Database Info

Quadrant score

I just did the lag fix mentioned here: http://www.xda-developers.com/android/one-click-lag-fix-for-galaxy-s-i9000/
on my captivate and got a score of 2185... It's my 1st time benchmarking the phone. Is that a good score?

yeah but did your actual perfomance change?

I got 2190 on a reboot after I manually did the fix. Still have all the AT&T stuff, root and side loaded but other than that stock.
The phone does feel a little faster, its not twice as fast as it was but scrolling around and launching programs does seem faster. Placebo effect? Maybe.

Nice
I tried it as well and I can say I have definitely noticed the speed bump. Well worth the three minutes it took me to read and install.

It doesn't really feel that much quicker, more like smoother since the lag is pretty much gone.

SiL3nTKiLL said:
yeah but did your actual perfomance change?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah it changes all right. things load much faster. webpages, apps etc... you will be amazed

I ran the fix too. The phone finally feels high end. Every app is now responsive. Xda app flies now. The market loads the"downloads" tab in 1 second instead of 7 dolphin is as fast as the stock browser. It's really great.
That said, the quadrant score is bogus. The lag fix sets up a loopback for io writes so quadrant produces a completely bogus and inflated ui score.

Degraded 3D Performance with Froyo/Cog 2.2?

Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...

Lencias said:
Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed that framerates were lower as well, but only about 4 or 5 FPS. A drop this small isn't really all that significant, and 3D performance at 40 FPS rather than 44 FPS is still much better than a phone like the EVO which runs at like 18 FPS, so I wouldn't really worry that much

Yeah, I noticed it too. I'm also noticing other slowdowns, like a lag on the app drawer screen between my finger swipes and corresponding animations on the screen. If I swipe left or right, the actual swiping animation happens a split second later (noticeable lag). Something tells me this isn't the release build of this rom.
I'm also noticing that the battery dies much quicker with this new rom. I'd get about 2 days of use out of JH7 with the amount I use the phone, with JI6 I'm lucky if I get 8-10 hours.

Actually the benchmark result is quite amazing id say
It scores 1900+ in quadrant standarf
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

Lencias said:
Hey everyone,
I was running Quadrant after flashing Cog 2.2/Froyo with OCLF. Everything seems to go faster but the 2D and 3D performance - I can definitely tell that the framerate is lower in those two tests than before. Am I crazy?...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!

Use Neocore, that is a better FPS than quadrant. I still get 55.5/6 with Neocore so 3d performance is not degraded, at least not on my phone.

I'd expect some continued optimization of Froyo 2.2. Remember how laggy JF6 was? Then it got way better with JH2/3/7. I expect progress like that with the Froyo builds as well. With OCLF, JI6 is actually fairly impressive speed wise.

kennethpenn said:
I'd expect some continued optimization of Froyo 2.2. Remember how laggy JF6 was? Then it got way better with JH2/3/7. I expect progress like that with the Froyo builds as well. With OCLF, JI6 is actually fairly impressive speed wise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm.. did you do anything after you flashed, like cleared dalvik cache and whatnot? Mine is actually running slower (UI-wise) than JF6

Its funny you posted this because I noticed it as well today when I ran Quadrant just to see what it would get. I think Quadrant is a horrible tool for benchmarking now since it can be so easily manipulated, but I did notice the FPS drop myself.

Gles 2/1 is perfectly fine, i scored 46fps on nenamark, so no need to worry about 3d performance, i do admit 2d does stutter a little tho.

designgears said:
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take the man's advice! Quadrant is an awful way to measure performance on the Captivate. Quadrant is biased towards Snapdragon processors, and isn't all that accurate.
Sent from my Cognition 2.2 powered Captivate using XDA app.

