Related
This is the final part in a 5 part series of Android performance benchmarking apps. Quadrant is probably the most popular Android performance benchmark app available today. First made popular in videos showing the (then) upcoming Galaxy S, it's been making the rounds as people jump on board to test their Android phones against the big guns. Quadrant is an all-around, full-featured performance test that measures all aspects of your phone's performance for a full rundown of how powerful it truly is. Some of the things analyzed are the CPU, 3D performance, and Memory, among others. Check out the video for a full demo of the app. Be sure to download today for a great app to compare Android phones, compare ROMs, or just have fun using one of the hottest apps on Android. Then go brag to all your iPhone friends. Do it.
Let me know in the comments which app is your favorite, or if you have any other great benchmarking apps!
Part 5: Quadrant for All-Around Performance Testing
For Part 4, check out Fps2D for 2D FPS Benchmarking
For Part 3, check out Linpack, the Most Popular CPU Performance Test
For Part 2, check out Necore for 3D Graphics Performance
For Part 1, check out Benchmark Pi for CPU Performance Benchmarking
I always liked Linpack.
Wouldn't it be nice to have all of this in one application, with similar framework and standardized test methods?
And would it be nice if you were able to extract ALL of the information out of your phone regarding Build, CPU features, Video subsystem, network subsystem, etc?
I wonder what such an app should be called? (seriously, I can't decide on a name. PhoneAnalyzer just seems... blah)
Dont forget GLBenchmark.
I dont think there is one for the Evo but I used the Incredible one.
http://glbenchmark.com/
Doward said:
Wouldn't it be nice to have all of this in one application, with similar framework and standardized test methods?
And would it be nice if you were able to extract ALL of the information out of your phone regarding Build, CPU features, Video subsystem, network subsystem, etc?
I wonder what such an app should be called? (seriously, I can't decide on a name. PhoneAnalyzer just seems... blah)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely would be. Quadrant gets close. I think a combo of Quadrant, Phonalyzr, and SystemApp would be an app not to be reckoned with
I know that quandrant is not a good benchmark because the results depends on the hardware installed (CPU qualcomm or samsung or TI OMAP), but my question is:
Desire S in quadrant advanced reach a score of 3000 in the CPU section; the xperia arc, with the same CPU reach a score of 5500 in the cpu section. They are both on gingerbread....so why this difference?
Also the desire HD with froyo and the same Qualcomm CPU reach a 5500 score...
I can't uderstaind!
sorry 4 my english
My wife just got her Des S, and Mega jump is lagging
Quadrant score is 1000-1200
how can it happen with an Adreno 205 inside?
it has 1.28.401.1 ROM on it. do you experience it with other ROMs too?
liljom said:
My wife just got her Des S, and Mega jump is lagging
Quadrant score is 1000-1200
how can it happen with an Adreno 205 inside?
it has 1.28.401.1 ROM on it. do you experience it with other ROMs too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i've got no lag at all....
ilbulgaro89 said:
i've got no lag at all....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no lag on Mega jump? not even when you pick up a rocket?
liljom said:
no lag on Mega jump? not even when you pick up a rocket?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no lag at all in this game
ilbulgaro89 said:
no lag at all in this game
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and what is your Quadrant score?
liljom said:
and what is your Quadrant score?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
around 1240
ilbulgaro89 said:
around 1240
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, that is the max I can get too
the funny thing is, that my Desire HD with a Desire S port performs better; same CPU, GPU and screen resolution; and no lag in megajump :/
liljom said:
yeah, that is the max I can get too
the funny thing is, that my Desire HD with a Desire S port performs better; same CPU, GPU and screen resolution; and no lag in megajump :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, I also do not explain the differences in benchmark scores with this 2 devices
i gave my opinion of why the lower scores in this thread here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1036668
basically there has been a general trend on most phones that gingerbread performs lower than froyo on benchmark tests and performance. this is certainly been my experience. and since the desire s is running gingerbread, while the desire HD is running froyo (i think, right?), that is your answer right there...
Since the Desire S is the "first" device from HTC dressed in Gingerbread...can we safely say that it wasn't an optimized Gingy version that HTC brought up?
