Kindle Page Turn Speed Comparison – Kindle vs Kindle DX 2 Vs Kindle DX 1

Now that the Kindle DX 2 is out and the Kindle 2 has been updated to 2.5 it’s time for another Page Turn Speed comparison. Note that this is much less comprehensive than the prior one (details listed below).

This post has page turn speed times and comparisons. There is also a comparison video if you want to make your own measurements at the Kindle DX 2 Video Page (should be live soon) – It’s under the Kindle Page Turn Speed Comparison Video heading at the end of the post.

Kindle vs Kindle DX 2 vs Kindle DX 1 Page Turn Comparison

Here’s what we get when we compare page turn speeds with a similar number of words per page (not font size but number of words).

Kindle DX 2 Page Turn Speed

We used the 4th Font Size in Kindle DX 2 and the book was Dominant Species by Michael C. Marks.

1st run: 10 page turns in 8.7 seconds. 2nd run: 50 page turns going forwards in 41.4 seconds. 

3rd run: 10 page turns backwards in 14.4 seconds. 4th run: 10 page turns going backwards in 14.6 seconds.

Which averages out to Kindle DX 2 doing forward page turns in .83 to .87 seconds and backwards page turns in 1.44 to 1.46 seconds.

Kindle DX Page Turn Speed (on Kindle 2.5.3 upgrade)

Font Size 4 in Dominant Species.

1st run: 20 page turns in 20.9 seconds. 2nd run: 50 page turns in 42.7 seconds (This was a bit of a surprise). 3rd run: 20 page turns in 17 seconds.

4th run: 20 backwards page turns in 24.2 seconds. 5th run: 30 backwards page turns in 39 seconds.

Which translates to .85 seconds to 1.04 seconds per forward page turn and 1.21 to 1.3 seconds per backwards page turn.

Kindle 2 Page Turn Speed (on Kindle 2.5.3 upgrade)

For the Kindle 2 we used Size 2 font in the Dominant Species book.

1st run: 30 page turns in 19.3 seconds. 2nd run: 50 page turns in 37.3 seconds.

3rd run: 10 backwards page turns in 11.9 seconds. 4th run: 20 backwards page turns in 21.1 seconds.

Which averages out to .64 to .75 seconds per page turn going forwards and 1.15 to 1.19 seconds per page turn going backwards.

Strangely, with both Kindle DX 2 and Kindle 2 the backwards page turns become slower around the 4th or 5th page turn. With the Kindle DX 1 this didn’t really happen though the 7th page turn every time is slower.

Results – Kindle 2 is better than Kindle DX 2 which is better than Kindle DX 1

Amazon have managed to not only improve the screen contrast of the Kindle DX 2 significantly they have also managed to improve the page turn speed for forward page turning by a slight amount. Backward page turns are slower than on the Kindle DX 1 although that should hardly be a concern.

How do Kindle Page Turn Speeds compare with Nook and Sony Reader?

Quite a while back we had compared the page turn speeds of various eReaders and had come up with these results –

… results we get –

  1. Sony Reader Touch Edition –  0.82 seconds per page turn. First Run: 72 pages in 1 minute. Second Run: 74 pages in 1 minute. Finishing Page: The way Dexter Predo knew. Second Run – Mr. Predo knew something.
  2. Kindle 2 International – 0.89 seconds per page turn. First run: 64 page turns in 1 minute. Second Run: 71 page turns in 1 minute. Finishing Page – She heads over to the Bar. Second Run – My Head to Mr. Predo. 
  3. Nook 1.3 – Exactly 1.5 seconds per page turn. First run: 40 page turns in 1 minute. Second run: 40 page turns in 1 minute. Finishing Page – Zombies eat brains. It’s their raison d’etre.
  4. Kindle DX International – 1.2 seconds per page turn. First Run: 50 page turns in 1 minute. Second Run: 50 page turns in 1 minute. Finishing Page – Philip’s Connection to the Coalition.
  5. Kindle US 2.3.3 – 0.76 seconds per page turn. First Run: 83 pages in 1 minute. Second Run: 75 pages in 1 minute. Finishing Page: Second Run: The problem with Philip is.

