Related
So after reading nearly 5 hours and spending my time in the wee hours of morning, I finally did all the "stable" mods for the phone... If you haven't been reading, make sure you guys check out the stuff in the development forum.
After all modifications, I was able to get 2701 points in quadrant benchmark. What mods did I do?
-i9000 eclair flash (JM5)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=734871
-Alternative mimocans lag fix
(one click installer http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=749495)
-One click root (googled it for i9000)
-Overclock kernel 1.0Ghz to 1.2Ghz
(http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=746343)
This stuff really does help out your phone folks. Bench it now with quadrant, then take a peak at the other stuff and make magic happen. If anyone needs any additional help setting up their captivate, I'm more than happy to help.
I agree those fixes help speed a lot. But the quadrant score is meaningless. the speed hack creates an io loopback. The loopback just tells quadrant what it wants to hear.
Does your BT work on the european ROM. For me all people hear is a gargeled mess on there end?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
Can you post the results of these tests:
Neocore
Linpack
CPU Benchmark
I keep hearing about this quadrant, does it actually improve real world performance? Or is just for the sake of scores?
jhego said:
I keep hearing about this quadrant, does it actually improve real world performance? Or is just for the sake of scores?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is just benchmarking software that takes the cpu, gpu and memory read/write speeds into account. It runs a series of tests and spits a score number out at the end, so you can compare your device to others (like comparing boner sizes, but less gay).
It doesn't actually do anything to speed up the device though.
modest_mandroid said:
Quadrant is just benchmarking software that takes the cpu, gpu and memory read/write speeds into account. It runs a series of tests and spits a score number out at the end, so you can compare your device to others (like comparing boner sizes, but less gay).
It doesn't actually do anything to speed up the device though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct and to be honest there is way to much weight in the I/O tests. That is the only reason that the stock Droid X bests the Gal X. It has more weight than cpu and gpu so you can't put to much into those scores. They really don't mean anything more than bragging rights. What I am interested in is real world usage.
Real world use with the hack provides amazing speed gains opening and switching apps. Io heavy apps are very much improved while open too. It's finally as fast as the iphone.
Whats your battery life like after the overclock?
The score ended up getting lower and lower every time i used quadrant. 2701 is the highest I was able to get so far, but that's with a fresh install of the rom and all the stuff before I started loading on apps. Everytime I ran the benchmark, I of course killed the apps beforehand.
The battery life is the same- to be honest. This is me comparing a rooted stock ROM to the somewhat fresh install of the eclair i9000. The phone is very snappy. I came from an iPhone 4 and one of the biggest eye sores to me was the less-fluidness of changing programs, response to buttons (homescreen-back button) and pinch to zoom. After all these changes, it's a whole different story. Browsing is very appealing, especially since pinch to zoom isn't jagged or slow. The smoothness of this functionality is on par to an iPhone. And there is no waiting when I press the home button or back button.
True, maybe these numbers aren't considerably accurate (as far as the lag fix and EXT2) but at least it shows raw computing capability in it's current state... meaning, the usage of a virtual EXT2. Never the less, the phone is still all around faster, even if it isn't exactly the proper way of going about it.
The only problem I've seen so far is that it likes to randomly shut off. Won't respond to anything unless if I soft reset it. I haven't really found what causes it, since the consistency of it happening goes about in a non set pattern.
I didn't see any real world increase .. so I reverted back in about 4 hours.... I'd rather have the memory than a number that don't transfer to real world speeds...
Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...
Lencias said:
Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed that framerates were lower as well, but only about 4 or 5 FPS. A drop this small isn't really all that significant, and 3D performance at 40 FPS rather than 44 FPS is still much better than a phone like the EVO which runs at like 18 FPS, so I wouldn't really worry that much
Yeah, I noticed it too. I'm also noticing other slowdowns, like a lag on the app drawer screen between my finger swipes and corresponding animations on the screen. If I swipe left or right, the actual swiping animation happens a split second later (noticeable lag). Something tells me this isn't the release build of this rom.
I'm also noticing that the battery dies much quicker with this new rom. I'd get about 2 days of use out of JH7 with the amount I use the phone, with JI6 I'm lucky if I get 8-10 hours.
Actually the benchmark result is quite amazing id say
It scores 1900+ in quadrant standarf
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Lencias said:
Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!
Use Neocore, that is a better FPS than quadrant. I still get 55.5/6 with Neocore so 3d performance is not degraded, at least not on my phone.