If all the Desire family get their Gingerbread update (Classic, HD, Z) and did perform well in benchmarking, that would leave Desire S...????
RogerPodacter said:
i gave my opinion of why the lower scores in this thread here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1036668
basically there has been a general trend on most phones that gingerbread performs lower than froyo on benchmark tests and performance. this is certainly been my experience. and since the desire s is running gingerbread, while the desire HD is running froyo (i think, right?), that is your answer right there...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are right
I run Gingerbread on my DHD, and the Quadrant is lower
I thought it's because we don't have the gingerbread sources for DHD, and we don't have the right drivers
but still, DHD has 1500-1600 in Quadrant (compare to 1200) with DS 1.28 port :/ and that's a big difference with the same CPU, GPU
liljom said:
you are right
I run Gingerbread on my DHD, and the Quadrant is lower
I thought it's because we don't have the gingerbread sources for DHD, and we don't have the right drivers
but still, DHD has 1500-1600 in Quadrant (compare to 1200) with DS 1.28 port :/ and that's a big difference with the same CPU, GPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i ask it in this thread for this reason: dhd has an higher results with desire s gingebread porting......a my friend has in test a developer version of incredible s with gingerbread 2.3.3 and his quadrant score is 1450 (higher than desire s...but with same hardware)
ilbulgaro89 said:
i ask it in this thread for this reason: dhd has an higher results with desire s gingebread porting......a my friend has in test a developer version of incredible s with gingerbread 2.3.3 and his quadrant score is 1450 (higher than desire s...but with same hardware)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 things can save us:
-we find the way to root DS
-we get a good update from HTC
DS is relatively still a "baby"
we'll get there eventually
ilbulgaro89 said:
i ask it in this thread for this reason: dhd has an higher results with desire s gingebread porting......a my friend has in test a developer version of incredible s with gingerbread 2.3.3 and his quadrant score is 1450 (higher than desire s...but with same hardware)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well maybe your friend's incredible s is overclocked, or he has some other type of customization that you are not aware of. because what i am trying to say is that, stock 2.2 vs stock 2.3, there is a performance and quadrant drop, significantly. stock 2.3 may get around 1250 quadrant, and stock froyo may get around 1650 quadrant. i get 1200 on 2.3, but i can over clock to maximum and get 1400. but somethign still isnt right, because i could over clock on 2.2 and get 1700.
also, people say quadrant scores are meaningless. but this has gotten mis interpreted on the web. quadrant scores are meaningless BETWEEN DIFFERENT PHONE MODELS. but quadrant definitely has meanign within the same device. so if your device runs 1600 on 2.2, then 1200 on 2.3, that is a meaningful piece of data. benchmark shows the ability of your phone to do various tasks like scroll a list, load some html or javascript, or parse a bunch of data. so it annoys me when others (not in this thread) say quadrant is meaningless. what the original statement meant was that lower device A could be optimized very well to be smooth, while higher device B could be better hardware, but optimized poorly to not be smooth, and a benchmark would not tell this story. i agree wtih that. but not within the same device i dont
i also see slower choppy scrolling in 2.3, for example tapatalk threads and lists were smooth in 2.2, but choppy and chunky in 2.3, etc. and the benchmark seems to agree with that.
RogerPodacter said:
well maybe your friend's incredible s is overclocked, or he has some other type of customization that you are not aware of. because what i am trying to say is that, stock 2.2 vs stock 2.3, there is a performance and quadrant drop, significantly. stock 2.3 may get around 1250 quadrant, and stock froyo may get around 1650 quadrant. i get 1200 on 2.3, but i can over clock to maximum and get 1400. but somethign still isnt right, because i could over clock on 2.2 and get 1700.
also, people say quadrant scores are meaningless. but this has gotten mis interpreted on the web. quadrant scores are meaningless BETWEEN DIFFERENT PHONE MODELS. but quadrant definitely has meanign within the same device. so if your device runs 1600 on 2.2, then 1200 on 2.3, that is a meaningful piece of data. benchmark shows the ability of your phone to do various tasks like scroll a list, load some html or javascript, or parse a bunch of data. so it annoys me when others (not in this thread) say quadrant is meaningless. what the original statement meant was that lower device A could be optimized very well to be smooth, while higher device B could be better hardware, but optimized poorly to not be smooth, and a benchmark would not tell this story. i agree wtih that. but not within the same device i dont
i also see slower choppy scrolling in 2.3, for example tapatalk threads and lists were smooth in 2.2, but choppy and chunky in 2.3, etc. and the benchmark seems to agree with that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my friend's incredible s is a stock phone updated to Gingerbread via OTA today...without any type of hack...incredible s is not rooted!
