|
PHM vs XCPUScalar
Well, I have both, but I must say that XCPUScalar is far better then Pocket Hack Master.
Stability
For some odd reason, XCPUScalar will work perfectly fine in power saver mode (up to 416MHz), while PHM will lock up my X30H. This lets me run my X30 at about 130mA, while PHM will require about 250mA at the same speed. On top of that, PHM can't even set my X30 to 650MHz, BUS:325, Mem163, LCD:81! XCPUScalar can set it to this without breaking a sweat. PHM can set it to 683HMz, BUS:204, MEM:104, LCD:104, but XCPUScalrs method is still faster, and runs cooler!
My Verdict
XCPUScalar creams PHM in this category.
Customization
XCPUScalar
XCPUScalar is more idiot proof, by only allowing certain cpu settings depending on your hardware. XCPUScalar does offer the option to add a cpu utilization monitor on the title bar, but it isn't as responsive as PHM.
PHM
PHM will allow you to set the cpu at almost anything you want, but there is no guarantee it'll work at that setting. PHM also give you the option to have a battery gage, cpu utilization gage, and speed gage in title bar of WM2003. Another great feature of PHM is the fact that it can automatically set the cpu to certain settings based on the active application.
My Verdict
PHM is better then XCPUScalar in this category.
Performance
For Performance, XCPUScalar wins. It's "624 MHz" setting allows my axim to have the best performance without generating an excess amount of heat under high load (wi-fi, Bluetooth on, watching near DVD quality movies streamed over my wi-fi network through BetaPlayer). With PHM, I can set the CPU clock above XCPUScalar, but you trade memory performance for a higher clock speed with causes your hardware temp to rise faster, and degraded performance since the X30s are completely memory based.
Another thing I don't like about PHM, is the fact that it stays visible to Switch Bar, even when it's minimized. This can make managing your programs a pain.
|