It's running fine for me.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

Actually using NenaMark1 which is a benchmark app specifically for OpenGL2.0 I get slightly higher scores than on 2.1.

designgears said:
You are crazy... Quadrant is for SNAPDRAGON PHONES... STOP USING IT!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dg, may as well save your breath. No matter what is said or done, there will always be people who complain that X is slower than when it was Y and be sure that they are right (and will argue they are right to their dying breath).
Synthetic benchmarks are b***it on a multitasking OS anyway, at any given time any thread can tie up a resource the synthetic benchmark needs or it may not. The only way you could truly benchmark something like this while still allowing multitasking would be with a long range sample like a few hours, the 30 -70 seconds Quadrant runs is a worthless snapshot in time.
They all think they are getting an answer but all they are really doing is using a magnifying glass on a Seurat and wondering why they don't get the big picture. Of course the performance issue couldn't be one of the apps they have installed or that has updated since the last time they benchmarked.
I have 206 apps installed on my captivate with even a ridiculous amount like that and more stuff than the average running I can still get a quadrant score of over 950, its a snapshot in the middle not an effective way to judge a film.

For everyone whinging about reduced "3D" performance, is the actual handset slower in real, day to day use?
This is stock 2.1 Firmware vs stock 2.2 Firmware.
Not Cognition/custom rom with lagfix vs Stock 2.2.

As much as I don't like benchmarks, in this they are only confirming the slow downs I'm seeing in real world use on the leaked froyo rom. (Not cognition)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

The first time I flashed 2.2 I saw some lag in the form of occasional black screens and delayed responses, even after installing OCLF.
I used Odin One-Click to flash back to JF6 and did a master clear before installing Cognition 2.2. Immediately applied OCLF before doing anything else. Not seeing the black screens and delayed responses this time. Some are suggesting it's the master clear that helps.
As for 3D performance, animations and scrolling between homescreens are a lot smoother than they were in 2.1. Games run awesome too. The only two places I notice some skippyness are in the app drawer (not often though, and very minor) and in the browser (this is due to a known memory leak bug).

1randomtask said:
For everyone whinging about reduced "3D" performance, is the actual handset slower in real, day to day use?
This is stock 2.1 Firmware vs stock 2.2 Firmware.
Not Cognition/custom rom with lagfix vs Stock 2.2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I actually never bothered benchmarking, but I'm experiencing noticeable lag between swipes and corresponding animations in the app drawer and launcher.

modest_mandroid said:
Yeah, I actually never bothered benchmarking, but I'm experiencing noticeable lag between swipes and corresponding animations in the app drawer and launcher.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have never experienced that on 2.2, even before applying a lag fix. I suggest One-Clicking back to JF6, doing a master clear, and then installing 2.2 again.

No drop vs stock, the overclock kernel gave the extra fps. it also overclocked the gpu by 11%. 4-5 fps out of 40-45 is right in that area.
Edit :.i did a master clear so maybe that's why I don't see a problem
Not all benchmarks will work because our phones are capped at 56 fps. A benchmark needs to bog the gpu down below that for the whole test to get an accurate measurement. Quadrant does that for only party of the test. Many benchmarks can't do that at all.
Quadrant is a decent bench mark but our phones will not see the score increase of a snapdragon with froyo. linpack shows greatly inflated scores on snapdragon froyo devices. Greene computing goes over this on there website.
http://www.greenecomputing.com/
the full version of quadrant shows that the hummingbird and the processor in the droid 2/x mop the floor with the snapdragon in all areas but processing speed. The hummingbird having an edge over the droid x particularly in the 3d area but losing overall because of the rfs file system lag Which is apparently is weighed heavily and the reason the lagfix blows the score out of proportion and the different lagfixes have big gaps in the score while real world performance is not even noticeable.
http://slideme.org/application/quadrant-advanced
Composite scores don't mean anything and that is my gripe with quadrant, there is no way to decide how to weigh file system benchmarks against processor benchmarks against 3d, each area must be compared separately, and the user should be able to decide what that means.
Edit: linpack shows a huge increase over stock. 13.77 vs the 9.61 I got with voodoo and overclock. But still not at the level of a snapdragon. Wait till the next generating of arm processors come out, if you think a snapdragon/hummingbird hybrid would be awesome that's nothing compared to what's in the works. Higher clock speeds and multi-core cpu's aren't far away.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk

Is overclocking worth the effort?