My understanding was that Gingerbread is quite a bit slower than Froyo in Quadrant tests.
In real use though, it seems fine.
I suppose we'll have more idea when 2.3.3 upgrades become available for devices currently running 2.2.x.
njd said:
My understanding was that Gingerbread is quite a bit slower than Froyo in Quadrant tests.
In real use though, it seems fine.
I suppose we'll have more idea when 2.3.3 upgrades become available for devices currently running 2.2.x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Desire HD came out with 2.2, and now it runs 2.3, and yes, the Quadrant went down
njd said:
I suppose we'll have more idea when 2.3.3 upgrades become available for devices currently running 2.2.x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On htc-hero score was equal on 2.2 and 2.3 (both overclocked CM-ROMs)
On my NexuS with 2.3 I have scores about 2500 @ 1GHz (and crazy >3000 @ 1,4GHz)
On the DesireS I only get 1200 @ 1Ghz (equal performance gov or ondemand)
Wired is the totaly different fps: desireS has 50fps at the "planet3D" where Nexus has only 20fps; in the "doom3D" it is vice versa
But in everyday use there is no big difference - I tend to sell the NexuS, but really not sure wich phone I should keep..
This thread is meant to be a comparison of changes over time for the G2x and not really a 'me too' benchmarks thread. The idea is to see unequivocally how various changes or versions impact our hardware over time. Benchmarking is something I enjoy and take very seriously. At this time I do not plan to run any custom ROMs and I will be holding off on OC/UV kernels until they have matured.
Feel free to suggest additional tests but please be realistic in what you're asking for.
Completed Tests
G2x 2.2 Stock
G2x 2.2 Rooted + Frozen Apps
G2x 2.3 Stock + Frozen Apps
G2x 2.3 Rooted
G2x 2.3 Stock + faux123 SV Kernel
G2x 2.3 Stock + faux123 OC Kernel @ 1.1
G2x 2.3 Stock + faux123 OC Kernel @ 1.4
G2x 2.3 Stock + faux123 OC Kernel @ 0.5
G2x ROM Benchmarks
G2x CM 7.1 RC vs Nightly 124 (2.3.5) vs Nightly 154 (2.3.7) Benchmarks
Planned Tests
???
Testing Methedology
All tests are run on freshly booted phones
Airplane mode is enabled for tests not involving the internet
First runs are ignored for caching purposes
Each test is run 10 times and averaged
Erroneous data points are ignored (values that +/- the norm of other tests excessively)
Revisions
2011.05.05 - Initial Release: G2x Stock vs G2x Rooted + Frozen Apps
2011.07.26 - Second Release: G2x 2.2 Stock vs G2x 2.2 Rooted vs G2x 2.3 Stock
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Rooted vs Faux123 Kernels
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Faux123 Kernels @ 500 MHz vs G1 @ 614 MHz
2011.09.07 - G2x ROM benchmarks
2011.05.05 - G2x Stock vs G2x Rooted + Frozen Apps
Higher Resolution Images
This test demonstrates the rooting and then using an application to freeze apps that are running. I did not freeze MyAccount or Tegra Zone since I use them.
AppPack
logmein.rescue
logmein.rescuesecurity
EA Games
NFS Shift
Nova
Polaris Office
SmartShare
T-Mobile TV
TeleNav
Video Chat (qik)
Wi-Fi Calling
Zinio Reader
As can been seen from the attached graph the there was a noticeable bump in performance in all tests performed on the phone. SmartBench 2011 showed a larger gap than Quadrant because a couple of its tests are SMP aware and probably benefited more from the extra overhead on the two cores. The gain of ~250 in Quadrant for comparison is the value a stock G1/MT3G gets by itself in Quadrant. SunSpider performs extensive small javascript tests that I did not expect to see much gain from since it is more implementation bound than CPU bound where SmartBench however performs much more CPU intensive visual browser tests.