The Kindle 2 US came in first, the Sony Reader Touch Edition came in a close second, and the Kindle 2 International was a close third. Every other eReader took more than 1 second per page turn.

It’s really interesting to see that the Kindle 2.5 upgrade (or perhaps one of the other Kindle upgrades) has cut down the page turn speed to just .64 to .75 seconds per page turn. This is quite an improvement.

How does the latest Nook firmware upgrade do?

This is what we get for the Nook with a somewhat comparable font setting –

Run 1: 20 page turns in 21.5 seconds. Run 2: 10 page turns in 10.7 seconds. Run 3: 20 page turns in 20.2 seconds.

Run 4: 10 backwards page turns in 13.7 seconds.  Run 5: 10 backwards page turns in 12.1 seconds. Run 6: 20 backwards page turns in 24.3 seconds.

Which translates to 1.01 to 1.07 seconds per forward page turn and 1.21 to 1.37 seconds per backwards page turn. Nook has improved from its abysmal 1.5 seconds per page turn speed – However, it is still behind the Kindle by a fair margin and it’s also behind the new Kindle DX 2.

13 thoughts on “Kindle Page Turn Speed Comparison – Kindle vs Kindle DX 2 Vs Kindle DX 1”

  1. Odd. You defended the Kindle’s slower-than-iPad page turns by mentioning a trick to click the button a line ahead of finishing reading, but you’re concerned that the Nook is still 1/4th of a second slower than a Kindle? Just click the button two words form the end of the second to last line, no?

    1. Don’t know what to say to that. We’re comparing eReader page turn speeds. The iPad isn’t an eReader.

      Would you like me to pretend it’s an eReader – Sure. Then it probably has .1 second page turns and wins the prize.

  2. Unless you’re taking Evelyn Wood’s Speed Reading class (are you even old enough to remember those commercials?) why kvetch abour page turning speed differences that are so miniscule that it really makes no darned difference.

    Are you that bored? Stop complaining and go read a book. That is why you bought you Kindle, whatever version, right?

    1. Well, last time we checked the difference was 1.5 seconds on Nook vs .8 seconds on Sony Reader (it’s less now). That’s .7 seconds per page turn. Over the course of a 500 eReader page book that’s 350 seconds = 6 minutes approximately.

      It’s not trivial and it’s also a bother as you have to wait every time and it breaks the flow of reading.

      1. I’m sorry, but if 6 minutes is a huge deal when reading a 500 page book I would be thinking there’s a deeper problem here than page turning speed. No offense meant, but it just seems so very petty in the whole scheme of things.

        On average, I think your opinions are spot on but with this one…well, isn’t there a more pressing issue? I do love your blog, so please don’t think I’m just a crabby old lady. Can’t wait to see your next topic!

  3. I think you misinterpreted what I meant. In an article within the last few days entitled “Test comparing Kindle, Book, iPad reading speeds loses the plot” which I assume you meant point rather than plot, you assert a couple of things:

    1) How best to handle page turns.
    2) How best to hold the Kindle to minimize page turns.

    You basically try to minimize the impact of page turns, saying things like above, plus questioning the margin of error, etc.

    That’s why I found it odd that you would trumpet the page turning speed of today’s Kindles versus a nook or Sony Reader. By your own admission, who cares?

    I wasn’t trumpeting the iPad, I was saying that there’s no reason to trumpet the Kindle here, the nook is every bit as good as is the Sony, in that they are all in the same ~ 1 second range for page turns, and you already acknowledged previous that a slight delay is meaningless.

    Regarding this, however:

    “Would you like me to pretend it’s an eReader – Sure. Then it probably has .1 second page turns and wins the prize.”

