and whatever is needed for the Bluetooth to work. It is the same CPU and RAM. I'm pretty sure the access to the storage and screen will be the same.
davidfor is offline   Reply With Quote