2011.07.26 - G2x 2.2 Stock vs G2x 2.2 Rooted vs G2x 2.3 Stock
Higher Resolution Images
I've updated my G2x via the LG update software to the GB 2.3 that was released for it. I did not unroot/unfreeze prior so I lost root but my frozen apps stayed frozen post update. As can be seen from the graph the Gingerbread tests show it performing within 2% of the results of the previous FroYo 2.2 rooted phone. I will not be able to perform a true stock test until I re-root the phone and unfreeze applications. The SunSpider test shows a decent 5% gain in speed which is not unexpected since browser performance was a touted feature of 2.3 on phones.
The lack of overall performance gain though was expected for this update before I ran the tests.
FroYo was the performance release version of the 2.x series of versions where 2.3 was a feature release. The addition of new features will typically garner a drop in overall performance unless additional time is spent focusing solely on performance increases. Google has already stated that the next phone oriented performance release will be Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0?) which will merge in the multi-core enhancements of the Honeycomb 3.x series.
This release of 2.3 is still running the 2.6.32.9 kernel version # as the previous 2.2 version was. This DOES NOT mean it is the same kernel, but it does indicate a lack of major changes, just primarily bug fixes and tweaks were done. The kernel controls task switching and various other base level processes, without a significant change at this level there will not be significant changes at the upper levels.
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Rooted vs Faux123 Kernels
Higher Resolution Image
After running my updated 2.2 Rooted + Frozen to 2.3 Unrooted + Frozen I felt there was something wrong with it as some things felt slightly off. My belief is the freezing process removes the permissions from an application required to read/write/execute it which in turn may have prevented specific items from being updated during the LG Updater process. I decided to do the GB root process and flashed the stock rooted GB file onto my phone which being a ROM flash and not an updater over wrote the frozen applications. Afterwards with everything running the phone just behaved more as I expected than the previously frozen version. Benchmarks attached show this as everything increased (except for SunSpider).
A note on SunSpider I was reporting results wrong previously as I forgot lower scores in SunSpider mean better results. Which in terms of the 5% variance is still not much of a change.
Now being rooted again I decided to start working with kernels to see how they changed things.
Faux123 SV (Stock Voltage & Frequencies) - This kernel showed higher values in some tests but lower in others. The main disadvantage is the memory compression in my opinion as it actually sacrifices bandwidth for capacity. The thing is though even with our ~380mb of RAM it's still more than enough for daily use. If you use the System Stats Live Wallpaper with memory listed you'll see that even with the most taxing applications this phone never reaches capacity. The decrease in bandwidth is noticeable with larger applications like games as they take longer to load and to switch between large maps and other data sets.
Faux123 OC/UV @ 1.1 - The slight bump in frquency provides the extra benefit to push the memory bandwidth past the hurdle created by compcache. This kernel provides an all around (except in 3D applications) performance increase making it very worth while even at this slight MHz bump.
Faux123 OC/UV @ 1.4 - Everything else before this was in single digit % of increase. The bump to 1.4 GHz on both cores provides significant increases as the graph shows. If your phone can run stable at these speeds then I say go for it. For me 1.4 GHz was as high as I could go and stay stable, 1.55 GHz would crash my phone on boot.
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Faux123 Kernels @ 500 MHz vs G1 @ 614 MHz
Having been an Android user from the start with a T-Mobile G1 & MT3G I still actively use that phone for testing and playing around with. When I actively used it we were always trying to find various tricks just to get smidgens more performance from it. So I decided to underclock the G2x down to 500 MHz and overclocked the G1 to 614 MHz running CS-DOS (GB 2.3.4) with everything tweaked for the fun of it.
This comparison shows the difference in terms of an ARMv6 versus an ARMv7 Cortex9 architecture and is just a fun informative bit. While being 100 MHz slower the G2x still was able to outperform the tweaked G1 by the following.