I'd expect some continued optimization of Froyo 2.2. Remember how laggy JF6 was? Then it got way better with JH2/3/7. I expect progress like that with the Froyo builds as well. With OCLF, JI6 is actually fairly impressive speed wise.
kennethpenn said:
I'd expect some continued optimization of Froyo 2.2. Remember how laggy JF6 was? Then it got way better with JH2/3/7. I expect progress like that with the Froyo builds as well. With OCLF, JI6 is actually fairly impressive speed wise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm.. did you do anything after you flashed, like cleared dalvik cache and whatnot? Mine is actually running slower (UI-wise) than JF6
Its funny you posted this because I noticed it as well today when I ran Quadrant just to see what it would get. I think Quadrant is a horrible tool for benchmarking now since it can be so easily manipulated, but I did notice the FPS drop myself.
Gles 2/1 is perfectly fine, i scored 46fps on nenamark, so no need to worry about 3d performance, i do admit 2d does stutter a little tho.
designgears said:
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take the man's advice! Quadrant is an awful way to measure performance on the Captivate. Quadrant is biased towards Snapdragon processors, and isn't all that accurate.
Sent from my Cognition 2.2 powered Captivate using XDA app.
It's running fine for me.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Actually using NenaMark1 which is a benchmark app specifically for OpenGL2.0 I get slightly higher scores than on 2.1.
designgears said:
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dg, may as well save your breath. No matter what is said or done, there will always be people who complain that X is slower than when it was Y and be sure that they are right (and will argue they are right to their dying breath).
Synthetic benchmarks are b***it on a multitasking OS anyway, at any given time any thread can tie up a resource the synthetic benchmark needs or it may not. The only way you could truly benchmark something like this while still allowing multitasking would be with a long range sample like a few hours, the 30 -70 seconds Quadrant runs is a worthless snapshot in time.
They all think they are getting an answer but all they are really doing is using a magnifying glass on a Seurat and wondering why they don't get the big picture. Of course the performance issue couldn't be one of the apps they have installed or that has updated since the last time they benchmarked.
I have 206 apps installed on my captivate with even a ridiculous amount like that and more stuff than the average running I can still get a quadrant score of over 950, its a snapshot in the middle not an effective way to judge a film.
For everyone whinging about reduced "3D" performance, is the actual handset slower in real, day to day use?
This is stock 2.1 Firmware vs stock 2.2 Firmware.
Not Cognition/custom rom with lagfix vs Stock 2.2.
As much as I don't like benchmarks, in this they are only confirming the slow downs I'm seeing in real world use on the leaked froyo rom. (Not cognition)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
The first time I flashed 2.2 I saw some lag in the form of occasional black screens and delayed responses, even after installing OCLF.
I used Odin One-Click to flash back to JF6 and did a master clear before installing Cognition 2.2. Immediately applied OCLF before doing anything else. Not seeing the black screens and delayed responses this time. Some are suggesting it's the master clear that helps.
As for 3D performance, animations and scrolling between homescreens are a lot smoother than they were in 2.1. Games run awesome too. The only two places I notice some skippyness are in the app drawer (not often though, and very minor) and in the browser (this is due to a known memory leak bug).
1randomtask said:
For everyone whinging about reduced "3D" performance, is the actual handset slower in real, day to day use?
This is stock 2.1 Firmware vs stock 2.2 Firmware.
Not Cognition/custom rom with lagfix vs Stock 2.2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I actually never bothered benchmarking, but I'm experiencing noticeable lag between swipes and corresponding animations in the app drawer and launcher.
modest_mandroid said:
Yeah, I actually never bothered benchmarking, but I'm experiencing noticeable lag between swipes and corresponding animations in the app drawer and launcher.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have never experienced that on 2.2, even before applying a lag fix. I suggest One-Clicking back to JF6, doing a master clear, and then installing 2.2 again.
No drop vs stock, the overclock kernel gave the extra fps. it also overclocked the gpu by 11%. 4-5 fps out of 40-45 is right in that area.
Edit :.i did a master clear so maybe that's why I don't see a problem
Not all benchmarks will work because our phones are capped at 56 fps. A benchmark needs to bog the gpu down below that for the whole test to get an accurate measurement. Quadrant does that for only party of the test. Many benchmarks can't do that at all.
