MyPal 68

[AstroSkipper]

Please, don't come up with your "gut feelings"!  I have presented all the essential facts that you have not commented on. My presentation has nothing to do with subjectivity and hypotheses. But as I said, it's offtopic here anyway and actually totally irrelevant. Your cucumber is old and mine is many years older.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Noted.  You're ALWAYS right and ALL of the CPU benchmark sites are wrong!  Got it!

[AstroSkipper]

33 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Noted.  You're ALWAYS right and ALL of the CPU benchmark sites are wrong!  Got it!

I am not always right. But a pure comparison of CPUs is not sufficient. Read here, for example, about the difference between SD-RAM and DDR2-RAM: 
https://www.transcend-info.com/support/faq-296#:~:text=DDR2 SDRAM(Double Data Rate,(double of DDR SDRAM).
Maybe now you'll realise what I'm talking about.  And apart from that, an Intel Pentium 4 is not the same as an Intel Pentium 4. There were different series like Willamette, Northwood, and Prescott. And within these series different FSB clock rates. So, forget about these comparison sites!  The only way to compare our computers is doing the same test regarding all hardware components.

P.S.: Due to my motherboard layout, there are several bottlenecks. Firstly, the extremely slow SD-RAM memory, then the very low bus clock rate and finally the AGP 4x interface, although my graphics card actually is an AGP 8x one.

Edited September 6, 2024 by AstroSkipper
Update of content

[NotHereToPlayGames]

1 hour ago, AstroSkipper said:

The only way to compare our computers is doing the same test regarding all hardware components.

Define the parameters of such a test and I will engage in this battle.  Quantifiable measurements where neither one of us can "cheat".  Then we'll let the rest of MSFN members "decide for themselves".

Or back down from this "stance".  Either way, "no skin off my back".

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I think the way they "used to" test-compare this type of "battle" is to take a folder of 1000, or 2000, or 5000 bitmaps/jpegs/txts and "time" how long it takes 7-Zip to compress them.

Uses RAM, uses CPU, uses HDD read-writes, et cetera.  We compress the same exact set of files, use the same exact compression program, use the same exact compression format, et cetera.

Capture a video of it so that the GPU is thrown into the mix somehow.

I'm willing if you are.

All I really know for sure is that this Acer Aspire is a POS but I'm too cheap and frugile to throw away something without a single scratch or blemish and still quite literally looks BRAND NEW.

In part because it is sooo dd#mmnn SSLLLOOOWW that I have "no interest" in USING it for anything of real significance.  

Edited September 6, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[anton12]

NotHereToPlayGames said:
"In part because it is sooo dd#mmnn SSLLLOOOWW that I have 'no interest' in USING it for anything of real significance."

Hello NotHereToPlayGames,
Why don't you speeeeeed it up with FAAAAST and well configured SOFTWARE ??

[NotHereToPlayGames]

That is in-process today.  This particular Acer Aspire One POS sits in a dark dusty corner of a mini-server room and is very difficult to get to.

I have it moved to a more-accessible location and will be comparing/contrasting Serpent52 and rebased Mypal68.

It is also undergoing some benchmark testing just to prove to the masses how SSLLLOOOWW this Acer Aspire One POS really is.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Acer Aspire One, Win XP x86, 1.0 GB RAM, Intel Atom N450 -

Serpent52 -
RAM with two extensions and no tabs loaded  ==  136.62 MB
Speedometer 2.1 score (wow is it utterly boring waiting for it to complete!)  ==  3.45  (yep, "gut feeling" already knew how ssllloooww this POS is, it's always nice to get quantifiable confirmation)
Holy H#LL - lowest score I have ever seen !!!

Mypay68 (first ever ran on this Acer POS) -
RAM with one extension and no tabs loaded before rebasing  ==  310.57 MB
RAM with one extension and no tabs loaded after rebasing  ==  119.88 MB
Speedometer 2.1 score (still boring but "gut feeling" already can foresee a better score)  ==  7.71  (nothing to "write home about", but yeah, even "gut feeling" can tell you that Mypay68 is "twice as fast" as Serpent52 on this Acer POS)

[UCyborg]

I just use fastest computer available 99% of the time. Simpler and leaner web browsers aren't as compatible.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Same here.  This POS is generally only used as an "email/text notification tool".

When the notification arrives, I use the non-pos computers to read/respond.

This Acer Aspire One really is the biggest waste of money I've ever spent!

It was a $250 Christmas Special fourteen years ago!

It got used a month or two then landed in a desk drawer until just a few months ago when a different laptop officially died.

So this POS is essentially "brand new" and finally at least being used for something.

But it really is a gigantic POS and a colossal waste of money.

But I guess it isn't really if I take that $250 initial cost and divide it out by the number of months over its lifetime (which should be another DECADE since it's JUST NOW really starting to get USED).

[anton12]

NotHereToPlayGames said:
"This Acer Aspire One really is the biggest waste of money I've ever spent!"

Hello NotHereToPlayGames,
Maybe "this biggest waste of money" could profit
from some inspirations to speed it up:

http://mrqash.blogspot.com/2021/12/ysiwin2kpror3iso.html

And it should work with Mypay68.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Looks promising!  The "AOA150" mentioned in the comments is actually the Acer Aspire One with the Atom N270.  So basically a model or two just prior to my POS.

[feodor2]

Okey enough about irrelevant stuff

I have done "rebase -b 0x6af00000 xul.dll" and also confirm its less memory hungru even on the latest version, I am going to make the new versions with this already, сonsider the value of 0x6af00000 is optimal. I saw for other files also do rebase, I try next. The question if this is such a good thing why mozilla do not apply this for the firefox?

[genieautravail]

34 minutes ago, feodor2 said:

The question if this is such a good thing why mozilla do not apply this for the firefox?

Very good question !

It seems so easy...

Any downside ?

Regards

 

[AstroSkipper]

25 minutes ago, feodor2 said:

I have done "rebase -b 0x6af00000 xul.dll" and also confirm its less memory hungru even on the latest version, I am going to make the new versions with this already, сonsider the value of 0x6af00000 is optimal.

I'm glad you think rebasing the xul.dll file makes sense. 

32 minutes ago, feodor2 said:

The question if this is such a good thing why mozilla do not apply this for the firefox?

Mozilla doesn't care about less RAM usage. Like many other manufacturers, they assume that the users of their newer versions have enough RAM available in their computers. Otherwise they would not produce such rubbish.