GPU Clocking - Nexus S Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

I know that GPU overclocking has been done on some phones (although not very common at all with android phones).
Seeing as the galaxy nexus is shipping with the same gpu as the nexus s but at a higher clock, do you think we could also clock our GPUs to a higher level?

asb123 said:
I know that GPU overclocking has been done on some phones (although not very common at all with android phones).
Seeing as the galaxy nexus is shipping with the same gpu as the nexus s but at a higher clock, do you think we could also clock our GPUs to a higher level?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some already do.
morfic kernels for the NS overclock the bus and thus overclock the GPU.
LiveOC mod from Ezeekeel also overclocks the bus.
Separate GPU overclocking has been one of my wishes for a while but nobody has a definitive answer whether or not it's feasable. Someone might find a way one of those days, who knows.

Related

[Q] Benchmark Scores

So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon
I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.
QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S5PC11x (Hummingbird) has 2x the memory bandwidth of the MSM8250.
The MSM8250 gets about 2x the floating point performance of the S5PC11x.
I believe the SGX540 GPU in S5PC11x is on the whole a bit faster than the GPU in the 8250, but I don't have hard numbers on that in front of me. They're architecturally different GPUs and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
It's really hard to do a good apples to apples comparison of different SoCs -- memory interconnect, cache sizes, ARM architecture version, GPU, etc, etc all play into overall system performance.
Gingerbread, overall, tends to be faster than Froyo on the same hardware.
Not really too familiar with this stuff, but will the JIT compiler being optimized for snapdragon instruction set make a huge difference still? My Vibrant plays games way better than the MT4G (imo) but scores terribly on Linpack and is terribly slow at opening applications and things vs. the MT4G.
Read the post above you. Linpack is mainly a benchmark for numerical performance(floating point etc), where the Snapdragon chips are MUCH better.
But the Hummingbird(PowerVR) GPU is better than the Adreno GPU found in the Snapdragon line. That's why the gaming performance of your Vibrant is better than the MT4G.
Ronaldo_9 said:
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PhoenixFx said:
I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, just anecdotally, hummingbird is MUCH faster than snapdragon IMHO
galaxyS/NS SGX540= 90 million triangles/sec
HTC G2 Adreno 205 =44 million triangles/sec
Nexus one = Adreno 200 = 22 million triangles/sec
nexus S is running on the fastest GPU out now. And another good thing about running on power VR GPU is that iphone runs on one also so when lazy iphone porting happens you will have optimal performance running on that GPU than you would on Adreno
Ive noticed this especially on gameloft games
Trust me im on a vibrant and came from nexus one with out a doubt the nexus S GPU smokes nexus one GPU even out performance 2nd gen snapdragon
Hummingbird > all atm.
Orion will be the same.
Don't make pre-assumptions about the dual core chips.. Orion has good competition from the TI OMAPS line.. Qualcomm looks like they'll stay behind GPU wise though.
Plus the Sound Quality of the Hummingbird chip is awesome. MUCH better than the Snapdragon chips.
Also, you have to be cautious of manufacturer specs for GPU pixels/sec and triangles/sec -- the "box numbers" are always under optimal conditions and often not representative of real workloads.
For modern non-fixed-pipe GPUs (gl ES 2.x, etc) compute capabilities (how many shader ops / pixel/ etc you can get away with) factor in as well.
Depending on what your workload is like (geometry heavy? fill heavy? texture heavy? shader heavy?) you will see different strengths and weaknesses when comparing GPUs.
All that said, the SGX540 is indeed quite snappy.
chip
I agree the sound chip is good in the NS, as is the GPU

The benchmark accusations...

