Database Info

[Q] Any quadrant scores?

Title. Did or can anyone run quadrant scores and post it here?
Sent from my Ally using XDA App

Standard = 1944

Hr1 Beta: MoDaCo Custom ROM =3224

Why ppl keep asking for a benchmark from an application that is worthless is beyond me. Just an FYI to everyone who looks at quadrant, it runs on one thread, aka it can only really test 1/2 of the phone, second when running quadrant on any tegra 2 device quadrant wont even max out a SINGLE core % wise. AKA its scores mean nothing...

I know. I was just wondering. I mean they mean something, at that something is something I don't know.
Sent from my Ally using XDA App

jug6ernaut said:
Why ppl keep asking for a benchmark from an application that is worthless is beyond me. Just an FYI to everyone who looks at quadrant, it runs on one thread, aka it can only really test 1/2 of the phone, second when running quadrant on any tegra 2 device quadrant wont even max out a SINGLE core % wise. AKA its scores mean nothing...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep, even with pcs I quit looking at 3d mark scores when I started noticing that 2000 extra points only gave me 1-3 fps more.
real world testing is far better than some generic benchmark. the archos 101 hits 2900, the evo 4g can reach 2700. but do they actually perform better than a tegra 2 device? well... other than high profile hd playback.

[Q] looking forward to Sensation.....

Hi Guys
Just sold my Desire HD, and i am looking forward to replace it with the sensation, however my only concern is the extremely poor benchmarks that floated on the internet.
I know that benchmarks dont tell the whole story, but they kind of give you an indication. The sensation scored 1200 on quadrant. My desire HD with a single core scored more than that on stock ROM
Other mobiles like the Galaxy S II score a frightening mark of 3200 to 3500
I know that its firmware might not be finished, but by how much will tweaking increase the score from 1200
I really want to buy the sensation but i cannot but really think of why it is getting such low scores on quadrant
Anyone got feedback on this
Also has anyone solid benchmarks showing Mali 400 versus Adreno 220
thanks

The Sensation ROMs that were benchmarked were running on one core. It will likely be around 3000 on Quadrant.

redbullcat said:
The Sensation ROMs that were benchmarked were running on one core. It will likely be around 3000 on Quadrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what about adreno 220 versus Mali 400, there is no clear post that shows which one performs better
what is the source for the information saying that the benchmarked ROM was using only single core ?

RADLOUNI said:
what about adreno 220 versus Mali 400, there is no clear post that shows which one performs better
what is the source for the information saying that the benchmarked ROM was using only single core ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No idea about GPU's. I'd personally say they'd be about the same, but I'm naive, what do I know?
There was a comment on this part of the forum a couple of days/possibly a week back saying that it was running on one core. Tbh it's common sense, but hey

[Q] Gaming Capabilities?

Hello
Will the sensation be better for playing games than the SGS 2, which needs games to be updated before they can play on the mali400? I hoping apps and games don't have to be recoded/reprogrammed to work on the adreno 220, if they work/play fine on the adreno 205?
Thanks
Ian

Not 100% sure but I think the problem with the SGS2 is that the Mali400 GPU doesn't support any form of texture compression. So any games that use texture compression needs to be recompiled and have the textures modified.
The Sensation should not have the same problem since the adreno 220 is just the next gen of the 205 and should be backward compatible.

benchmark
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim

RADLOUNI said:
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wtf are you saying -_- ? String a complete coherent sentence together, damn no child left behind...
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App

RADLOUNI said:
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you're saying is not entirely true.
The 1.5 GHz is the chip's default speed (check Qualcomm's website) - the benchmark was of the Qualcomm development unit (MDP). The Sensation uses an underclock probably to reserve battery life.
Keep in mind, and I'm basing it entirely on tidbits I hear here and there on this forum and on tech blogs, that Qualcomm CPUs tend to get higher overclock speeds than the competition (or at least those who do it make more noise ).
As for the early benchmark - I was able to play with a similar device in question, software version 0.50.something, and yes - it was horrid. I ran Neocore just for laughs and it got 5 FPS. Later on I had a few minutes with one running 1.05 (not the final 1.20 that was leaked) and Neocore got 59.9. Wish I could upload a screenshot, but if I did I'd probably get fired (it has the confidential watermark with the serial number on it, which could than trace it directly to me).
Do take the above with a grain of salt - this is the internet and at the moment I have no way to give solid proof that what I said is true - you can just take my word for it (which if you're smart - you won't).
I will say this though - I have already pre-ordered one.

I think the Qualcomm cpus are the most efficent by far. My dhd runs undervolted all the way up to 1.2ghz and overvolts upto 1.6ghz, we have a stable 2ghz kernel atm too, my phone has never felt warm or hot. So it wouldn't surprise me if it was natural running at 1.5ghz.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App

Trekest said:
What you're saying is not entirely true.
The 1.5 GHz is the chip's default speed (check Qualcomm's website) - the benchmark was of the Qualcomm development unit (MDP). The Sensation uses an underclock probably to reserve battery life.
Keep in mind, and I'm basing it entirely on tidbits I hear here and there on this forum and on tech blogs, that Qualcomm CPUs tend to get higher overclock speeds than the competition (or at least those who do it make more noise ).
As for the early benchmark - I was able to play with a similar device in question, software version 0.50.something, and yes - it was horrid. I ran Neocore just for laughs and it got 5 FPS. Later on I had a few minutes with one running 1.05 (not the final 1.20 that was leaked) and Neocore got 59.9. Wish I could upload a screenshot, but if I did I'd probably get fired (it has the confidential watermark with the serial number on it, which could than trace it directly to me).
Do take the above with a grain of salt - this is the internet and at the moment I have no way to give solid proof that what I said is true - you can just take my word for it (which if you're smart - you won't).
I will say this though - I have already pre-ordered one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the neocore was that fast, that'll do me nicely one other question, will the sensation struggle to play resource heavy games with the ram only being 768mb?
Thanks
Ian

Beaker491 said:
If the neocore was that fast, that'll do me nicely one other question, will the sensation struggle to play resource heavy games with the ram only being 768mb?
Thanks
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it will not heavy emulator rely more on the CPU than the gpu. Look at computer you can have a crappy gpu and an I7 processor would play an xbox Wii emulator just fine. Mytouch 4g plays n64 emulator just fine.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA Premium App

hmmm... honestly its what resources the games use because i have seen bench marks of the intel i5, i7 vs the amd phenom 2 x4 and the scores were quite similar because of the gpu... so i would take everything said with a bit of salt

[INFO] Sensation NEW Benchmark Scores

Hey I thought it would be cool to just have a seperate thread for this so people can stop asking so much al throughout the other threads.
I've seen 2342 so far on the released version compared to the model in prerelease which was 1300 score. Thats a very fast speed.
Post yall quadrant scores here.

Remember also that all who view this the sensation has a qhd screen.
Makes a difference.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App

And as I've been reading on other topics there might be a incompatibility problem due to two cores. It's new chipset and has different architecture etc. Lets give it some time.

mr.orange303 said:
Remember also that all who view this the sensation has a qhd screen.
Makes a difference.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really? I wonder what goes into that technology. I kind of wanted the screen to be a full size 4.3 inch screen.. with the width the same size as the evo. I just love the space u get

I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...

samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you prefer SGS 2 after using both? I'm asking because of your signature.

samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In real world testing. Can you feel lag at all?
Coming from the g2x. Its almost lag free. But has other problems.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App

not accurate
Figure_desire said:
And as I've been reading on other topics there might be a incompatibility problem due to two cores. It's new chipset and has different architecture etc. Lets give it some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Helllo
People have been saying that the sensation is getting low scores because benchmark programs are not designed to test both cores.
I find that most people are throwing around nothing but assumptions for reasons i really cannot understand. Do you know for a fact whether those benchmark programs are optimized only for one core, or is your enthusiasm for the sensation subconsciously pushing you to say that ?????????????
The author of smartbench has posted a comment on another thread in this forum that one of the main reasons smartbench 2010 was pulled out and smartbench 2011 released was testing dual core phones. he added that he does not know why is the sensation getting such low scores as compared to other dual core phone, but will investigate and come back.
So irrespective of my personal preference to HTC phones, and if smartbench author cannot find a bug in his smartbench 2011 leading to low scores on sensation, i have to say that the sensation CPU does not seem to be at the same performance level as other dual core phones
check post #239
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1081531&page=24

