Related
Has anybody got an overclock kernel to work with the new gingerbread roms? I tried buzz kernel with leedroid and android revolution, but messes up the rom and you get FCs and extremely sluggish operation. Also tried the cm overclock kernels with cm7 RC2, but that you just get boot loop. Anybody else have any luck?
Even without overclock gingerbread seems pretty quick, but running benchmarks and was getting bad scores with android revolution hd. Getting less then 40 mflops and less then 1500 quadrant, its weird cause running cm7 rc1 i normally get 3000 quadrant score with 1.479 gighrz overclock or 2500+ on the other froyo roms.
h_22_accord said:
Has anybody got an overclock kernel to work with the new gingerbread roms? I tried buzz kernel with leedroid and android revolution, but messes up the rom and you get FCs and extremely sluggish operation. Also tried the cm overclock kernels with cm7 RC2, but that you just get boot loop. Anybody else have any luck?
Even without overclock gingerbread seems pretty quick, but running benchmarks and was getting bad scores with android revolution hd. Getting less then 40 mflops and less then 1500 quadrant, its weird cause running cm7 rc1 i normally get 3000 quadrant score with 1.479 gighrz overclock or 2500+ on the other froyo roms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nope we need sources from htc, and this rom is not even official released yet, so dont expect it anytime soon
first we need the rom released, not leaked, and then wait for htc as usual
Ok, i feel this post will be good for all those newbies... I know benchmarks are not really accurate but help me out filling this post with info... Your post should be in the following format----
ROM you are using, version
Kernel you are using,
Set cpu settings, governor, under volt.
radio you are using,
and benchmark snap shot.
I suggest using just quadrant standard... if there is a more accurate benchmark feel free to let me know and we will change the standard benchmark platform. This i feel will help alot and get more interest in flashing different roms and kernels. I will start flashing and posting in the AM...
Since these benchmarks aren't accurate and don't really mean anything, why go to the trouble to test all the ROMs?
Sure I'll play...though I'm not sure how accurate Quadrant is or if this really proves anything.
ROM: Ingersoll 2.5 (all 3 images were with different builds, can't remember which build goes with which pic)
Kernel: Ingersoll - Kernel JV Kernel #7 (2.6.32.28-jv7)
Radio: Stock
setcpu: 1.8 Ghz (I think) Governor: Performance
The highest score in Quadrant I ever received was 3309 but I lost that screenshot in a Flash gone bad.
Just like I mentioned...this is just to eliminate all those newbie questions.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA Premium App
This post has been edited because I added Mandrobench results because it utilization of both cores. Mandrobench scores were identical for both kernels. Running Mandrobench at 1500 more than once tended to overheat my phone and cause reboots and other signs of instability.
One thing is clear, if you run either Faux or Trinity kernel you must OC at least to 1100 or you take a huge hit on performance.
I ran 4 different benchmarks on every configuration of CM 10 times with the Faux and Trinity kernels. I normalized the results so that each benchmark was evenly weighted and so the numbers are better understood they were normalized so that CM with its own kernel scores 100. All other numbers are relative to that. The 4 benchmarks were Quadrant, Smartbench 2011, Linpack, and Mandrobench. The results are a bit surprising, I am attaching the spreadsheet so that anyone can check my methodology.
CM w/CM kernel 1000 MHz score 100
CM w/Faux kernel 1000 MHz score 77
CM w/Faux kernel 1100 MHz score 104
CM w/Faux kernel 1200 MHz score 114
CM w/Faux kernel 1300 MHz score 123
CM w/Faux kernel 1500 MHz score 138
CM w/Trinity kernel 1000 MHz score 85
CM w/Trinity kernel 1100 MHz score 116
CM w/Trinity kernel 1200 MHz score 124
CM w/Trinity kernel 1400 MHz score 140
CM w/Trinity kernel 1500 MHz score 147
Test for each configuration were started following a reboot with a battery charged over 60%. They were run sequentially the same way for each configuration. Each number above was the result of the averaging a total of 30 benchmarks.
Interesting note, the first couple Quadrant scores on each run were generally lower than the rest, result of caching by the phone perhaps? On certain configurations the Smartbench results fluctuated wildly producing unexpectedly low scores. Not sure what the reason for this fluctuation but it is repeatable, at least on my phone, but only on certain configurations.