Are really stupid. Between the governor differences, ram differences, thermal limit tweaks and whatever other little tweaks per phone/soc, what is the difference between Samsung or x OEM modding their phone to run full throttle and the consumer putting the phone in performance governor and running it full throttle? The benchmarks between phones with similar soc's have less merit than guaging against phones with different SOC's and checking performance against different generation SOC's. I think it is best that OEM' tweak their phones to run full throttle on benchmarks as it leaves less question about what is better/best. The benchmarks aren't all that scientific anyways with all the variables anyways. It was funny at first when people were crying about it but now it's just frustrating and another stupid first world problem for all the peeps with little weiners.
Now I do have a problem with tweaks that aren't available as a preset like running a cpu or GPU above frequency that the soc isn't rated for. That itself is deceiving. But running benchmarks similar to running a performance governor I have no problem with. Some of these big review sites need to get together and come up with a standard that leaves little question if the OEM is running the benchmarks above spec. Just smdh. Simple solution.
To me Samsung just makes the phone do what the so called benchmark app is supposed to do anyway...make the phone run full throttle. There is no difference than setting your gov to performance and running the test.
@rbiter said:
Are really stupid. Between the governor differences, ram differences, thermal limit tweaks and whatever other little tweaks per phone/soc, what is the difference between Samsung or x OEM modding their phone to run full throttle and the consumer putting the phone in performance governor and running it full throttle? The benchmarks between phones with similar soc's have less merit than guaging against phones with different SOC's and checking performance against different generation SOC's. I think it is best that OEM' tweak their phones to run full throttle on benchmarks as it leaves less question about what is better/best. The benchmarks aren't all that scientific anyways with all the variables anyways. It was funny at first when people were crying about it but now it's just frustrating and another stupid first world problem for all the peeps with little weiners.
Now I do have a problem with tweaks that aren't available as a preset like running a cpu or GPU above frequency that the soc isn't rated for. That itself is deceiving. But running benchmarks similar to running a performance governor I have no problem with. Some of these big review sites need to get together and come up with a standard that leaves little question if the OEM is running the benchmarks above spec. Just smdh. Simple solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree, if they over clocked it that would be one thing, but this is no different from intel or amd binning thier chips for reviewers to make sure the fastest chips go
Thread closed as its essentially a duplicate of this >>> http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2465518

Difference between Snapdragon 600/800 @ CPU Clock?

Hello, I'd like to know if there's any difference between snapdragon 600 and 800, without taking the GPU,
To be more clear, I want to know the difference between the CPU Speeds so, my question is.
Let's say I have a Snapdragon 800 running at 2.1 Ghz and I have a Snapdragon 600 Overclocked with a kernel running at 2.1 Ghz, are they gonna be the same? or Snapdragon 800 is gonna be faster even if it's clocked at the same speed as the 600?
You can't compare the snapdragon 800 @ 2.3 Ghz to a first gen i7 920 Intel running at 2.4 Ghz, of course the i7 is a lot faster.
An Snapdragon 800 running at 2.1 Ghz is as fast as a 600 running at 2.1 Ghz?
My english isn't the best and I hardly can explain what I want to know in my native language so, thanks for taking your time to read this thread and sorry about my broken English/Bad explaination.
Snapdragon 800 is not a CPU. Its a SoC. The CPU within the 800 is a 2.3 krait 400 and within the snapdragon 600 is a 1.9 krait 300
If both CPU run at 1.9, they will be the same speed. The architecture is the same only designed for lower output. That is the only difference.
The reason an i7 and krait 400 cannot be compared us because they are completely different.
Now if you could overclock a krait 300 to match 2.3 on krait 400, theoretically its same speeds but of course overheating and stability will probably mean the real world performance will not be as good
-----------------------
Sent via tapatalk.
I do NOT reply to support queries over PM. Please keep support queries to the Q&A section, so that others may benefit
Hi,
Both clocked at 2.26 Ghz (so with a S600 overclocked) the S800 will always be faster, or both at 2.1 Ghz if you want... In short and for raw performance. This is not only the CPU frequency that is important...
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/800
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/600
You can search also for Krait 300/400 for the difference, etc...
also don't forget that the GPU is not the same, the S800 GPU (Adreno 330) is a lot better than the S600 (Adreno 320)
rootSU said:
Snapdragon 800 is not a CPU. Its a SoC. The CPU within the 800 is a 2.3 krait 400 and within the snapdragon 600 is a 1.9 krait 300
If both CPU run at 1.9, they will be the same speed. The architecture is the same only designed for lower output. That is the only difference.
The reason an i7 and krait 400 cannot be compared us because they are completely different.
Now if you could overclock a krait 300 to match 2.3 on krait 400, theoretically its same speeds but of course overheating and stability will probably mean the real world performance will not be as good
-----------------------
Sent via tapatalk.
I do NOT reply to support queries over PM. Please keep support queries to the Q&A section, so that others may benefit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I just wanted to know if the S800 is faster only because it's clocked higher or there's more (besides the GPU)
viking37 said:
Hi,
Both clocked at 2.26 Ghz (so with a S600 overclocked) the S800 will always be faster, or both at 2.1 Ghz if you want... In short and for raw performance. This is not only the CPU frequency that is important...
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/800
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/600
You can search also for Krait 300/400 for the difference, etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
DarknessWarrior said:
also don't forget that the GPU is not the same, the S800 GPU (Adreno 330) is a lot better than the S600 (Adreno 320)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ye, I know the GPU on the S800 is better but I was curious about the CPU
Sooooooo if both run at the same clock speed they're the same? (ignoring the heat)
So, the S800 is faster because it can be clocked higher due to krait400, so it only is faster than S600 at clock speed (ignoring the GPU)
Nice to know, I thought there were more differences besides the clock that made the S800 faster than S600 in CPU wise.
Thanks for the replies
PunkOz said:
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Re,
Nope they are not exactly the same, it's not only an history of CPU freq, look closely
PunkOz said:
Yeah, I just wanted to know if the S800 is faster only because it's clocked higher or there's more (besides the GPU)
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
Ye, I know the GPU on the S800 is better but I was curious about the CPU
Sooooooo if both run at the same clock speed they're the same? (ignoring the heat)
So, the S800 is faster because it can be clocked higher due to krait400, so it only is faster than S600 at clock speed (ignoring the GPU)
Nice to know, I thought there were more differences besides the clock that made the S800 faster than S600 in CPU wise.
Thanks for the replies
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well not just heat. The Krait 300 CPU is designed to be run at 1.9 whereas the krait 400 is designed to be run at 2.3. Running both at 2.3, they obviously run the same amount of cycles, but the quality of the materials / construction and the design will mean that the krait 300 will not be able to maintain that amount of cycles for long, may drop some cycles etc. Theoretically a cycle is a cycle, in practice getting all those cycles to work properly is different
Plus the difference about memory, L2 cache, etc... For all the differences Google should be your friend, after it's too technical
viking37 said:
Plus the difference about memory, L2 cache, etc... For all the differences Google should be your friend, after it's too technical
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually googled and the CPU is about the same, same L2 cache accordign to Qualcomm's website, 28 nm, just the S800 is clocked higher, I always Google before making a thread but I couldn't find an answer to my question or maybe I didn't ask Google properly.
I know the S800 supports USB 3.0, has a faster charging etc etc, I just wanted to know if it would be running as fast as a S600 if they have the same clock speed.
in conclussion, S800 is faster because it runs cooler than S600 so it lets the S800 reach a higher frequency + better materials used on S800 architecture etc makes it run cooler and cooler means more stable under high load + reaching higher clock.
Thanks for the help guys correct me If I'm wrong but I think I got this
Hi,
Qualcomm will not reveal all on their site
The L2 cache is faster than the S600, memory access (Memory controller?) too it's on a bunch of sites... 28mm, right, but one is LP and the other is HPm...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6568/qualcomm-krait-400-krait-300-snapdragon-800
The thing we need is the internal hardware stuff, source and documentation from Qualcomm, for sure there is another things . Maybe some kernel devs could have good information too?
Maybe if you did not find anything more is that there is nothing else to find...
But if you got it, it's fine and I think that all is said :good:

GPU Overclock performance

Hello 1+1 owners,
I just wanted to ask whether does GPU Overclocking on your OnePlus devices improve graphics performance. I've seen some kernels which supports GPU OC, so I'm asking those who already tried it.
I'm asking this because I've added GPU OC to my custom kernel for Lenovo Vibe Z2 Pro (which has the same Snapdragon 801), and although the GPU itself goes to 657MHz frequency step, I haven't noticed any improvements whatsoever, either in GPU Benchmarks (3DMark, GFXBench) or in android games.
Electry said:
Hello 1+1 owners,
I just wanted to ask whether does GPU Overclocking on your OnePlus devices improve graphics performance. I've seen some kernels which supports GPU OC, so I'm asking those who already tried it.
I'm asking this because I've added GPU OC to my custom kernel for Lenovo Vibe Z2 Pro (which has the same Snapdragon 801), and although the GPU itself goes to 657MHz frequency step, I haven't noticed any improvements whatsoever, either in GPU Benchmarks (3DMark, GFXBench) or in android games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because GPU overclocking isn't possible on this device, or any non A-family device (our chipset is B-family, and almost all Qualcomm devices released in the last 2 years are B-family). The GPU clock table is stored in TrustZone, so we can't touch it.
Sent from my A0001 using XDA Free mobile app
I wonder why they did this. Are they pushing people to get and pay for devices with their newer soc's? That's bad news, really.
I remember modifying the gpu freq table on my Nexus 7 (T3) which helped to squeeze some extra power from the device.
Anyway, thanks @Sultanxda for explanation.
Electry said:
I wonder why they did this. First thing that came to my mind was the idea that they are pushing people to get and pay for devices with their newer soc's. That's bad news, really.
I remember modifying the gpu freq table on my Nexus 7 (T3) which helped to squeeze some extra power from the device.
Anyway, thanks @Sultanxda for explanation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a Nexus 7 2012 and all I can say is that Tegra is nowhere near the same level as Snapdragon. The T3 is super laggy, whereas even Snapdragon chips from 3 years ago are still running smoothly today. Our GPU and all of our hardware in general should be the least of your worries; the Snapdragon 801 is super overpowered, and the GPU on this thing won't be a cause for bottlenecks while gaming for probably another 2 years. 578MHz is more than plenty right now.
Sultanxda said:
I have a Nexus 7 2012 and all I can say is that Tegra is nowhere near the same level as Snapdragon. The T3 is super laggy, whereas even Snapdragon chips from 3 years ago are still running smoothly today. Our GPU and all of our hardware in general should be the least of your worries; the Snapdragon 801 is super overpowered, and the GPU on this thing won't be a cause for bottlenecks while gaming for probably another 2 years. 578MHz is more than plenty right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True about T3, probably nvidia's biggest dissapointment.
Although Adreno 330 is already struggling with some more demanding games at 1440p (which is the resolution my phone has), GPU usage constantly hits 100% where at 1080p it only hit 60-70% (measured with GameBench). I was afraid that I will have to switch permanently to 1080p soon, just to maintain playable framerates (25+).
Electry said:
True about T3, probably nvidia's biggest dissapointment.
Although Adreno 330 is already struggling with some more demanding games at 1440p (which is the resolution my phone has), GPU usage constantly hits 100% where at 1080p it only hit 60-70% (measured with GameBench). I was afraid that I will have to switch permanently to 1080p soon, just to maintain playable framerates (25+).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can try changing the GPU governor to performance. Open a terminal emulator app and run these two commands:
Code:
su
echo performance > /sys/class/devfreq/f*/governor

