Database Info

[Q] Smartbench gpu scores higher on stock than cm7?

Am i the only one that has noticed my score is about 500 points lower for gaming when i'm on CM RC1 compared to Stock 2.3.2?
RC1 gives me a score of about 2600 while stock gives 3k+ while using Smartbench.
I wonder if this is due to the video drivers not being fully up to date or optimized on the CM builds?
I have also noticed that quadrant scores do not seam to be affected whether on CM or Stock. My experience with the N1 was CM helped with performance a lot.
What do you guys think about this? Have you experienced the same?

TheRiceKing said:
Am i the only one that has noticed my score is about 500 points lower for gaming when i'm on CM RC1 compared to Stock 2.3.2?
RC1 gives me a score of about 2600 while stock gives 3k+ while using Smartbench.
I wonder if this is due to the video drivers not being fully up to date or optimized on the CM builds?
I have also noticed that quadrant scores do not seam to be affected whether on CM or Stock. My experience with the N1 was CM helped with performance a lot.
What do you guys think about this? Have you experienced the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I normally run at 1.4GHz and get about 3.3-3.4k on the games index. (Just got 3232). I don't really ever run on stock so its hard to say but I can say that I've hit 1800/3700 at 1.6GHz before.

Quadrant Scores - Seem low?

I just got my Zoom and I have had other tablets, so Im not totally new to rooting/etc and Ive been reading the Overclock thread in development and my quadrant scores at 1GHZ is 1722 and at 1500 (setcpu) its 2211. In the thread, people report 22xx at stock 1GHz speed and arouns 28xx with the overclock.
Any ideas why my scores are much lower?
Thanks

I wouldn't worry about Quadrant scores, ever.
If the Xoom is fast at tasks, it's fast at tasks, the end.

Good point ... Ill have to check it out in a few games and see how it goes.
Thanks

I agree that benchmarks in general and Quadrant specifically aren't what matters, but my Xoom wifi got 1892. So, scores can be all over the place.

My Xoom scores over 3000 at 1500mhz on my Xoom... it means nothing.

an oc'ed archos 101 running on ext4 at 1200mhz can reach 2900. but it's real world performance is far from what the xoom can do... excluding video playback - the archos can do high profile 720p with ac3 5.1.

The stock score, was that before or after setcpu? If it was after, then it must be on the MIN/MAX settings and/or the governor settings you're using. Mine scores 2300+ stock as well.. I have the 3G verizon version..
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium App

The lower score was with SetCPU on the stock 1GHz, and my second score was with SetCPU at 1500. At the 1500 settings I seem to be scoring what most do at stock, which is why I was curious.
Its quick overall, but to test a HEavy Flash Site I hit Disney.com with Dolphin and its a bit slow to load up, but I have to assume thats the Flash Issue.
I do love this Xoom (Wifi Version)

PensFan66 said:
The lower score was with SetCPU on the stock 1GHz, and my second score was with SetCPU at 1500. At the 1500 settings I seem to be scoring what most do at stock, which is why I was curious.
Its quick overall, but to test a HEavy Flash Site I hit Disney.com with Dolphin and its a bit slow to load up, but I have to assume thats the Flash Issue.
I do love this Xoom (Wifi Version)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try rebooting, running Quadrant from a fresh boot with nothing else running... also set the governor to 'Performance,' will likely boost your high score.

[Q] OC Experience anyone?

I'm currently running phoenix ultimate w/Tagrak.
It's OC'ed at 1.3 GHz ATM.
It has made a seeming performance change to my phone. But i want to take it further and OC to 1.5 or even 1.6 if possible. After hours of researching, the CPU in the Cappy is capable of running at 1.6 at the fastest.
Does anyone know any APP that will allow you to OC higher than 1.3 GHz? and has OC'ed higher than 1.3?
Thanks a bunch

What kernel are you running? AFAIK the only kernel that supports 1500/1600mhz is Onix, which is the kernel I'm running. Best OC experience I've gotten on the captivate was 1344. I was using Phoenix with the Paragon 1344 kernel.
Once you get Onix, voltage control will let you OC to 1600, but you might not even be able to hit 1400 and stay on for more than 5 mins (my situation)
I'm pretty sure this should be in Q/A, no?

There is already a thread in this section (currently 4 posts down) about this topic.