Quadrant is a decent bench mark but our phones will not see the score increase of a snapdragon with froyo. linpack shows greatly inflated scores on snapdragon froyo devices. Greene computing goes over this on there website.
http://www.greenecomputing.com/
the full version of quadrant shows that the hummingbird and the processor in the droid 2/x mop the floor with the snapdragon in all areas but processing speed. The hummingbird having an edge over the droid x particularly in the 3d area but losing overall because of the rfs file system lag Which is apparently is weighed heavily and the reason the lagfix blows the score out of proportion and the different lagfixes have big gaps in the score while real world performance is not even noticeable.
http://slideme.org/application/quadrant-advanced
Composite scores don't mean anything and that is my gripe with quadrant, there is no way to decide how to weigh file system benchmarks against processor benchmarks against 3d, each area must be compared separately, and the user should be able to decide what that means.
Edit: linpack shows a huge increase over stock. 13.77 vs the 9.61 I got with voodoo and overclock. But still not at the level of a snapdragon. Wait till the next generating of arm processors come out, if you think a snapdragon/hummingbird hybrid would be awesome that's nothing compared to what's in the works. Higher clock speeds and multi-core cpu's aren't far away.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
just curious lol I love to push my devices to the limit!
I'm pretty sure a 50% increase in CPU speed on a dual core processor is more than enough for this guy. Why would you even need to go higher? You'll just end up breaking your device and come here complaining to the devs that it's their fault..
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App
I had mine set to 1.5 and it was very smooth and fast. But I noticed that if I was watching a movie, my xoom got pretty hot in my hand. Maybe not such a good idea to go that high or much higher than that perhaps?
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium App
chrisharmful said:
I had mine set to 1.5 and it was very smooth and fast. But I noticed that if I was watching a movie, my xoom got pretty hot in my hand. Maybe not such a good idea to go that high or much higher than that perhaps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Same here!
i think if it was totally safe motorola would have been the one to do it and brag that they have the fastest tablet in the market with a 1.5 - 2.0 Ghz Processor. if you want you device to last, leave it with the stock speed, this thing is pretty fast as is, and if you do have to overclock i think the max would be what others have said 1.5. there is no other benefit, and i doubt you will notice any difference. other then your battery lasting 2 hours and your web pages loading a second faster (not important), and maybe apps opening a little faster(won't notice) and then your device getting hot as other have said, which can bcome an issue with other things on the the motherboard becoming hot. and in the next few months you'll end up with a Motorola DOOM
I have an overclocked Samsung Epic and it the improvement in speed in everyday use is significant. Because the processor voltage is set lower than stock there is no sacrifice in battery life. With the Asus Transformer do you get a definite and significant benefit from overclocking? I am not talking about test bench scores but real world noticeable responsiveness. When I skim through the forums it is difficult for me to tell? Some people swear by sticking with stock. I would appreciate others perspectives.
Thanks
The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.
I haven't played too many games (mostly Stardunk and Stupid Zombies) on my TF, but I haven't noticed any issues with them. I have also played high profile 720p video with absolutely no stuttering or artefacts.
In other words, I haven't felt the need to overclock yet. But if you are doing heavy gaming and/or video processing of some kind, it might be worthwhile.
For me, there's hardly any need to OC. It all depends on what you wanna do. To many people who play a lot of games on their TF, they report increases in performance (especially with emulators) but on other things I never really noticed any difference. I'm currently underclocking my TF, and have been for about a week, with no noticable stutters or performance issues and have great battery life.
And it's not really an "effort" to flash a new kernel... the hardest thing is waiting for your device to boot up again...
I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.
Galaxy's screen
How do you rate the screen of the Galaxy Tab 10.1? Is it as good as the Super AmoLED (+)'s from Samsung mobiles?
droidx1978z4 said:
I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This seems so counter-intuitive to me. If you overclock a PC CPU there is a very direct correlation with performance. There are always limiting factors such HD acess, etc., but there is a definite and noticeable difference across applications. What is even more surprising is that we are talking about very large % increases vs what people can do in the PC world. People are overclocking these CPUs by 50% plus...You would think you would see a very noticeable improvement but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My main interest is in browser performance. For example, XDA forum pages load extremely slow in all browsers I have tried (stock, Opera, Dolfin) with 5-6s to refresh vs instant on desktop browser. Also flash video tends to freeze and stutter some times. My internet connection is over 20Mb/s down and 5Mb/s up. I was hoping that I would find overclocking safe and provide a noticeable improvement.
earlyberd said:
The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So for web page loading you haven't noticed much of a difference? How about flash video?
Thanks.
Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.
hachamacha said:
Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post!