That's on the low end compared to other qHD devices but not bad.
Any other benchmarks with the final release?

Figure_desire said:
Do you prefer SGS 2 after using both? I'm asking because of your signature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First impression is yes, but i have only had to play with the Sensation for about 8hrs or so
mr.orange303 said:
In real world testing. Can you feel lag at all?
Coming from the g2x. Its almost lag free. But has other problems.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The overall UI is pretty fast, but web browsing... not as clear cut as i would have expected from the specs, the Ram used by Sense seems to be the problem.

I got a score of 2306 in quadrant advanced, only did one run as waiting to root before going further :S

samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sam, I saw your youtube video of browser performance for Sensation. That flash pinch-zoom thing was horrible. Was this consistent across all websites?
I would have expected better. I feel most of the guys might know about this, rest of us who were unaware, check out Sam's youtube channel. Keep up the good work mate!

I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those

Do you have the device yet?
charnsingh_online said:
I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

My g2x on froyo is higher than the sensation.
But I bet the sensation is just plain more reliable
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App

No but i have the datasheet of the processor in it and i know the scores its getting in benchmarks, these scores can be calculated even via the datasheet.
About G2X Tegra2 is plain sucky when it comes to dual core and it is slowest of the bunch. The Java Apps dont perform well and that is what android is based on. Native Apps are mostly games and tegra 2 is good but Sensation is better on both

charnsingh_online said:
I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They doesn't quite make sense as the mytouch is a stock 1.4 chip MSM8255 the g2 and mytouch are basically the same processors underclocked to 1ghz. The sensation is a stock 1.5 dual core capable of 2.6 ghz overclock The score the sensation getting is the same the score my mytouch was getting out of the box. That indicates that the other processor isn't quite doing anything. At its not the same as a mytouch. The chip in the sensation is MSM8660 Dual-Core SoC with Adreno 220 GPU. Equivalent to the one with HTC evo 3d. QSD8x60 dual core hasn't even been introduced yet.
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App

Killbynature said:
They doesn't quite make sense as the mytouch is a stock 1.4 chip underclocked to 1ghz. The sensation is a stock 1.5 dual core capable of 2.6 ghz overclock The score the sensation getting is the same the score my mytouch was getting out of the box. That indicates that the other processor isn't quite doing anything. At its not the same as a mytouch. The chip in the sensation is MSM8660 Dual-Core SoC with Adreno 220 GPU.
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it doesn't seem like most of the people hear understand the async tech used in the new qualcomm chip... there is soo much into it that i myself wonder if it is worth it to have a dual core phone at this point as much apps wont stress the first core enough to push the second core to a clock speed close to 1.2 ghz.. yes i do like the sync speeds of the sgs2 but still i think its over kill... to try to put it in lamens terms the sgs2 cores will be at 1.2 ghz in use and what ever mhz at rest while the sensation could have 1 core at a clock speed of 1.2ghz and the other at what ever to relieve the stress be it 3 4 5 6 hundred mhz so until we really get programs to mimic whats needed to make the second core jump to 1.2 ghz we will always wonder about benchmarks which are useless to me