I've been running a custom oc at 3200mhz stable for 3 days now.

ninjuh said:
I've been running a custom oc at 3200mhz stable for 3 days now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
3.2ghz?? On what your laptop???

studacris said:
3.2ghz?? On what your laptop???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no reason the chip cant do that running @ 3volts with dry ice or liquid nitrogen cooling

superasian827 said:
I'm currently running phoenix ultimate w/Tagrak.
It's OC'ed at 1.3 GHz ATM.
It has made a seeming performance change to my phone. But i want to take it further and OC to 1.5 or even 1.6 if possible. After hours of researching, the CPU in the Cappy is capable of running at 1.6 at the fastest.
Does anyone know any APP that will allow you to OC higher than 1.3 GHz? and has OC'ed higher than 1.3?
Thanks a bunch
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the kernel needs to support the different timing modes used. onix will allow up to 1600. to my experience nearly all phones go up to 1200 a vast majority to 1280-1300 im barely stable @1300 myself. but 1344-1400 is the limit with only a few exceptions. every chip is different and i have a feeling the earlier phones had less consistant manufacturing. samsung may also be cherry picking chips that clock better for the galaxy s 2 mini which is supposed to be a hummingbird clocked up to 1400 out of the box.
keep in mind that 30% overclock is significant. if i tried that on my pc it wouldn't run very long.

I can get mine stable at 1.4 using Onix kernel and Serendipity rom. I tried 1.5 and 1.6 but was not able to get it to run.

I've come to the conclusion that OC achieves very little... UV even less.
Sent from my Captivate

Dani897 said:
keep in mind that 30% overclock is significant. if i tried that on my pc it wouldn't run very long.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My computer has just over a 35% overclock on the CPU...
I went from 2.8 GHz to 3.8 GHz.
Sent from my Captivate

MikeyMike01 said:
My computer has just over a 35% overclock on the CPU...
I went from 2.8 GHz to 3.8 GHz.
Sent from my Captivate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A ) im guessing not on the cheapo heatsink they sold you with the cpu unless it is one of those "black edition" something or other chips that are marketed towards overclockers
B) i dont see aftermarket heatsinks out there for cell phone processors

Dani897 said:
B) i dont see aftermarket heatsinks out there for cell phone processors
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just wondering. Is it at all possible to squeeze in an effective heat sink on the captivate? would be an interesting mod to have.

My Cappuccino can run at 1400 stable, but the extra 400 MHz didn't really make a difference.
CM7 Inspire 4G

G2x Benchmark Comparison

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.

Nexus 5 - how to take the best performance?!

Hello everyone.
I hope there aren't a similar post here.
I wood like to make a "monster" Nexus 5, concerning performance.
So, can somebody tell me about the fastest ROM, the best version of the rom, the best compatible kernel, etc.
I want to see the highest benchmark, and of course the best performance.
I don't care about the version of the ROM (KitKat, Lollipop, etc)
I'm waiting for responses.
Thank you!

Get Marshmallow (Stock or the Xtreme ROM)
Get Elemental X kernel
Switch to F2FS filesystem in recovery (make backups as this wipes)
Overclock
Profit.
For reference:
3D Mark IS Unlimited score: 18672 (stock was in the 15k)
Geekbench (single core): 1040 (stock 800s)
Geekbench (multicore): 2987
AnTuTu: 42k
This is running at 2.8Ghz.
EDIT: I can benchmark all the way up to 2.9Ghz but it becomes unstable in day-to-day use at that point. So keeping it at 2.7 - 2.8Ghz for stability.

vkarof said:
Hello everyone.
I hope there aren't a similar post here.
I wood like to make a "monster" Nexus 5, concerning performance.
So, can somebody tell me about the fastest ROM, the best version of the rom, the best compatible kernel, etc.
I want to see the highest benchmark, and of course the best performance.
I don't care about the version of the ROM (KitKat, Lollipop, etc)
I'm waiting for responses.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Get Racer Kernel
Any Rom will do as long as it is not a DeoDexed Rom
get performance cpu governor, OC to 2.9 GhZ
make I/O scheduler either Sio or Vtripndroid
make read ahead 3072kb
Set cpu governor tunable of up_threshold to 10
Watch your phone have the greatest benchmark scores.. While getting hotter than sexy girls while screen On haha