    Again, page turns aren’t really germane in forwards/backwards reading. Where the iPad loses, it loses big (sunlight). LCD sensitivity is a hotly debated topic, I err on the side of I stare at a computer all day at work, when I’m not reading late at night I’m staring at a backlit LCD TV, and when I’m picking music I’m staring at a backlit LCD screen on a MP3 player. The extra 30 to 90 minutes a day seem rather small. There are differing opinions, for sure, and things like Pixel Qi and Mirasol will mitigate some of this, yet an IPS screen will certainly remain an advantage for many non-reading tasks.

    I wouldn’t recommend you consider the iPad to be an eReader… but you might want to consider it as the biggest threat to an electronic reading blog you’ve ever seen. In a typical reading forward, page-by-page test, we can argue all day which is better. One is more paper like, one has better aesthetics, both let you read in small or large print.

    I made the switch for research. Things that iBooks or Kindle on the iPad also fall short on. In my case, I’m involved in a lot of Bible Study (see, here’s an example that’s not based on it also being cool for movies and music). Apps like Logos or Olive Tree have better searching than iBooks or Kindle, they have vastly superior note taking and bookmarking, you can flip around verses much quicker, notes sync out of the individual app much easier, and hyperlinks to notes in other volumes / commentaries are a blessing (pun intended).

    You see, where eInk versus LCD is meaningless, is indeed on page turn. .8 seconds versus .1 seconds – who cares, it’s less than a second of my life. That’s why I was happy when I had my nook, even though I knew my older Kindle turned pages faster (this was pre 1.4, and in fact, pre 1.3). Typing on a Kindle or nook is slower than an iPad, and when you are trying to look at 3-4 references, the refresh DOES become an issue. For example, click on a footnote on both devices, the iPad will have you back in a very significant amount of time less than your Kindle will.

    I just would suggest you not be so dismissive of the iPad because it’s primary function is not an eReader. You don’t really cover eReaders in the way other blogs do, you’re not really a gadget blog covering every Chinese import and all the second tier releases here and abroad. You basically focus on pro-Kindle, anti-Ipad-as-a-reader, with a smattering of mentions about nook and Sony, plus some excellent coverage of affordable books (mostly for Kindle).

    The PC software industry is a virtual graveyard between the 80’s and 90’s of companies that dismissed Microsoft as a threat. The last 10 years that graveyard shifted to a graveyard of search engines that thought they could best Google, and hardware device manufacturers who dismissed Apple. First, the MP3 manufacturers were hit hard. Now the phone manufacturers are being hit hard. Now, people are deciding they’d rather buy $500 iPads than $700 tablet edition PCs and in some cases $250 netbooks.

    One day, reading might be done in serious fashion mostly on devices that can run Amazon software, rather than devices that are Amazon hardware. eInk isn’t likely to stop this train, whether or not it maintains a primary advantage in the aspect of eye strain and glare reduction.

    PS: A Porsche Boxer is a MUCH better “car” than my minivan. It goes faster, corners faster, looks nicer, breaks better, etc. I still bought a minivan, since I also like to carry my kids and groceries.

    I suspect you know much of this – do you think color eInk is a necessary evolution of the product in order to allow it to survive?

    1. I don’t cover eReaders the way other blogs do because my only concern is reading and books.

      There have always been people who think Apple is going to revolutionize the world and there always will be. Mp3 players and phones are not a big deal. Neither is the iPad – it doesn’t matter how many Apple devotees buy it.
      It’s just a consumer creating machine – No other company has devotees like Apple because they’re really good at marketing and influence.

      Here’s the biggest proof – once Steve Jobs is gone it’ll disappear. He’s the only one in there capable of spinning it that well. Of course, it’ll be easy to rationalize it has nothing to do with his reality distortion field and that Apple just couldn’t make amazing products any more without him.

      Reading is hugely important – it’s one of the tenets of civilization and progress. As is stuff like Tesla and Space (Blue Origin, SpaceX) and the Internet.