boostedb16b said:
it doesn't seem like most of the people hear understand the async tech used in the new qualcomm chip... there is soo much into it that i myself wonder if it is worth it to have a dual core phone at this point as much apps wont stress the first core enough to push the second core to a clock speed close to 1.2 ghz.. yes i do like the sync speeds of the sgs2 but still i think its over kill... to try to put it in lamens terms the sgs2 cores will be at 1.2 ghz in use and what ever mhz at rest while the sensation could have 1 core at a clock speed of 1.2ghz and the other at what ever to relieve the stress be it 3 4 5 6 hundred mhz so until we really get programs to mimic whats needed to make the second core jump to 1.2 ghz we will always wonder about benchmarks which are useless to me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope I understand I said this early about lower benchmarks. I don't care about them and I do understand the qsd chip isn't similar to the msm Chipset. Similar processors would be g2 and the mytouch 4g as they have the exact same architecture. The mytouch architecture though similar being a a8 should be vastly different
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App

RADLOUNI said:
Helllo
People have been saying that the sensation is getting low scores because benchmark programs are not designed to test both cores.
I find that most people are throwing around nothing but assumptions for reasons i really cannot understand. Do you know for a fact whether those benchmark programs are optimized only for one core, or is your enthusiasm for the sensation subconsciously pushing you to say that ?????????????
The author of smartbench has posted a comment on another thread in this forum that one of the main reasons smartbench 2010 was pulled out and smartbench 2011 released was testing dual core phones. he added that he does not know why is the sensation getting such low scores as compared to other dual core phone, but will investigate and come back.
So irrespective of my personal preference to HTC phones, and if smartbench author cannot find a bug in his smartbench 2011 leading to low scores on sensation, i have to say that the sensation CPU does not seem to be at the same performance level as other dual core phones
check post #239
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1081531&page=24
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I said "there might be". That doesn't mean there is. Most of us don't have this phone so we're making guesses of course.
Early anandtech benchmarks say (don't want links again just search yourself) this chipset at default 1.5 ghz is better than other dual cores. 0.3 Ghz downclock doesn't effect that much. So we're suspicious that there might be incompability problem. Because chipset is new, phone is new etc. And that author doesn't have Sensation too. Then I said "lets wait". Is that ok for you?

Quadrant says "Cores:1"?

Just wondered if quadrant says 1 core in system information for everyone and why?? Surely if we are only using one core we are not getting full use of our sensations

The Elixir system info app also says just 1 core in use.

Yep, mine says core 1 as well.

gingerbread is not a android version with true native accelerated dual core support... this has been mentioned plenty of times... especially the fact that ice cream sandwich will be better dual core support... im new here and know this

Hey I have an idea its because when quadrant was released. There was no such thing as dual core.
Quadrant isn't designed to test dual core phones. cf bench is
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA App

But then, why does it even display this information ? If Quadrant couldn't see how many cores a phone has, what's the point in putting a "core" section ?

Quadrant is only optimized to recognize a single core so that's all it's going to look for and read. I think there are threads around here talking about the more in-depth reason why quadrant only sees one core but if you want a more accurate benchmark score use CF-bench.

Quadrant only detects 1 core. It is a flawed and easily skewed benchmark app. Don't use it. CF-Bench is a lot lot better.

Its not Quadrant its Android 2.3.3
If you install a 2.3.4 ROM (like InsertCoin 2.3.4) Quadrant will report 2 cores. You don't need to wait until Ice Cream Sandwich. Google fixed a lot of issues in Honeycomb surrounding SMP that were backported to 2.3.4.
You can read more about this here or Google info about 2.3.4. Or you can just download InsertCoin 2.3.4 and see for yourself.

My stock ROM phone also has Quadrant reporting 2 cores...
Matt

I'm using InsertCoin 2.3.4?

bonesy said:
I'm using InsertCoin 2.3.4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know what to tell you then...
Quadrant told me I had 1 core on stock & etc. but upgrading to a 2.3.4 ROM made it say 2....
btw, Quadrant score dropped precipitously after upgrading to 2.3.4 and it started recognizing 2 cores, I'm guessing they're not really taking the second CPU into account in their scores. Phone's a hell of a lot faster regardless of the benchmark. Definitely something's not right there.

The dual core devices are way ahead of most measures... be happy, you have a ferrari in a field of vw bugs...