Quadrant - 72% faster
SmartBench - 79% faster
BrowserMark - 27% faster
SunSpider - 61% faster
2011.09.07 - G2x ROM benchmarks
High Res Image
I've completed my various ROM comparison testing and below are my numerical findings. I averaged the overall results and as listed in the order below are the highest to lowest scoring ROMs in terms of performance. In terms of numerical, graphical, & I/O performance they're all very close to each other. However it becomes very clear that either the stock ROM's web browser has been modified or the Android 2.3.4/2.3.5 web browser has had some significant performance optimization done to it as BrowserMark & SunSpider both return values nearly twice as fast as the 2.3.3 based versions. I believe that CompCache settings on the Faux123 kernel used in the Faux123 ROM result in its lower CF-Bench scores as it impacts memory bandwidth. With Miui it has a different/modified web browser in place and it shows as it has the worst of the browser benchmark scores.
CM7.1-RC1
CM7 Nightly 124 (2011.08.31)
Eagles Blood 1.08
Faux123 1.3.1
G2x 2.3 Root
Stock Tweaked 1.2.2
Miui 1.8.26
Weapon G2x 2.4 (0823)
2011.09.30 - G2x CM benchmarks
With the release of G2x Nightly 154 the codebase is now Gingerbread 2.3.7 so I decided to do a CM benchmark comparison to see how it handled compared to the others. Of not since the 14x series of nightlies EXT4 was also enabled by default.
As 2.3.6/2.3.7 were mainly Sprint Nexus S updates along with Google Wallet feature additions I am not surprised from the results to see the numbers are fairly close to each other. The 2.3.7 eeked out slightly ahead in CF-Bench but lagged behind in SunSpider by about 500 milliseconds making it's score larger (ie slower) than 2.3.5 however those values are still much better than 2.3.3 based browsers.
Performing benchmarks with the newly installed GB version on my G2x now, results to follow. I was rather surprised to see that all of the apps I had frozen while rooted are still frozen now post installation even though my phone is no longer rooted.
my quadrant score
my quadrant score on a g2x ..
This isn't meant to be a showoff type thread but a scientific analysis. If you want to contribute I suggest following the guidelines I set out in the OP along with providing detailed information about your setup and settings.
I've updated the first 2 posts with the same information.
2011.07.26 - G2x 2.2 Stock vs G2x 2.2 Rooted vs G2x 2.3 Stock
Higher Resolution Images
I've updated my G2x via the LG update software to the GB 2.3 that was released for it. I did not unroot/unfreeze prior so I lost root but my frozen apps stayed frozen post update. As can be seen from the graph the Gingerbread tests show it performing within 2% of the results of the previous FroYo 2.2 rooted phone. I will not be able to perform a true stock test until I re-root the phone and unfreeze applications. The SunSpider test shows a decent 5% gain in speed which is not unexpected since browser performance was a touted feature of 2.3 on phones.
The lack of overall performance gain though was expected for this update before I ran the tests.
FroYo was the performance release version of the 2.x series of versions where 2.3 was a feature release. The addition of new features will typically garner a drop in overall performance unless additional time is spent focusing solely on performance increases. Google has already stated that the next phone oriented performance release will be Ice Cream Sandwich (4.0?) which will merge in the multi-core enhancements of the Honeycomb 3.x series.
This release of 2.3 is still running the 2.6.32.9 kernel version # as the previous 2.2 version was. This DOES NOT mean it is the same kernel, but it does indicate a lack of major changes, just primarily bug fixes and tweaks were done. The kernel controls task switching and various other base level processes, without a significant change at this level there will not be significant changes at the upper levels.
I've updated the first 2 posts with the same information.
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Rooted vs Faux123 Kernels
Higher Resolution Image
After running my updated 2.2 Rooted + Frozen to 2.3 Unrooted + Frozen I felt there was something wrong with it as some things felt slightly off. My belief is the freezing process removes the permissions from an application required to read/write/execute it which in turn may have prevented specific items from being updated during the LG Updater process. I decided to do the GB root process and flashed the stock rooted GB file onto my phone which being a ROM flash and not an updater over wrote the frozen applications. Afterwards with everything running the phone just behaved more as I expected than the previously frozen version. Benchmarks attached show this as everything increased (except for SunSpider).
A note on SunSpider I was reporting results wrong previously as I forgot lower scores in SunSpider mean better results. Which in terms of the 5% variance is still not much of a change.
Now being rooted again I decided to start working with kernels to see how they changed things.
