Database Info

Degraded 3D Performance with Froyo/Cog 2.2?

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

So...my G2x lags bad when I upload video to youtube

(I am a total noob)
Is this normal?
I did the quadrant test during video (size 89mb) uploading to youtube and only scored 651
I thought with dual core processor this phone should be able to handle that multi task flawlessly.
Any thoughts?
Thanks!

Yep a few...
First, Quadrant...eh...I have been accused of being mean, so let me just say not the most reliable benchmarking tool.
Second, you ran Quadrant while performing a heavy I/O task (transmitting a 89Mb file). Quadrant relies heavily on I/O in the computation of its score. I/O is already a bottleneck on this device (I/O and 2D are the lowest benchmark areas for this phone). And you were shoving 89Mb through the phones I/O while measuring the I/O speed in another APP. You can see where this could cause a problem even if the upload had no effect on the processor...of course, the upload DID have an effect on the processor...no work gets done for free.
Third, it's normal.
So, to summarize, don't benchmark anything while it is doing other work. Oh, and don't use Quadrant...it's scores have very little resemblance to real world performance (I scored >3300 with my HD2). Smartbench is a much better choice in my opinion. Hope I helped...

Also, dont make the mistake of thinking that just because the phone is dual core means its impossible to slow it down.

instead of making a new post i thought it'd be better to use a youtube one
so my g2x won't let me upload keeps saying failed to retrieve account info . . i logged in and out a couple times to fix but can't seem to get it.. any ideas ?

Is overclocking worth the effort?

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.

AnTuTu Benchmarks

I have the highest score listed at 3300. What I'm asking is for people to start downloading AnTuTu Benchmark and running benchmarks while overclocked at 1.152 GHz, see if the score reaches over mine. I want do some research about our phones, but the more scores that are in, the easier and faster ill be able to compile my findings, and come up with something to further increase performance.
sent from my SGH-T839 (Sidekick 4G) running Glorious Overdose V3.0.3.

Benchmarks are bull****. Each value will come up differently depending on what is going on in the background and how Android chose to throttle the CPU while the benchmark was running...
Beyond that...
Overclocking this device is a known source of instability and most devices will crash under heavy load.
Also, I expect the heat will eventually cause issues when using GPS.
Any device is only as good as the weakest link and you are not increasing the speed of the memory, GPU, or the busses on the board.
What you are doing is increasing the heat inside the case above what the heatsinks are designed to handle and causing timing/sync issues.
There have been times in the past that a manufacturer saved money by producing a large amount of one chip and used it in many devices. In that kind of situation, the chip was sometimes "underclocked" and put in budget devices. I can assure you that is not the case with the Sidekick 4g.
Overclocking is an interesting idea in a large PC because there is plenty of room and accessories available. This device is not a PC.

Sorry, didn't see your reply sooner, been busy with the ROM and general life crap. But yes, too fast and you lag, but with the right overclock, you won't get too hot, but a notice a fair amount of increase. Though yes, I only overclock when need be due to increased battery drain. Regardless, I'm doing limit testing for stability purposes, speed purposes, and because I may attempt at one point to see what I can do about coworking 2.3 at the very least before switching over to the G2. After college starts, I won't be on here much at all.
sent from my SGH-T839 (Sidekick 4G) running Glorious Overdose V3.0.3.

nexus 5 antutu test QQ

first time i got the phone i got almost 30k score in antutu,then i installed a custom rom,i got like 27 then 24(rebooted),22,19.(tryd on few custom rooms).now i found a flashable officiall rom.i got like 25k max.las was 24.idk whats happening...(no custom kernel or other staff used or smth that can take the power..on last test i used an custom kernel,but not oc)
strange QQ

It shows benchmark apps are no different than a random number generator...
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk

its scarry when you see a device with same specs and without latest android version on better place or even 1st

uNb0rN1 said:
its scarry when you see a device with same specs and without latest android version on better place or even 1st
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scary? Really? Benchmarks are meaningless. This phone runs better in day-to-day use than pretty much anything else. Don't stress out over benchmark scores.