+1
Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.
sstea said:
Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I've done this, just not on the TF yet. I'm working on a kernel right now that doesn't have OC built-in and activated at boot, so that we can use setcpu to screw around with it and find that 'sweet spot' that works for us, also under-over-volting. What I'd really like is to build in all the modules I like, setup over/under-clocking-volting and have it boot at 1 G. I mean, a dual-core 1G is nothing to sneeze at, and then try to ramp it up without screwing with over-volting immediately. I never like other peoples ROMs or Kernels because they have made their own crazy judgement calls. I like my own crazy judgement calls
Here's what I've noticed: When you have 'up-to-date' technology , as we do, in the TF, then overclocking that is totally stable makes a difference and it is noticeable. For me it's the FC's that kill the deal, but this chip and box appear to have plenty of headroom so I'm guessing that 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 are all good possibilities.
Example: My HTC Incredible phone has been overclocked to 1.1 from 1.0G for ~a year or so, and it doesn't FC, and it is faster, noticeably than at 1. It's only a 10% increase and yet it feels much quicker, so go figure. Those things are also subjective, so grain of salt... Example2: A stock droid1 is one I took to a double overclock, 550 to 1000, and yes it was faster at some things, but the underlying infrastructure didn't really support the faster CPU so I really never noticed a 100% increase that matched the clock speed. I left it that way for a year without any damages and it still boots up fine at 1 G.
In another post I started, I was asking what keys were required to boot 'safe mode' which exists in android OSs, and if I knew that, I'd try one of the OC'd kernels right now. IF not, I don't feel like unbricking again.
If you're interested, here's a good link for building your own: (generic android, not TF really:
http://www.droidforums.net/forum/rescue-squad-guides/31452-how-compile-your-own-kernel.html
Thanks for the response. With such a large community of Transformer users I am hoping to find a solid, conservative kernel that I can overclock with. Creating one myself is beyond my current technical capabilities.
Has anyone else had a laggy sensation, was fast when I first got it. Installed apps etc and after about one month became gittery/laggy navigating around or in apps. However when testing with ANTUTU, I got a bench mark score of 4562 with stock ROM and all these apps, running the tests I got results anything from 3200 to 4200 regularly, even running one after the other.
After rooting became available I installed Virtuous Sensation v.1.0.3 with V5 Kernel patch http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1101249, it was still laggy after installing my apps back. Using ANTUTU, I got one bench mark of 6009, which is pretty good for a sensation, most bench marks about 5600.
I installed 1.1.0 when it came out and it wasn’t much better, bench marks right back to stock between 3200 to 4200.
When testing using Quadrant, my results are at just under 2000, not a whole lot better than the Nexus One 2.2+ which is pathetic, my HTC Desire overclocked to 1.2Ghz on 2.3.4 gets bench marks of around 1700 with a single processor.
It is almost like the 2nd asynchronous CPU is not kicking in?
I must say now with 1.1.2 the lag has all but disappeared but the bench marks are still pretty low I would think.
Run another test without any apps installed except the default install and bench mark tools and the results have been the same.
Has anyone got some tips, or am I doing something wrong?
try moving all of your apps to the sd card and clear cache using cachemate
Android benchmarking is a pretty hit-and-miss affair, and is shockingly over-rated.
As long as you got it smooth for everyday use, 'good' benches are irrelevant for everything but ePeen
Agreed! Take the bench for what it is...day to day device performance should be the deciding factor
juzz86 said:
Android benchmarking is a pretty hit-and-miss affair, and is shockingly over-rated.
As long as you got it smooth for everyday use, 'good' benches are irrelevant for everything but ePeen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks so much everyone for your responses, yes I understand bench mark is hit and miss, but it was the only way I could get some form of validation.
The problem was that it was getting laggy for everyday use, which is why I tried the other things to try to understand the issue better.
juzz86 said:
Android benchmarking is a pretty hit-and-miss affair, and is shockingly over-rated.
As long as you got it smooth for everyday use, 'good' benches are irrelevant for everything but ePeen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
couldnt agree more
danw_oz said:
Thanks so much everyone for your responses, yes I understand bench mark is hit and miss, but it was the only way I could get some form of validation.
The problem was that it was getting laggy for everyday use, which is why I tried the other things to try to understand the issue better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would do what sweensour says. its the most sensible solution. sounds like you packing the 800 megs with apps. use the external for that. also make sure to copy any back ups to your computer and remove them from your device. back ups take a lot of room