Faux123 SV (Stock Voltage & Frequencies) - This kernel showed higher values in some tests but lower in others. The main disadvantage is the memory compression in my opinion as it actually sacrifices bandwidth for capacity. The thing is though even with our ~380mb of RAM it's still more than enough for daily use. If you use the System Stats Live Wallpaper with memory listed you'll see that even with the most taxing applications this phone never reaches capacity. The decrease in bandwidth is noticeable with larger applications like games as they take longer to load and to switch between large maps and other data sets.
Faux123 OC/UV @ 1.1 - The slight bump in frquency provides the extra benefit to push the memory bandwidth past the hurdle created by compcache. This kernel provides an all around (except in 3D applications) performance increase making it very worth while even at this slight MHz bump.
Faux123 OC/UV @ 1.4 - Everything else before this was in single digit % of increase. The bump to 1.4 GHz on both cores provides significant increases as the graph shows. If your phone can run stable at these speeds then I say go for it. For me 1.4 GHz was as high as I could go and stay stable, 1.55 GHz would crash my phone on boot.
2011.08.30 - G2x 2.3 Faux123 Kernels @ 500 MHz vs G1 @ 614 MHz
High Res Image
Having been an Android user from the start with a T-Mobile G1 & MT3G I still actively use that phone for testing and playing around with. When I actively used it we were always trying to find various tricks just to get smidgens more performance from it. So I decided to underclock the G2x down to 500 MHz and overclocked the G1 to 614 MHz running CS-DOS (GB 2.3.4) with everything tweaked for the fun of it.
This comparison shows the difference in terms of an ARMv6 versus an ARMv7 Cortex9 architecture and is just a fun informative bit. While being 100 MHz slower the G2x still was able to outperform the tweaked G1 by the following.
Quadrant - 72% faster
SmartBench - 79% faster
BrowserMark - 27% faster
SunSpider - 61% faster
I find this thread very interesting and informative. Thanks for this
Sent From My G2x EB 1.07
Thanks!
I've started performing ROM benchmarks now. This is my intended set of ROMs to evaluate using the same testing patterns. I chose ROMs that are actively being worked on and used.
CM7.1-RC1
CM7 Nightly 124 (2011.08.31)
Eagles Blood 1.08
Faux123 1.3.1
Miui 1.8.26
Stock Tweaked 1.2.2
Weapon G2x 2.4 (0823)
2011.09.07 - G2x ROM benchmarks
High Res Image
I've completed my various ROM comparison testing and below are my numerical findings. I averaged the overall results and as listed in the order below are the highest to lowest scoring ROMs in terms of performance. In terms of numerical, graphical, & I/O performance they're all very close to each other. However it becomes very clear that either the stock ROM's web browser has been modified or the Android 2.3.4/2.3.5 web browser has had some significant performance optimization done to it as BrowserMark & SunSpider both return values nearly twice as fast as the 2.3.3 based versions. I believe that CompCache settings on the Faux123 kernel used in the Faux123 ROM result in its lower CF-Bench scores as it impacts memory bandwidth. With Miui it has a different/modified web browser in place and it shows as it has the worst of the browser benchmark scores.
CM7.1-RC1
CM7 Nightly 124 (2011.08.31)
Eagles Blood 1.08
Faux123 1.3.1
G2x 2.3 Root
Stock Tweaked 1.2.2
Miui 1.8.26
Weapon G2x 2.4 (0823)
2011.09.30 - G2x CM benchmarks
With the release of G2x Nightly 154 the codebase is now Gingerbread 2.3.7 so I decided to do a CM benchmark comparison to see how it handled compared to the others. Of not since the 14x series of nightlies EXT4 was also enabled by default.
As 2.3.6/2.3.7 were mainly Sprint Nexus S updates along with Google Wallet feature additions I am not surprised from the results to see the numbers are fairly close to each other. The 2.3.7 eeked out slightly ahead in CF-Bench but lagged behind in SunSpider by about 500 milliseconds making it's score larger (ie slower) than 2.3.5 however those values are still much better than 2.3.3 based browsers.
bilalrashid said:
my quadrant score on a g2x ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah! Run that script that inflates your score! Quadrant so useless. Informative post.
zetsumeikuro said:
Yeah! Run that script that inflates your score! Quadrant so useless. Informative post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As a comparison between various users and phones I agree, but it still functions well at least for testing performance gains or losses on the same phone.
Eaglesblood 2.4 , Dragon 1.51, o/c'ed @1.4g
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
mustangtim49 said:
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Post details such as cpu speed, etc.
More than that, the data lacks relevance. You have no baseline, no definition of testing process, just one benchmark from one application that does not correlate to the ones I've already presented so there is no way to compare these numbers to any others provided.
I'm running tsugi 2.3.4 oyasumi 2.6.32.9 gb kernel running @ 1400 MHz quadrant average 3784 fresh boot ten tests. Antutu reboot ten test average 6420
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
I would recommend using different colors. The All-Orange makes it hard to compare the key to its corresponding graph.
But orange is my favorite color!
I'm going to add in AnTuTu benchmark to my testing set as it seems to be fairly popular now. I'm also going to do some additional tests soon including the latest nightly kang builds of 7.2 RC0 along with some updated Faux kernels. I'm rather excited about nVidia finally making the Tegra2 resources available so hopefully upcoming CM 7.x builds & CM 9 builds will have full true hardware support.
Before anyone chastises me: I know that quadrant scores can be manipulated, and shouldn't be relied on to determine if your setup is adequate. I'm talking about my own personal experiences here.
I've only had an android phone for a month or so (my Captivate), so I can't claim to be experienced with it. However, like I did when experimenting with Linux distros (a long, long time ago --- settled on Slackware), I've been playing with all the ROM's available for the Captivate.
Initially, it was to get a feel of the differences in the ROM's themselves and that mostly had to do with user interface. However, I soon figured out that some were faster than others 'native', and then I discovered the Quadrant Scores.
So, I started checking Quadrant scores with each ROM under similar conditions (Wifi on, only a couple of apps running, no overclocking, etc.). This is a really horrible addiction -- I keep thinking that maybe the next ROM, or the next kernel update will make the score better - even though I've noticed that a better Quadrant score doesn't necessarily have much bearing on the performance of the Captivate.
The result: I haven't stuck with a single ROM for two days running.
I seem to have settled down recently, but we'll see.
This is a tongue-in-cheek rant, incidentally...this whole experience has been addictive.
Hi . I made 2 quadrant tests : with eclair2.1 and cm7.1.0 . With eclair2.1 i get 800-900 pcts and with cm7.1.0 1600-1700 . I didn't overclock or other setting made .
Yeah, but that's what I mean - a small change can result in better scores, so where do you stop?
So far, on my Captivate, I've found that I get the best scores with
1) Fasty III - 2500+
2) Dlev 4.2 (Talon) - 2250+ (Dlev 5 doesn't like my Captivate)
3) Biffmod (CM7 based) - 2000+
4) Miui 1.10 + Glitch kernel - 1900+
Here's the issue: I love the UI of Miui - it seems to have the best themes available and everything works smoothly. The stock browser on Fasty III is laggy, for example. The games I play work best on Miui and Fasty.
So, the Quadrant scores don't necessarily have any 'real world' meaning. Most of the lagfixed kernels seem to take care of the I/O rates, improving the scores.
Still, I can't stop trying to find a 'better' setup.
PM'ed reinbeau to close.
Quadrant scores mean nothing, I can enter a single code and get over 3000 on a stock RFS partitioned ROM with no OC/UV (Which is incredible) but it means nothing because the Quadrant app is outdated and wasn't meant for the Hummingbird processor, nor Gingerbread on the phones, or dual core.
seems the higher my score gets the worse my phone runs.
Its all about balance
Thread closed.
Anyone give it a go yet?
Browsermark scores 77,000-86,000 High being 86,019
Sprint Nexus S 4G
CM9.0.0-RC0-NS4G-KANG
CPU tuned 1.4ghz (interactive)
I know interactive is probably not the best to use for this, but it's been the most stable and realistic for me so far.
Just saw that this is available now but for only 4.0+ Will there be a way to have this installed on gingerbread?
The only Browser benchmark worth running is one that involves using a stopwatch.
No doubt there will be side-by-side comparison videos up on youtube soon too.