uNb0rN1 said:
its scarry when you see a device with same specs and without latest android version on better place or even 1st
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take a look at this article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/state-of-cheating-in-android-benchmarks

Hi,
Instead of always say "benchmark means nothing", "benchmark are useless", "benchmark are not real life" (obviously), bla bla bla... Maybe the OP could know why his score are low or why there is too much difference?
Like for some other guys if almost everyone have, it's an example, about 35 000 in Antutu and one guy post because he have only 20 000, I think he could know why, what is wrong, etc..., right?
But no, each time there is always the same kind of "ready repplies" like above...
Benches can be useful if you know how to run them (and yes there is a manner to run a bench like CPU temp at the beginning, with data active or not, after reboot or not, etc...) and how you interprete them (the most important, at least for me), even Quadrant can be useful for a quick bench but it's just my opinion (ok Quadrant seems to have more variations than Antutu)... And i don't manipulate them (like with the FPS unlock, I mean the debug.egl... build.prop edit) after it's for fun too.
And if I tweak my device with VM, governor, i/o scheduler settings for example (and it is not manipulating, not for me, it's some real "tweaks" that you can judge too in real use, in general UI, user experience (improvement or not) and not only in benchs) I see in first in general UI and after I look in bench to see...
Yes don't get these benches as a scientist approach or the best accurate result or a result to garantie you a general user experience (bad or good), for example my main goal is about general UI (smoothess, speed, responsiveness) and after I play with benchs because it's always fun...
But the tendance, here on XDA, is to ban benches with always the same words and the same mind (because xx says benchs are useless, xy repeat the same thing without knowing anything or xx have a bad/low score so benchs are useless, etc, etc, etc...), it bothers me... (it's not directed to you in particular).
And in general the guys who post a result of bench post a screenshot of the overall score and nothing more... The most important is to know how you got this score (governor settings, rom, kernel, "tweaks", etc...) and the detailed score is also important.
A bench makes sense with explications and details on how and why you have this or that score.
I agree that a screenshot without information means nothing..., I'm the first to say that in different bench threads but people don't care and continue to post a screenshot only, it's absolutely ridiculous, but well...
It's like the battery stats or screen on time (and we have at least to thrads for that...), it's a kind of benchmark, but here people agree more with these (?) and same thing: 2 or 3 screenshots without any information (settings or usage) means nothing...
In preparation of car engine you run benchs (for the raw power) and you test also your car on street to see the comportement in general not only on a bench and also ther is some conditions to respect before run a bench like for a phone. It's the same thing for a device if you like tweak it, you tweak your device, you run bench to see the result, you use it in day to day use to see if there is an improvement or not (general UI, battery).
It's the same thing for a sportsman, the 100 m, marathon, etc... it's a kind of bench, you don't use it always in "real life" nor it suggests your real state but people don't shout against, right? But benches for phones, welcome to the drama... it's pathetic.
"It shows benchmark apps are no different than a random number generator...", false, I posted some Antutu scores in the benchmark thread (testing i/o scheduler) and I can say you I have accurate results (just keep in mind I was testing different i/o schedulers so the overall score varies a little) in 35 800-36100 range, nothing with 2/4 000 points difference. I can show you accurate results in Antutu with always the same settings like 36 000-36 100 range..., is it a random number generator? No, I don't think... You will always have a little variation, if it's a variation of 5 000 points then something is wrong (thermal throttling mostly, an app auto update, who knows?).
Things to retain: detail your scores, explain your setup and yes don't get the result as a condition on how your phone runs in day to day use, that being said I don't know where is there a problem with benchs on phone... and sometimes fun is nice...
Ok, end, to the OP it's probably due to thermal throttling, but you give very little information... so hard to say exactly but it seems you ran Antutu one after another?
You need to let your phone cool down between each run...
Sorry for this post but I had something to say... and yes I assume totally