I have an overclocked Samsung Epic and it the improvement in speed in everyday use is significant. Because the processor voltage is set lower than stock there is no sacrifice in battery life. With the Asus Transformer do you get a definite and significant benefit from overclocking? I am not talking about test bench scores but real world noticeable responsiveness. When I skim through the forums it is difficult for me to tell? Some people swear by sticking with stock. I would appreciate others perspectives.
Thanks

The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.

I haven't played too many games (mostly Stardunk and Stupid Zombies) on my TF, but I haven't noticed any issues with them. I have also played high profile 720p video with absolutely no stuttering or artefacts.
In other words, I haven't felt the need to overclock yet. But if you are doing heavy gaming and/or video processing of some kind, it might be worthwhile.

For me, there's hardly any need to OC. It all depends on what you wanna do. To many people who play a lot of games on their TF, they report increases in performance (especially with emulators) but on other things I never really noticed any difference. I'm currently underclocking my TF, and have been for about a week, with no noticable stutters or performance issues and have great battery life.
And it's not really an "effort" to flash a new kernel... the hardest thing is waiting for your device to boot up again...

I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.

Galaxy's screen
How do you rate the screen of the Galaxy Tab 10.1? Is it as good as the Super AmoLED (+)'s from Samsung mobiles?

droidx1978z4 said:
I have a transformer, galaxy tab 10.1, and a xoom. I've used just about every kernel that can be overclocked for each one of them, and to be honest I haven't really seen any improvements from them. I don't really play many games on my tablets though, so maybe there really is some benefit in that area.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This seems so counter-intuitive to me. If you overclock a PC CPU there is a very direct correlation with performance. There are always limiting factors such HD acess, etc., but there is a definite and noticeable difference across applications. What is even more surprising is that we are talking about very large % increases vs what people can do in the PC world. People are overclocking these CPUs by 50% plus...You would think you would see a very noticeable improvement but that doesn't seem to be the case.
My main interest is in browser performance. For example, XDA forum pages load extremely slow in all browsers I have tried (stock, Opera, Dolfin) with 5-6s to refresh vs instant on desktop browser. Also flash video tends to freeze and stutter some times. My internet connection is over 20Mb/s down and 5Mb/s up. I was hoping that I would find overclocking safe and provide a noticeable improvement.

earlyberd said:
The improvements from overclocking vary on the application.
Home screen switching is choppy regardless of overclocking simply because the launcher lacks optimization. Browser performance is improved a little bit, but mainly remains unchanged as well. Games run noticeably smoother, especially Fpse. Task switching gets a small boost, as some applications will be able to load faster.
If you're a big gamer, overclocking is definitely worth it. For everything else, it won't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So for web page loading you haven't noticed much of a difference? How about flash video?
Thanks.

Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.