      The fundamental disconnect is that it’s hard to take a marketing company that’s selling ’emotional highs’ seriously. If reading dies out there isn’t going to be a substitute. If any phone or any gadget dies out there’ll always be another one.

      The more people can be disconnected from things like reading that make them smarter the better the chance for a consumer/cattle creating culture to spread. Basically, the Internet, NPR, things like reading make people smarter while things like porn, reality TV, most TV, advertising make people dumber.
      It should be clear which companies are on which side. Consumer Producing Machines vs Things that encourage creating and free thinking.

      It has very little to do with iPad and a lot to do with fighting consumer culture. Sooner or later all of advertising is going to crumble away. Advertising online is a $20 to $40 billion business – it seems huge until you consider the amount of stuff that happens online and how little advertising there is compared to it. Google makes its money from shortcuts not ads – They direct people where people already want to go – they don’t influence/manipulate blatantly like ads do. That leaves hardly any company making significant money from advertising online.

      It’s about encouraging reading and killing customer manipulation and ending consumer culture and advertising. The more people read and as more people read and use the Internet and other anti-influence channels the more we’ll see the advertising/consumer culture indoctrinated by TV in the 1960s and 1970s die out.

  4. I could respond in full, but you summed it up quite nicely here:

    “Here’s the biggest proof – once Steve Jobs is gone it’ll disappear.”

    He’s not gone yet. That’s just an opinion, not a proof.

    PS: Apple isn’t marketing THIN AIR. They are an amazingly great marketing firm. But in the case of the iPad (relatively little TV time, btw, that will change as inventory levels improve no doubt), they are brilliantly marketing a product that:

    1) Has a custom chip developed partially in house that provides advantages over other deployments of the same ARM Cortex technology.

    2) Has a battery life untouched by other tablets.

    3) Scared Amazon enough to make sure the app was ready on day 1.

    3) Has a bright screen with a virtually limitless viewing angle.

    4) Has a touch sensitive screen far in excess (proven in labs) of the capabilities of any competition.

    5) Has an app store. Yes, everyone has one now, but that’s because the concept was so brilliant for a consumer device.

    6) Has an SDK that enables super rapid development.

    7) Has a distribution model for that app store that’s so attractive, it’s been replicated, including by Amazon, including not just for apps, but for cutting book deals (70/30 split, etc etc).

    BTW: You can dismiss iPads, iPods and iPhones all you want, but the MP3 market is now known as the iPod market + a few Zune users and a few products available at big box computer chains by Samsung and others. The phone market (a fairly large industry) is still largely run by Nokia, but referred to as the iPhone market + phones that aren’t smart phones + phones that are “the latest iPhone killer”. The tablet market isn’t known as the iPad market, it just is. Apple has already sold more tablets then all other comers combined, especially if you remove the “laptops with a swivel LCD and a keyboard” segment.

    Yeah, no, nobody’s knocking on ereading’s door. Dedicated, one function devices are certainly competing with iPads.

    PS: ‘my only concern is reading and books.’

    Funny, I read a lot of books on my iPad. In fact, I stopped carrying an eReader, since I just read on the iPad now. And thanks to Zinio and Press Display, I read magazines and newspapers too. Thanks to the NY Times’ obstinence, I just don’t read THEIR paper anymore.

    Do I read as many books as you? I bet so.

    1. You mentioned that you don’t use eReaders any more. Perhaps then you can stop reading eReader blogs too.

      90% of my time on the blog today is spent helping people figure out PDF support on the Kindle DX 2 which is a great use of my time. The other 10% is spent talking to you about how great you think Apple is. There’s nothing that could EVER happen for me to believe that and vica versa. So perhaps we could just stop wasting each other’s time.

  5. “You mentioned that you don’t use eReaders any more. Perhaps then you can stop reading eReader blogs too.”

    Umm… no thanks. I still read, and follow gadgets. I understand if you don’t want to reply to my comments, of course, but there’s really no reason I would want to stop reading these blogs. Yes, even yours…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *