Most of the recent WM6 rom chefs have been advocating making NO performance tweaks, in favor of keeping as large a RAM pool as possible. As I rarely need 30mb to run a program, I am happy to give up what I don't need if it will help get data back and forth to the SD card and so on faster. Has anyone got thoughts or data about this? I don't own a benchmarking program so I can't check it out directly. I have been making all the tweaks anyway, but does it matter?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Ed
X-Plore 1.1
IPL/SPL 3.08
GSM 2.69.11
edhaas said:
Most of the recent WM6 rom chefs have been advocating making NO performance tweaks, in favor of keeping as large a RAM pool as possible. As I rarely need 30mb to run a program, I am happy to give up what I don't need if it will help get data back and forth to the SD card and so on faster. Has anyone got thoughts or data about this? I don't own a benchmarking program so I can't check it out directly. I have been making all the tweaks anyway, but does it matter?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree completely! I'd like to see a WM6 ROM with all the performance tweaks and 8 MB page pool. I know jwzg is working on an 8MB pp ROM based on Faria's up coming Vanilla WM6 ROM.
Check out this thread for more info http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=299584&page=10
Thanks for the link. I really don't understand the drive for smaller and smaller page pools either...
Some Answers!
OK, here is my contribution to the WM6 literature...
I am running battery status 1.04 beta 3 with the following settings in all tests: cpu speed 247, cpu scalar min 143, boost 278. set on wakeup, remember last speed. My base setup is as per my signature. I ran SK Tools v 3.1.1.0 in demo mode. I also removed the HKLM\init launch100 key in both cases.
All tweaks, No tweaks
Integer (moves/25us) 134.0864, 134.4001
Floating point MWIPS 3.490, 3.489
RAM Access speed index 345, 328
Draw bitmaps speed index 503, 522
Main storage (w) KB/sec 607.78, 612.14
Main storage (r) KB/sec 3670.25, 3469.23
Storage card (w) KB/sec 412.76, 423.11
Storage card (r) KB/sec 3353.71, ! 1119.13
As you can see, the major difference is in the storage card read speed. This led me to retest using only the SD card speed tweak, and no others. Surprisingly, the result was unchanged from using no tweaks! So, likely there is some interaction with the other file system tweaks that is involved. (See the wiki-WM5 performance tweaks). At some point maybe I'll try to pin it down further.
Regards,
Ed
BTW: Sorry for the poor formatting, for some reason the extra white space between columns is being suppressed in the post.
When I was using NotTooSmart's ROM, it had some performance tweaks. I don't have a benchmark prog but it was definitely much faster. I would say it's comparable to when I had it overclocked to 234-247MHz...
I believe what made the most difference was the System Cache... I lost ~10MB of RAM but the ROM was flying... Start up was scary though... I think it went <2MB w/ the progs I had...
edhaas said:
Thanks for the link. I really don't understand the drive for smaller and smaller page pools either...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of people tend to be RAM fanatics... that's probably what drove cooks to have smaller and smaller page pools... Another thing is people and numbers.. many tend to feel the bigger, the better.. High IPL/SPL, High Radio, High OS, High Storage, High RAM.. I think you get the picture.. =P
Update on tweaks
I think I'm near the max. I maxed out the file cache, and filter cache, kept the SD cache at 256 and re-ran the benchmarks. Slightly higher numbers all round, but a dramatic increase in SD card read rate, now up to 6.5 mb/sec! I would expect this would speed loading those big programs and files from the SD card, and is 6 times the "stock" speed!.
Regards,
There was a post a few weeks ago (I think) where someone did comparisons with playing with PagePools and the performance. They compared 4MB, 6MB, 8MB, and 12MB pagepools. As I recall there was very little difference between 12MB and 8MB performance. I think 6MB was the worst of the 4.
Again this was all from memory, but I just remember after reading that, I no longer was that concerned about the differenence in performance over the added extra memory available by dropping to 8MB.
Performance tweaks
Actually, in thinking about the issue, it occurs to me that the standard benchmarks we are using (SPB Tools) don't measure things that would likely be changed by a change in page pool. CPU calculations, memory access speeds, would not change by changing the page pool or buffer sizes. The only measurement which would change would be the speed of swapping programs and data in and out of memory (by suppressing the actual need to do so) or accessing the memory card. However, these things *would* impact on "real life" apparent speed of the device in activation of programs and quick response times.
Thoughts?
Forgive my obvious ignorance... This is the closest thread I have found for my search, "SD card speed tweak" so can you please help me? point me to the tweak to speed up my SD card?
thanx in advance!
Re: Speed tweaks
Sure, If you want awesome numbers on SK Tools SD read benchmark, (particularly when combined with overclocking) make these registry changes:
HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>MMC_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>SDMemory_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
HKLM>System>StorageManager>FATFS:
Change CacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
HKLM>System>StorageManager>Filters>freplxfilt:
Change ReplStoreCacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
The larger the numbers the faster the benchmark. However, some of the other benchmarks run slighly slower, and I'm not sure I see significant "real life" improvements in responsiveness. I'd be interested in your impressions. One thing to watch out for, particularly when using the 16384 settings, is that available memory can drop to "dangerously" low levels on start up from soft reboot. If you're using batterystatus you can monitor this. As long as you stay above 2mg or so at the minimum you're ok, as the situation resolves after the start up routines finish. If you do go below, I've had the screen blank temporarily and hang for a moment, but it eventually booted fine anyway.
Have fun!
Thank you for your prompt and courteous answer!! I am still learning this PocketPC stuff. Someday I hope to be able to contribute. It already seems faster!
email tweaks
is there anyway to make my pics in emails auto download?
(instead of having to click "download pics" every time...)
and to create shortcuts to my text messages and other applications, how can i do that?
b.mann said:
is there anyway to make my pics in emails auto download?
(instead of having to click "download pics" every time...)
and to create shortcuts to my text messages and other applications, how can i do that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This question is slightly offtopic, but I'll answer you anyways.
Go to the email account you want to change:
Menu/Tools/Options/Choose The Account (it will take you into email setup):
Next/Next/Next/Options/Next/Next/Download size limit (drop down menu - choose what you want)/Finish
Hi,
I saw the benchmarking results that you guys posted and the difference between "with tweaks" and "without tweaks". The numbers sure show a difference with the benchmarking results but what i'd like to ask and what i'd really like to know is - have you noticed a significant difference in actual/real life performance on ur wizard? Was it obviously faster?
I mean, for me and IMHO, i'm not much of a fan of "benchmark" results and all that unless I actually see a "real" difference in speed when i use my PPC. I don't think i'll go for the performance tweaks if i'll loose 10+MB of RAM and am only able to see "benchmark" results being better instead of overall actual performance. That's why i'd like to get ur inputs on this whole performance tweaks thing...is there a noticeable difference in speed? (not just benchmark data)
WM 6.1 Tweaks
Hi,
Even the thread is quite old,
after some time of using WM6 and 6.1 and test meny mor etweaks, there I post some of them who i found usefull.
TKS to all contributors form xda or another.
1. Stop 3G services: settings\phone\ HSDPA must be disabled; RAT set to GSM; the internt still accesible trought GPRS for the most operators
Result in: less batery consumption 1-2 days stdby increase to 3-4 days
reduce blockings and wake-up problems
2. Disable Power management for SD card: use poket toolman or others and uncheck Enable Power Mgmt for SD card; or use regedit and change to
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Drivers\SDCARD\ClientDrivers\Class\SDMemory_Class]
“DisablePowerManagement“=dword:00000001
Other option:
Change reg into
[HKLM\System\StorageManager]
“PNPUnloadDelay“=dword:8196
[HKLM\System\StorageManager]
“PNPWaitIODelay“=dword:8196
Note that the 8196 should be entered as a DECIMAL value. The HEXADECIMAL (HEX) equivalent is 0×00002004.
Result in: Less blocking and sd diseaparing fix or slow upload sd when wake-up
More consumption on batery, about 10% more, but with tweak 1 still OK
3. Uncheck today timeout: settings\items\ uncheck Today timeout
Result in: less delay when a phone call income o r standby resume
4. Try to instal the alarm programs and sounds files direct into main memory instead of SD; to avoid sd blocking when standby resume
5. Install .NET Compact Framework 3.5 (last vers) to your device, as:
1. Download .NET Compact Framework 3.5 from Microsoft and save it on your PC.
2. Run the downloaded MSI file and let it install.
3. Connect your device to Activesync/Windows Mobile Device Center and finish the automatically launched installation on your device.
4. Soft reset your device.
5. Open a Registry editor and navigate to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\.NETCompactFramework where you will see two entries for the (now two) existing version references: the old one, which came with your device and the new one you just installed.
6. Change the DWord value of 3.5.7283.00 from 0 to 1 (thus enabling it) and all the other values (i.e.: 2.0.7045.00) from 1 to 0 (thus disabling it/them).
7. Soft reset your device.
Result in: shorter time (gain 0.5 sec) to navigate trough windows menus and buttons actions.
6. Activate lock applet on today menu; Without this function when the phone is in stand-by and a call income the phone delay has about 8-10s to wake-up.
Result in: the wake-up on call is shorter (gain 4-5 sec) than without this lock checked in today settings; somehow WM use this library to pass trowght to wake up.
7. Speed-up the SD card read; tks to edhaas contributor from xda-developers.
Action: increase some SD cache into registry:
a) HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>MMC_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
b) HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>SDMemory_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
c) HKLM>System>StorageManager>FATFS:
Change CacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
d) HKLM>System>StorageManager>Filters>freplxfilt:
Change ReplStoreCacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal (16384 is dangeours high, some blank screen at startup)
a), b) settings are regulary set by default to 256; c), d) is by default to 0, so change-it and see if gain some perf.
All of them has tested and works fine.
Apply and now I found my i-mate ultimate 6150 OK, instead of first phone impression when I blame-it.
I have done a search, looked at the Wiki and other articles describing exactly what page pool is and what it is used for. I have been flashing ROMs on my Touch Pro and trying different page pool sizes, but haven't really seen a noticeable effect, other than how much RAM I have I have available after a soft reset. I tried page pools ranging from the stock 6 all the way to 32 MB and really can't say I saw any noticeable performance increase or decrease.
Maybe I wasn't looking in the right place? Where do you tend to see better performance from a larger page pool? Why would more page pool benefit more than having more free RAM?
Yeah..that question is bothering me too....As I noticed .... I used 5mb pool page and in netfront sometimes I had ,,cannot load page..low memory " ..smthing like that. Now with 6mb as I surfed ...I didn`t had that problem with the memory yet. I dunno maybe is because of the bigger poolpage that I have now on this rom.
wow... really? No one here feels like answering this question huh?
there is no answer depend on the apps one use
and how many apps one wish to run at the time
lower page pool mean lower io speed == slower programs which depend on
loading stuff
lower ram mean few apps running at once without running out of mem
judgment call for each user I'd say
/proc/meminfo on my G1 shows total memory as 99040KB. I thought the G1 had 192MB of SDRAM. Clearly I must be missing something here. The free command shows the same as well.
Good question... with that said where is our ROM at too? I don't see 256MB of ROM... by my calculations I am missing about 50MB but I could be wrong.
neoobs said:
Good question... with that said where is our ROM at too? I don't see 256MB of ROM... by my calculations I am missing about 50MB but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The fact that they advertised it has having 256MB of ROM seems strange to me, since the internal memory that comes closest to that (268,400KB - when adding up the total sizes of the /dev /sqlite_stmt_journals /system /data and /cache partitions - is actually 262MB) is definitely not Read-Only-Memory. And it wouldn't appear to be 256MB, unless that /sqlite_stmt_journals is a subdivision of another partition like the /system/modules and /system/xbin (which I obviously left out of my calculations), that would bring it down to 264,304KB or 258MB - pretty close.
But that is still not ROM, so I don't know what they were getting at with that.. Unless I missed a memo and ROM doesn't just mean Read-Only-Memory any more...
I was confused about the use of "ROM" too. Apparently, it's just to differentiate between memory and storage. The /data partition is definitely not read-only.
techvd said:
/proc/meminfo on my G1 shows total memory as 99040KB. I thought the G1 had 192MB of SDRAM. Clearly I must be missing something here. The free command shows the same as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that the rest of the memory is reserver for the framebuffer and video textures etc.
The question was already answered by Hackborn on the mailing list.
https://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/adb2fa9946275b73
i dont think that thread responds to "where the hell are the 100 MB remaining"
i dont believe "radio firmware" + "graphic framebuffers for shadows" + "etc" is eating 100 Mb of memory. I dont believe and in that forum they dont explain the numbers.
windows XP, with 800x600 x 65.000 colors, is able to run with just 64 Mb of ram, and only 200 Mhz. That would give as 120 Mb Free. to run games like diablo 2, baldur's gate (i played baldur's gate with my pentium mmx 200mhz)
This phone is superior than my Pentium 200mhz who had 64 ram. why this phone cant do the same with 3x times memory x 3x times cpu?