hachamacha said:
Overclocking can be a bit like collecting .. 'string' , because it is mostly done for the sake of itself, kind of like the many Ham Radio fans who talk about their "rigs", etc etc.
Yeah, of course if you can get, like in the old old days, a celeron 300 that overclocks to 450, and is dead stable, it was noticeable, and if you had a droid 1, which overclocked (many did) with ease from 500 to 1000+ , then it was again, noticeable, just not a staggeringly 2 times increase, because there are too many other factors.
The number of bus errors, and retries and slowness of the original bus speeds, and other components makes for a not-quite-as-expected by the numbers 'increase'. I would still mess with it, but not for the obvious reasons. I like under-volting more, and over-clocking only the slightest bit where nothing ever crashes or FCs. The moment you overclock, you really shouldn't be asking questions about 'Why does blah blah netflix crash?' because it crashes because you overclocked, and nothing else matters until you stick a kernel back at stock in there.
The other thing I love about alternate kernels is that you've got control of what modules you either compile in or compile and load as .ko files. cifs, tun, ntfs, whatever, it is all very useful, so there are lots of good and not-as-good things about it.
One thing I hate is when a dev insists on creating a kernel that has a 'default' speed greater than stock so that you've instantly got an ordeal if you've got one of the many gizmos that will not overclock to his default (like 1.6 to pick a number out of a hat).. Just make them all start at default, then allow us , the users, to setup overclocking via testing with setcpu or some such thing. Much easier than basically bricking things right off.
I sometimes look at those guys that overclock 'seriously' (by 3-4 times) using a container of liquid nitrogen that lasts for ~5 minutes and it is all for bragging rights, setting records , etc and think they're insane, but that is also part of it. Some are happy if they can just post here that they got 9,000 mF on some test despite not being able to do anything else reliably.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post!
+1

Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.

sstea said:
Very philosophical ! ;-)
I guess what I am getting at is if you overclock to 1.2Ghz-1.3Ghz on the Transformer can you have a stable system that shows an appreciable improvement in responsiveness? Moving from hypothetical to actual...have you done this? Any specific kernel?
The engineer in me is looking for a definitive answer. ;-)
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I've done this, just not on the TF yet. I'm working on a kernel right now that doesn't have OC built-in and activated at boot, so that we can use setcpu to screw around with it and find that 'sweet spot' that works for us, also under-over-volting. What I'd really like is to build in all the modules I like, setup over/under-clocking-volting and have it boot at 1 G. I mean, a dual-core 1G is nothing to sneeze at, and then try to ramp it up without screwing with over-volting immediately. I never like other peoples ROMs or Kernels because they have made their own crazy judgement calls. I like my own crazy judgement calls
Here's what I've noticed: When you have 'up-to-date' technology , as we do, in the TF, then overclocking that is totally stable makes a difference and it is noticeable. For me it's the FC's that kill the deal, but this chip and box appear to have plenty of headroom so I'm guessing that 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 are all good possibilities.
Example: My HTC Incredible phone has been overclocked to 1.1 from 1.0G for ~a year or so, and it doesn't FC, and it is faster, noticeably than at 1. It's only a 10% increase and yet it feels much quicker, so go figure. Those things are also subjective, so grain of salt... Example2: A stock droid1 is one I took to a double overclock, 550 to 1000, and yes it was faster at some things, but the underlying infrastructure didn't really support the faster CPU so I really never noticed a 100% increase that matched the clock speed. I left it that way for a year without any damages and it still boots up fine at 1 G.
In another post I started, I was asking what keys were required to boot 'safe mode' which exists in android OSs, and if I knew that, I'd try one of the OC'd kernels right now. IF not, I don't feel like unbricking again.
If you're interested, here's a good link for building your own: (generic android, not TF really:
http://www.droidforums.net/forum/rescue-squad-guides/31452-how-compile-your-own-kernel.html

Thanks for the response. With such a large community of Transformer users I am hoping to find a solid, conservative kernel that I can overclock with. Creating one myself is beyond my current technical capabilities.

My Virtuous Sensation demo at 1.7ghz.

I thought I would share how responsive the Virtuous Sensation rom is at 1.7ghz. I've not used Sense in ages so would be interested to know if this is quicker? The site used in the browser if
you want to test for yourself is forums.overclockers.co.uk as they are quite big pages to load , was on a wifi connection btw.
The speed has not been altered in any way. You may want to enlarge the screen as it's in portrait mode. Tried to capture the responsiveness of it. Not sure how it compares to Sense as I've not used it in ages.
you see some jumps due to the frame drops of the capturing software.

That's fast.

Ich
zeroprobe said:
I've had a very good experience with the Virtuous Sensation rom, I thought I would share how responsive it is at 1.7ghz. I've not uages so would be interested to know if this is quicker? The site used in the browser if
you want to test for yourself is forums.overclockers.co.uk as they are quite big pages to load , was on a wifi connection btw.
The speed has not been altered in any way. You may want to enlarge the screen as it's in portrait mode. Tried to capture the responsiveness of it. Not sure how it compares to Sense as I've not used it in ages.
you see some jumps due to the frame drops of the capturing software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also use Virtuous, & I love how fast & smooth it is. I've played w/ the sense rooms a little but they don't near compare in responsiveness. Which kernel are you using, & how bad does it tear through battery life? I've gotta try this kernel for myself.

SebastianFM's kernel 1.30.4_1782mhz
Just seen Open Sensation has the Camera working now. Might give that a try.

yes ,it goes well
That's fast.

Gpu Turbo update available (C185)

Hello everyone
A few hours ago, Firmware Finder received .150 firmware update for C185 models. I personally downloaded it even though there was no change log and updated using Hurupdater. I had noticed no changes at a first glance but then i moved to settings to confirm that the phone had updated. It said GPU Turbo below my version number. I decided to check out a graphically intensive game I play called 'Honkai Impact 3rd' on max graphics and 60fps which would heat down the phone within a few missions and there would also be quite a few stutters when alot of special effects would be going on at the same time before. I can confirm that since the update that the stutters have been reduced but most importantly, the phone hasn't been heating up as much in game after an hour of playtime. Battery life has been noticeably better too as there is less drain for sure. This is just my experience, can't wait for everyone else to get it as well, so I can know what is happening (whether GPU Turbo is actually on or not). For now though, I'll be testing more games to see how the phone is doing but I'm liking this so far.

very good news

In China, there have been a lot reports of the phone getting even hotter, the battery draining faster and the camera being more sensitive to flaring (esp. in night mode). I'm curious if people here will confirm or if these bugs have been fixed in the meantime. Personally, I think I won't update to .150 when it's out, better to wait a few weeks =)

Better battery drain during gaming or even in general use?

all the pugs said:
In China, there have been a lot reports of the phone getting even hotter, the battery draining faster and the camera being more sensitive to flaring (esp. in night mode). I'm curious if people here will confirm or if these bugs have been fixed in the meantime. Personally, I think I won't update to .150 when it's out, better to wait a few weeks =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From my experience (which is less than a full day) the phone doesn't get as hot as it normally did before the update unless I play extensively for about an hour straight. Any less and I've been seeing good heat management so far. Of course I'm still in the early stages of testing and cannot comment further until 3-4 days of testing.

lambstone said:
Better battery drain during gaming or even in general use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So battery life definitely seems better when i was playing my regular games., I'll need some time before I can comment on regular use. I'll try updating the thread after a few days of testing.

Interesting news! Any antutu or other benchmark result?

Still waiting 130 update for C432 model of p20 pro.
Funny how some areas gets updates so much faster although same phone model.

What about normal apps specially Google photos. Is it any smoother with no lag or stutters ??

Hi, please check the slo-mo 960fps recording.... Any improvements in the alleged artifacts during 32x slow videos? Huawei is using framerate interpolation for it which throws in visible artifacts during close up slow motion...

halleyrokz said:
Hi, please check the slo-mo 960fps recording.... Any improvements in the alleged artifacts during 32x slow videos? Huawei is using framerate interpolation for it which throws in visible artifacts during close up slow motion...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would like too, to know answer on this question

Loragejt said:
Interesting news! Any antutu or other benchmark result?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i want to know too, to see at what kind of degree the update will improve the score, Antutu and Geekbench please

