CF Bench (More accurate benchmark) - Samsung Galaxy S (4G Model)

http://www.xda-developers.com/android/cf-bench-for-android-devices/
Anyone check it out yet?
You gotta scroll all the way down in the results page to get your overall score.

i installed this program scored a 2210 not bad i guess
FBis251 said:
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/cf-bench-for-android-devices/
Anyone check it out yet?
You gotta scroll all the way down in the results page to get your overall score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Apparently the dev just wants to get some initial data before tweaking the app. I think it'll eventually get to be more accurate than Quad. I saw a post about someone getting a 10k score with only a 1.5ghz OC using CM7 on a tablet... Yeah, made the dev post up a comment saying that he'd fix the bug... Haha.

Related

[Q] What Benchmark Test App?

What is the best "Benchmark" testing app out there? I see people testing their Quadrant scores after the lag fix, and I was wondering what app they are using to test it?
Thanks in advance.
Gr8Danes said:
What is the best "Benchmark" testing app out there? I see people testing their Quadrant scores after the lag fix, and I was wondering what app they are using to test it?
Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant
Linpack is another benchmarking application.
Quadrant is the one you see most people use. Linpack test mflops, Neo Core test FPS (frames per second). Those are just a few people use, I have them on mine to compare between what I do and my wifes.
Quadrant is useless. As proven in all the speed hacks, its not a good indicator.
From cyanogen today:
http://twitter.com/cyanogen/status/21313672502
http://twitter.com/cyanogen/status/21313718922
Please, this has nothing to do with "ANDROID DEVELOPMENT."
People need to stop making stupid topics like this in the wrong area.
lol quadrant scores the app is called Quadrant Standard i think

[Q] Fastest Droid X

Does anyone know how to make the Droid X go over 1.3 ghz? My quadrant score 2025. I want it as fast as possible.
By the way I know the side affects.
tyvallely said:
Does anyone know how to make the Droid X go over 1.3 ghz? My quadrant score 2025. I want it as fast as possible.
By the way I know the side affects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
throw it...
Funnyface19 said:
throw it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha! I am bored so I tried it and my quadrant score went to 2075!
tyvallely said:
Haha! I am bored so I tried it and my quadrant score went to 2075!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
told u
Funnyface19 said:
told u
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pshhht! Lucky. Ok now what is a logical thing I could do? Like does having 2 overclocking apps make it faster instead of one? Or should I get a third?
tyvallely said:
Pshhht! Lucky. Ok now what is a logical thing I could do? Like does having 2 overclocking apps make it faster instead of one? Or should I get a third?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no however if you have advance task manager make sure no unnecessary processes are running so that quadrant can use as much ram/etc as possible, also i found underVOLTing and overCLOCKing it rendered some of the graphics blank making them load "faster" giving it a higher reading, also if ur on liberty 1.5 using the STAGEFRIGHT hack works too
Funnyface19 said:
no however if you have advance task manager make sure no unnecessary processes are running so that quadrant can use as much ram/etc as possible, also i found underVOLTing and overCLOCKing it rendered some of the graphics blank making them load "faster" giving it a higher reading, also if ur on liberty 1.5 using the STAGEFRIGHT hack works too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the gingerbread link so I really cant get back on liberty like I want to for some gay reason. Why cant users running 2.3.3 get liberty to work?
And plus really want to use your sense theme for it.
tyvallely said:
I have the gingerbread link so I really cant get back on liberty like I want to for some gay reason. Why cant users running 2.3.3 get liberty to work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tyvallely said:
And plus really want to use your sense theme for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it is because liberty is not based on 2.3.3 yet
and thanks its not sense per say just thunderboltish and im still hammering out some issues
Funnyface19 said:
it is because liberty is not based on 2.3.3 yet
and thanks its not sense per say just thunderboltish and im still hammering out some issues
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I wish liberty had an option for skins like sense does.
While I'm not sure I get the point in this...
Droid Overclock in the market from Jrummy allows you to set custom frequencies. I have a profile set up for Max performance, at 1.45 ghz. When it came out, there was talk of people going up to 2 ghz if I remember correctly or it could have been a hoax, never looked into it. Definitely Risky, but you did say you already knew that, so don't come crying to back to the forums if you break something.
Stagefright.
It is not just a liberty mod, its a Build Prop mod that is easily edited in the liberty toolbox, you could always just edit the Build.prop yourself. I looked into this a while back with all the quadrant score hype and this removes the ability of the phone to play back video recorded from the device's camera or at least it used to, may have been fixed?.
Not 100% on this one, but I believe Stagefright is just false inflation of quadrant score, not really a performance increase; someone else feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Do you know were I could try the app out before buy it?
amazon
The amazon app market is the only place with "try before you buy" that I know of, but its in a web browser. Not really on the device, so would let you see features but not actually alter clock. Plus im not sure if that app is in the amazon market.
SharkBaitDave said:
While I'm not sure I get the point in this...
Droid Overclock in the market from Jrummy allows you to set custom frequencies. I have a profile set up for Max performance, at 1.45 ghz. When it came out, there was talk of people going up to 2 ghz if I remember correctly or it could have been a hoax, never looked into it. Definitely Risky, but you did say you already knew that, so don't come crying to back to the forums if you break something.
Stagefright.
It is not just a liberty mod, its a Build Prop mod that is easily edited in the liberty toolbox, you could always just edit the Build.prop yourself. I looked into this a while back with all the quadrant score hype and this removes the ability of the phone to play back video recorded from the device's camera or at least it used to, may have been fixed?.
Not 100% on this one, but I believe Stagefright is just false inflation of quadrant score, not really a performance increase; someone else feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it is just a false inflation but if he was willing to throw his phone to make it faster...
Funnyface19 said:
it is just a false inflation but if he was willing to throw his phone to make it faster...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
keeeeep gooiiingggg........do you have droid overclock?????
Honestly Quadrant scores are meaningless... If your phone is fast enough for you then you have it. Personally I see no reason to overclock Droid X or any other phone for that reason. A few hundred Mhz isn't going to change much in real world performance. Also you sacrifice battery life when you overclock.
Agreed on Quadrant Scores, however, many people are running higher frequencies with either stock or lower voltage, but doubt anyone is at 1.3ghz or higher without increasing voltage.
Also, with SetCpu, you can set up profiles to keep stock battery life with higher frequencies.
tyvallely said:
Does anyone know how to make the Droid X go over 1.3 ghz? My quadrant score 2025. I want it as fast as possible.
By the way I know the side affects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In Jrummys overclock app (Droid x Overclock) , there is the option to go up to 1.45 ghz. (To use the higher settings, go to the settings, then scroll down to "Scaling Frequency Preset" and select it. then go to set scaling frequencies, and select your voltage and speed. best of luck.
I got liberty 2.0.1 installed with stagefight on and my quadrant score is 2500+ with stage fright off my score was 1300 thats with a 1.2 overclock. Btw which is insanely stable compared to Liberty 1.5. For me atleast.
If you really want to see where your phone can run, buy quick clock advanced.from the market. It will test your phone for you to determine how low a voltage and how high a clock speed you can safely run. you can then load presets such as battery saver, balanced, or high speed. If you're on the Gb leak, it will not persist at boot, however
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Benchmarks - Quadrant, Linpack, & Neocore

Here are my results for all three benchmarks right after I killed my Tasks
Im running KC1 and using tegrak Overclock to 1.3
Post what yah got.
btw, I noticed alot of other folks posting up multi-colored quandrant results. Is there another app that I should be using?
fknfocused said:
Here are my results for all three benchmarks right after I killed my Tasks
Im running KC1 and using tegrak Overclock to 1.3
Post what yah got.
btw, I noticed alot of other folks posting up multi-colored quandrant results. Is there another app that I should be using?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant Advanced provides the breakdown for each individual area (multi-colored).
http://slideme.org/application/quadrant-advanced
The thing about quadrant however, is it's not optimized or suited for the processor in our phones (Hummingbird). It was designed for snapdragon processors.
Additionally, Quadrant is sub par in my opinion on benchmark test apps (even though it's well known) because it does operations that aren't typical. If you get advanced you'll see that it does like 60% all IO operations, however thats a really strange test because it would be like you running a full on database on your phone.
So the scenarios and tests it runs are not representative of the scenarios you are going to use your phone to perform.
I like SmartBench better because it gives you an index for Gaming and Productivity.
Samsung Galaxy S 4G's will slightly outperform the snapdragon/adreno combo that you see in the MT4G etc. Very slight advantage. In regard to productivity it does well too.
Thanks for the info Joe, Im new to all of this and ran accross benchmarks so I tried it. It was something else to do while I await the almighty CWM. haha
fknfocused said:
Thanks for the info Joe, Im new to all of this and ran accross benchmarks so I tried it. It was something else to do while I await the almighty CWM. haha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries it was one of those things where I was bummed that my wife's MT4G was triple the score on my SGS4G so I investigated haha.
Yep same here . It's real close from what I can tell.

[Q]How accurate is Smartbench 2010?

Hi would like to know if smartbench is accurate. Cause my games index point seems to be higher than other device by alot. 3095 pts
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA Premium App
dplate07 said:
Hi would like to know if smartbench is accurate. Cause my games index point seems to be higher than other device by alot. 3095 pts
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i dont trust smartbench. i get games indexes from 6000-1000 while overclocked at 1.544ghz. generally, benchmarks do not mean anything, but are nice to use just to compare devices.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Oh that's interesting. simms22, do you get that result every time you run the app or just occasionally? That is a bug that needs to be fixed!
Thanks.
Acei said:
Oh that's interesting. simms22, do you get that result every time you run the app or just occasionally? That is a bug that needs to be fixed!
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i get a constant 5000-10000. but it ranges between 5000-10000 on every run. its not consistent around a certain score.
Acei said:
Oh that's interesting. simms22, do you get that result every time you run the app or just occasionally? That is a bug that needs to be fixed!
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i figured theres something wrong, so i havent been publicizing these.
lol, heres a few more
Acei said:
Oh that's interesting. simms22, do you get that result every time you run the app or just occasionally? That is a bug that needs to be fixed!
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you going to throw out all results and go reestablish a new baseline for every device?
Acei said:
Oh that's interesting. simms22, do you get that result every time you run the app or just occasionally? That is a bug that needs to be fixed!
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
morfic said:
Are you going to throw out all results and go reestablish a new baseline for every device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have to wonder the same the same thing. are ALL results invalid now? if there is a bug, then it cant be trusted with any device until the bug is squashed. who knows which results are valid or not.
Results are relatively easy to hash out, at least so far. These high index scores are caused by one or more sub-tests that somehow fails and ends up with unrealistic scores (well into millions). The server submit script rejects these results so they don't really make it to the DB (although I will check it out manually to make sure this is the case). I do have a script that runs nightly and looks for other anomalies as well.
As you can see in this link, you won't find your scores in the DB:
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ind...bench2011:Games&filter_cpu=all&filter_gpu=all
The real question though is why it is reporting these high values - I need to know which test fails and reports false numbers when it is performing the final calculation.
Going back to the same question - is it happening to you on every single test run, or does it only happen occasionally? You are the first person to report this so far.
Thanks again.
morfic said:
Are you going to throw out all results and go reestablish a new baseline for every device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would do this gladly if I find any evidences that the results contain garbage. So far though, the results either look good or they are close to infinite (very small % of the runs cause this though) so it's pretty easy to figure out which ones are wrong.
Acei said:
I would do this gladly if I find any evidences that the results contain garbage. So far though, the results either look good or they are close to infinite (very small % of the runs cause this though) so it's pretty easy to figure out which ones are wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have a way to proof that a 3600 when usual avg is 3400 is not caused by a minor glitch?
Why not change the app behavior to not submit anything when something failed?
How much can the current results be trusted if we rely on "i think nothing else but the 'obvious' ones went through"?
Acei said:
Results are relatively easy to hash out, at least so far. These high index scores are caused by one or more sub-tests that somehow fails and ends up with unrealistic scores (well into millions). The server submit script rejects these results so they don't really make it to the DB (although I will check it out manually to make sure this is the case). I do have a script that runs nightly and looks for other anomalies as well.
As you can see in this link, you won't find your scores in the DB:
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ind...bench2011:Games&filter_cpu=all&filter_gpu=all
The real question though is why it is reporting these high values - I need to know which test fails and reports false numbers when it is performing the final calculation.
Going back to the same question - is it happening to you on every single test run, or does it only happen occasionally? You are the first person to report this so far.
Thanks again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i get them every time. but the lower the ghz kernel i use, the lower the score.
as far as i remember(i can be wrong) i had to submit my scores to the site to get added to the DB, but that was months ago. btw, i did get these scores a few weeks ago, but never posted them anywhere because they are just too ridiculous.
morfic said:
Do you have a way to proof that a 3600 when usual avg is 3400 is not caused by a minor glitch?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't guarantee that every single test run results stored in DB are accurate of course. That's one of the reason why I am continuously capturing more results to determine more accurate average results. But you are right, 3600 vs 3800, there is no way to prove that.
Why not change the app behavior to not submit anything when something failed?
How much can the current results be trusted if we rely on "i think nothing else but the 'obvious' ones went through"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I have been doing this for a while now. Smartbench is an app written by a human after all. Just as other apps I have written since the past 15 years, this one has bugs too. I have been fixing bugs and I am determined to fix new ones that get discovered as well, that's why I am here right now.
The server-side scripts are there just in case more bugs are discovered on the client-side code. The goal is, as you mentioned here already, fix it at the root which is in the app itself.
simms22 said:
i get them every time. but the lower the ghz kernel i use, the lower the score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, that is indeed interesting.
Did you get this from day 1 or after some mods?
as far as i remember(i can be wrong) i had to submit my scores to the site to get added to the DB, but that was months ago. btw, i did get these scores a few weeks ago, but never posted them anywhere because they are just too ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes those scores are too ridiculous and I do intend to find out why it is reporting them, on your particular phone and not on others.
Do you let them run without any interruptions?
A while back, some have found a way to "cheat" the app by performing certain actions so I had to add some code to check for those.
Going back to your run, I just had a look in the DB. I can see one of your runs - you got high scores because your JellyFish score was really high. Did your Jelly Fish test run properly from the beginning to the end? All I'm doing here is capturing a time before the test and another one at the end, down to a nano-second accuracy. I could easily reject these results on the client side and report invalid runs but I would prefer to find out why it is causing this in the first place...
Hi guys,
I have just released a v1.2.1 which fixed the problem described here.
If you are interested, you can check out the following article (I wrote it) here:
http://bit.ly/lfxS1a
Thanks!
EDIT: For some strange reason, I don't see the latest version in the Android Market yet. In the past, the update has always been instantaneous. I hope this one gets updated soon.
EDIT2: I see the update now!
Acei said:
Hi guys,
I have just released a v1.2.1 which fixed the problem described here.
If you are interested, you can check out the following article (I wrote it) here:
http://bit.ly/lfxS1a
Thanks!
EDIT: For some strange reason, I don't see the latest version in the Android Market yet. In the past, the update has always been instantaneous. I hope this one gets updated soon.
EDIT2: I see the update now!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Coming to think of it, we saw similar in the past, where high scores caused a rejection of the scores even if everything finished through.
Why not add a failed score as a zero, total number of scores / number of scores == avg
Not just succeeded scores, this way devices where tests fail will score low, as would be expected.
BUT, if tests fail, can you be verbose what failed, how far it got before it failed?
I have not seen 2011 complete on my phones in a long time (i mean not gotten a "valid score") and i would like to know where the problem is. And none of those with gfx show signs of early exits, numerical tests i can't get visual clues from.
Thanks,
Daniel
Acei said:
Hi guys,
I have just released a v1.2.1 which fixed the problem described here.
If you are interested, you can check out the following article (I wrote it) here:
http://bit.ly/lfxS1a
Thanks!
EDIT: For some strange reason, I don't see the latest version in the Android Market yet. In the past, the update has always been instantaneous. I hope this one gets updated soon.
EDIT2: I see the update now!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i just updated and tested. im still getting high scores.for example, overclocked to 1.1ghz i just scored a 12000+ on games. lol, thats just funny. but i do see the jellyfish test as faster than id expect. but not that much. interesting to note, i had a few failed benchmarks this time. but more high scores after.
morfic said:
Coming to think of it, we saw similar in the past, where high scores caused a rejection of the scores even if everything finished through.
Why not add a failed score as a zero, total number of scores / number of scores == avg
Not just succeeded scores, this way devices where tests fail will score low, as would be expected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure I'll get arguments from both sides on this. Some units will overclock better than others (even if they are the same devices/models), so for those lucky owners with more headroom will want to see results that don't include failed results. Or at least that is my opinion. At the end of the day, you guys will need to tell me which makes more sense.
In the worst case, I can implement both, and allow you to select which "mode" you want to see.
BUT, if tests fail, can you be verbose what failed, how far it got before it failed?
I have not seen 2011 complete on my phones in a long time (i mean not gotten a "valid score") and i would like to know where the problem is. And none of those with gfx show signs of early exits, numerical tests i can't get visual clues from.
Thanks,
Daniel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is definitely possible. There are currently several checks I do to see if test runs are valid:
1. If an app has lost its focus, I assume the test is invalid. This was done to prevent people from switching out of the app during the test run and end up with some funky scores. Somehow users were getting interesting scores!
2. If any of the test suit throws exceptions (i.e. crashes), then I assume the test is invalid. As you mentioned here already, it is possible to find out at least which test suit failed.
It appears that it is still possible to end the test early without crashing as I have witnessed in this thread. So I will look further into other possibilities as well.
simms22 said:
i just updated and tested. im still getting high scores.for example, overclocked to 1.1ghz i just scored a 12000+ on games. lol, thats just funny. but i do see the jellyfish test as faster than id expect. but not that much. interesting to note, i had a few failed benchmarks this time. but more high scores after.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting! So that means your result is caused by not one but two issues. I may have to go as far as checking to see if it has completed rendering the right # of frames during the test.
simms/morfic, would you guys mind testing for few more scenarios for me? I can produce a special build to do some further experiment.
Thanks much!
Acei said:
Very interesting! So that means your result is caused by not one but two issues. I may have to go as far as checking to see if it has completed rendering the right # of frames during the test.
simms/morfic, would you guys mind testing for few more scenarios for me? I can produce a special build to do some further experiment.
Thanks much!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've always been a fan of your work actually being on the forums and working bugs out. There aren't many devs dedicated like you so anything you want to test, hit me up as well, fortunately/unfortunately mine hasn't shown one of these erroneous scores so I'm not sure if my phone will help, my game index score is always in the 3000 range.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
dreamsforgotten said:
I've always been a fan of your work actually being on the forums and working bugs out. There aren't many devs dedicated like you so anything you want to test, hit me up as well, fortunately/unfortunately mine hasn't shown one of these erroneous scores so I'm not sure if my phone will help, my game index score is always in the 3000 range.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the offer.
Even a positive confirmation that the latest build works is helpful.

[Q] Question Regarding ROM "Ultimate ICS V2"

Hey there! OK before I start, please understand that I am WELL AWARE that quadrant scores don't necessarily mean a whole lot when it comes to the performance of a rom. I get that. However I do have one question regarding this one. I notice in the ...what, 3rd video test? I dunno, the one with the moon orbiting the planet. It won't go over 10FPS. This to me is not right considering how great it performs on all the other tests and also considering that my old Optimus One usually gets 55-65FPS on that exact test. I tried with the kernel that comes with the rom and also with GlaDOS 2.5 kernel, both at 1GHz and 1.2GHz and the results are exactly the same. Is this a bug? Is there a fix, or a work around to improve this? I see the nexus S scoring 2400-2700 on quadrant and with this 10FPS on that test I am still scoring 2100 or so. Any help as to why it lags on that one test would be most helpful!....well, would be SOMEWHAT helpful. A FIX would be MOST helpful lol
Thanks!
I don't think quadrant had been updated to run properly on ICS so it may not be pulling the GPU to render that scene. So you may not need a fix because what your looking at and what quadrant may be reporting could be incorrect.
With root explore go into system/lib/egl and delete eGLES_android.so then reboot and the plants will run around 56-60fps
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Esteway.619 said:
With root explore go into system/lib/egl and delete eGLES_android.so then reboot and the plants will run around 56-60fps
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow thanks that worked! what does that file do anyway? Does deleting it have any other impact on the phone?
And it looks like you were both correct because even though the fps on that test improved, my score his exactly the same lol
Thank you for the replies!
santeana said:
Wow thanks that worked! what does that file do anyway? Does deleting it have any other impact on the phone?
And it looks like you were both correct because even though the fps on that test improved, my score his exactly the same lol
Thank you for the replies!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said. Quadrant isn't updated to know what its supposed to test.

Categories

Resources