Why windows Xp (a real operating system) is running with a lot less resources than android ??? where is our 192 Mb of ram??
a 200mhz Pentium >>>> 384 mhz ARM processor
*) first of all, a pentium is faster than the arm we use, especially for things like gaming.
a PC is optimized for performance, an embedded architecture is optimzied for efficiency (especially regarding power consumption)
*) your PC has a graphiccard that has its own memory.
*) android = linux = real OS.
why do these rants always pop up whenever embedded systems are discussed.
it was the same with the gp2x / pandora scene, the same in every windows mobile forum, etc.
people, get a clue. attend a course about systems architecture or read a book or two...
Take a look here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=482228
Same discussion
you saw i called windows xp a real os and you started freaking out, lol !
*) cpu is 528 Mhz clocked down to 384 (google says: to conserve battery!!!!) , so they stole us speed and memory. Performance vs eficiency? i dont buy it. Its all the same running the same kernel.
*) my graphic card sucked balls, old ati radeon 128 with 16mb ram. So, 16 mb doesnt mean a **** in the middle of the 100MB we are missing.
*) android = java = resources devour, when i discover android = java i was disapointed, the real operating system running on my phone is the good kernel+debian armel which i had to host in memory card instead of internal memory because lately google is acting like microsoft. and im starting to think android will be as ****y as windows is.
yea i readed a pair of books and i know how to count, where is my Mhz and where is my Memory?
greetings
does increasing the pagepool DECREASE battery life?
what is your pagepool?
WHAT IS A RECOMMENDED PAGEPOOL?
Pagepool size doesn't affect the battery life of your phone.
It affects the performance & the available program memory of the phone.
This is how it goes: small pagepool means more memory & less performance, big pagepool means less memory & better performance
I have a Wizard & the most used pagepool sizes are 2,4,6mb. It is a matter of taste .-
samxein said:
Pagepool size doesn't affect the battery life of your phone.
It affects the performance & the available program memory of the phone.
This is how it goes: small pagepool means more memory & less performance, big pagepool means less memory & better performance
I have a Wizard & the most used pagepool sizes are 2,4,6mb. It is a matter of taste .-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what do u think of a 8mb pagepool?
are u sure it doesnt lessen the battery life?
and does changing the pagepool higher make the startup quicker?
I am sure it doesn't affect the battery life.
For my Wizard 8mb pagepool is too large. I prefer 4mb.
Maybe for your phone it's perfect. I don't know what phone you have & what are it's specifications, especially the size of the Program Memory. My phone has only 64mb .
Try searching at your phones thread about recommended pagepool size.
I am not sure about the startup time. The logical is to be faster with bigger pagepool but I haven't test it.-
Page pool
the page pool varies on some devices.... wich one do you have?
It cant increase the startup time... it allows you to use many tasks at same time.
+ Que PPC said:
the page pool varies on some devices.... wich one do you have?
It cant increase the startup time... it allows you to use many tasks at same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have a cingular 8125
hey fellow XDA WM devs and users and forum people,
Greetings,
so I am asking whether not WM devices are capped on using 25+mb of RAM for each app...
If so, can I assume that this is the reason why we cannot have stunning graphic games just like the other compatitor platforms (iOS, Android) ??
also, a reply tweet from one of my favourite game dev:
http://twitter.com/Isotope244/status/16152606483
any comments or answers are greatly apprerciated
Kind Regards
Processes in winmo can only access 32 mb of virtual memory (with a max of 32 processes). There's normally at least 7 mb or so of memory allocated to dll's for all processes (sometimes more). 32-7=25 mb. I think that's what the developer is talking about. This is changing with WP7, where all process will have full access to 1 GB of virtual memory (limited by the amount of availabe RAM).
Farmer Ted said:
Processes in winmo can only access 32 mb of virtual memory (with a max of 32 processes). There's normally at least 7 mb or so of memory allocated to dll's for all processes (sometimes more). 32-7=25 mb. I think that's what the developer is talking about. This is changing with WP7, where all process will have full access to 1 GB of virtual memory (limited by the amount of availabe RAM).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks farmer tad for your reply....
now its all clear to me
thanks.
(oh lol... then what's thhe point of phones having all those extra RAM while the OS cannot use them, at all?)