Loragejt said:
Interesting news! Any antutu or other benchmark result?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For everyone interested to know benchmark results, to my disappointment, results on Antutu, Geekbench and 3d mark remain very similar to those prior to the update. Which is very strange indeed as I'm definitely noticing an improvement in battery life, device heat management and fps slightly whilst gaming. It is possible that im running a test build and have not been running a full taste of Gpu Turbo, and it's also possible that Huawei's claim of 'Gpu Turbo' just means much better device thermal manamagement for more consistent FPS and battery life. Lastly, it is also possible thst Gpu turbo isn't even on since this is a test build and it's just that they've tweaked device performance and improved battery life compared to the previous version I was on (. 130). Thus I cannot judge fully and I'm waiting on an update to prove me wrong. I check firmware finder everyday and love testing new things. Although if what I'm experiencing is actually gpu turbo then I do not mind as at the very least, I see some improvement in battery life.

vodovodo said:
What about normal apps specially Google photos. Is it any smoother with no lag or stutters ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scrolling has been super smooth. Google photos has been super snappy. The only app I see causing any scroll lag at this time is Twitter and that I'd blame the app itself rather than Huawei. I think it's definitely more fluid than the previous version of the software I was on but it is not heavily noticeable as both were very smooth for the most part.

halleyrokz said:
Hi, please check the slo-mo 960fps recording.... Any improvements in the alleged artifacts during 32x slow videos? Huawei is using framerate interpolation for it which throws in visible artifacts during close up slow motion...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I took this opportunity to compare the slow mo performance to my Mom's S9+. I believe the artifacts are still present as I see lines and weird effects popping up randomly which I do not see on the S9+.

Gpu turbo is only for games so you won't notice any improvement other that in gaming, that's why there is an special application tor that "game suite" that you can enable the acceleration.
I'm running b150 for a few days and so far the phone is better from before in term of small tweaks here and there and i noticed the front camera is better now,not perfect but very usable.
The battery has improved a little but but it was very good before too.

I had read that the antutu would be similar to snapdragon 845. I guess it was just a lie.

gm007 said:
Gpu turbo is only for games so you won't notice any improvement other that in gaming, that's why there is an special application tor that "game suite" that you can enable the acceleration.
I'm running b150 for a few days and so far the phone is better from before in term of small tweaks here and there and i noticed the front camera is better now,not perfect but very usable.
The battery has improved a little but but it was very good before too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh thanks for the info, I actually didn't notice this and yes I see games running much nicer with the setting turned on. However, they also heat up the phone quicker and drain alot of battery life. Should you choose to turn the option off however, you notice the same games don't drain as much battery life anymore and the phone doesn't heat up as much and the battery life is noticeably better than before the update.

psycho.b94 said:
Oh thanks for the info, I actually didn't notice this and yes I see games running much nicer with the setting turned on. However, they also heat up the phone quicker and drain alot of battery life. Should you choose to turn the option off however, you notice the same games don't drain as much battery life anymore and the phone doesn't heat up as much and the battery life is noticeably better than before the update.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't play intensive games just clash royal,i have the acceleration turned off, didn't test much of it but the battery seems better not sure about the heat tho.
This is my battery life this day,all day 4g and most of the time outside.

gm007 said:
I don't play intensive games just clash royal,i have the acceleration turned off, didn't test much of it but the battery seems better not sure about the heat tho.
This is my battery life this day,all day 4g and most of the time outside.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's pretty good considering you're gaming. I'm definitely getting atleast 7-8 hours of sot when I'm not going all out and about 5-6 on maxed out heavy gaming for most of the day. Even with the Gaming Optimization turned on the phone doesn't heat up alot as long as you're in a well ventilated environment. Im not much of a heavy gamer myself but definitely see better fps on Csr Racing 2 (used to lag a bit in the garage) and Honkai Impact 3rd with optimization in gaming suite on. Honkai is definitely giving me 60 fps in 90% of the scenarios so the lag is barely noticeable unlike before. As for benchmarks, unfortunately you cannot add benchmark related apps to the game optimize feature so the GPU turbo can't be turned on for them. Strangely enough, every other app (even regular apps) can be optimized.