Are the Pixel benchmarks true

Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Look at the hands on videos. You won't be worried about performance after that. Looks like Google has done a lot of optimization. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story.
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The 821 shows a peak cpu frequency spec a bit higher than 820, but this doesn't mean that everyone who uses it is obligated to use the highest frequency.
So here is a little bit of information about CPU manufacturing;
Every CPU core is a little bit different. Some of them are stable at lower voltages and higher frequencies than others. The CPU specification indicates a MINIMUM frequency that it MUST be stable at while operating within the designed power envelope. In other words, another CPU may be able to operate at the higher frequency, but it won't do so within the designed power envelope -- it will require OVER VOLTING.
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Don't worry about benchmarks! What it matters is the SoC you have, how well disipated is the SoC, and most important, how the software is done (kernel, drivers, android, binaries, etc).
There could be many devices with same SoC and better scores, but at the end, they lag more etc.
For instance, my previous Z5 Compact (with Sony Android, which is similar to AOSP) and a much better SoC than my current N5X, imo lags more than my current Nexus 5X with a worse SoC.
There's no way you can choose a device based on the benchmark, you must try both devices by yourself (ideally with your apps) and see the difference.
Giving another example...A Nexus 5 2013, is extremely fast in KK (with ART) and even in MM (but not in Lollipop).
However, it still throttles much more than a 5X because of the frequency, nm, and many other things.
doitright said:
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Good info, thanks guys!
We know nothing yet, time will tell obviously. The videos in the early previews look great, but we'll see under heavy load how these perform.
jbrooks58 said:
Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like it if you could actually find something that claims that the 6p is anywhere near pixel in performance benchmarks. Reality is that it is more than 2x faster across the board.
As far as comparing it with 820, there are two things you can accomplish with the "1" -- more speed, or less power. They seem to be opting for the latter.
All the benchmarks I could find show it against either apple, or samsuck. Samsuck is well known for building TO the benchmarks (sometimes even *cheating*), which causes their scores to be unnaturally high, and comparing against apple is just stupid, since there is no baseline between them due to architectural differences and a complete lack of a common software stack. In other words, in a comparison between pixel and anything made by apple, you could have a smaller number, despite *actually* being considerably higher. The number doesn't equate across platforms.
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 PM ----------
jbrooks58 said:
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That 10% is an interesting figure.
The SD820 has clock rates of 2.15 GHz on 2 cores, and 1.59 GHz on the other 2 cores.
Multiply by 1.1 (add 10%) and you get 2.365 and 1.749 GHz.
The SD821 has clock rates of 2.34 GHz on 2 cores and 2.19 GHz on the other 2 cores.
On those first two cores, that is marginally more the 10% higher clock rate. On the other 2 cores, it is considerably more than 10%. Note that a system's performance does NOT scale linearly with CPU frequency.
The other thing to note is that the pixel specs show it operating at 2x2.15+2x1.6 GHz, just like the SD820.
So what we can read from that, is that the pixel's CPUs are **underclocked**. That will allow it to use less battery power, and run cooler, while still running *really really fast*. If you want more, unlock and clock it up to 821 spec, I think you will find that this phone is an "overclocker's" dream, even if it isn't really overclocking.
That 10% figure comes directly from Qualcomm's publications on performance for the 821 vs 820.
craig0r said:
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good read, thanks.

Categories

Resources