This took a long time, I am sharing it because I found the results unexpected and that they might be useful to somebody. Not everyone is dumb enough to sit and run benchmarks all day. Would be interesting to know how close the numbers are ran on another phone. I am intentionally only providing the numbers and my methodology, I will leave it to someone smarter to explain them.
Add Mandrobench to the list... only app that utilizes TWO cores for its benchmarking (free too). Then we'll talk.
EtherealRemnant said:
Add Mandrobench to the list... only app that utilizes TWO cores for its benchmarking (free too). Then we'll talk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, Mandrobench should have been included, I didn't originally because it has disappeared from the market. I have searched my back-ups and found the apk, so I will incorporated them into the experiment later today. It is my understanding that most current apps do not take advantage of the dual core, therefore the results from benchmarks that are not optimized for dual-core have significance.
EtherealRemnant said:
Add Mandrobench to the list... only app that utilizes TWO cores for its benchmarking (free too). Then we'll talk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Above not available anymore on market - maybe post the .apk.
Let me start by saying thanks! This undoubtedly took a very long time and it was nice of you to share the results with everyone. Did you use only ext3 or ext4 kernels or a combination of both?
Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk
I appreciate u sharing your results. Just a quick question. was ur battery life changed a lot while u overclocked it. Also what's the difference between ext4 and 3
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
EtherealRemnant said:
Add Mandrobench to the list... only app that utilizes TWO cores for its benchmarking (free too). Then we'll talk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mandrobench was added to my original post. These results were identical for both kernels.
r4d14n7 said:
Let me start by saying thanks! This undoubtedly took a very long time and it was nice of you to share the results with everyone. Did you use only ext3 or ext4 kernels or a combination of both?
Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both kernels were ext4, made much easier to switch back and forth by the new version of clockwork.
Both of these are file systems and ext4 is newer and theoretically faster, probably more so on a computer where there are more read/writes to disc. I don't think any of these benchmarks test for this. Someone else may correct this as I don't know a lot about phones, I am a computer guy, and an out of date one at that.
moeahmad1995 said:
I appreciate u sharing your results. Just a quick question. was ur battery life changed a lot while u overclocked it. Also what's the difference between ext4 and 3
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Running consecutive benchmarks can kill a battery in 2 hours.
Battery life is a subjective, I haven't thought of a way to objectively test it. I feel I get the best battery life with CM with its own kernel or Eaglesblood Froyo. Bionix appears to eat batteries.
After seeing these results, I plan to run the Trinity UV11 kernel for awhile and see to see how good the battery life is. The performance increase appears significant for only OC to 1100 and I like the idea of getting the advantages of a little OC/UV without having to run Pimp my CPU.
I have gotten a clear increase (hours more idle time) by simply turning off 4G and only toggling it on when I need it. I use Pandora a lot and it ironically runs better at 2G when I am bicycling (less drops interruptions in the streaming as I move around).
Cubeology said:
Running consecutive benchmarks can kill a battery in 2 hours.
Battery life is a subjective, I haven't thought of a way to objectively test it. I feel I get the best battery life with CM with its own kernel or Eaglesblood Froyo. Bionix appears to eat batteries.
After seeing these results, I plan to run the Trinity UV11 kernel for awhile and see to see how good the battery life is. The performance increase appears significant for only OC to 1100 and I like the idea of getting the advantages of a little OC/UV without having to run Pimp my CPU.
I have gotten a clear increase (hours more idle time) by simply turning off 4G and only toggling it on when I need it. I use Pandora a lot and it ironically runs better at 2G when I am bicycling (less drops interruptions in the streaming as I move around).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? I found that these 2 kernels gave me better battery life then the stock cm7 kernel. Also can you add antutu benchmark to the list?
maxesxp said:
Really? I found that these 2 kernels gave me better battery life then the stock cm7 kernel. Also can you add antutu benchmark to the list?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are also quoting and talking about a response from 6 months ago which was beginning stages for cm7 on this phone especially kernels lol... Glad you are getting great performance and battery though.
mt3g said:
you are also quoting and talking about a response from 6 months ago which was beginning stages for cm7 on this phone especially kernels lol... Glad you are getting great performance and battery though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL oops I need to start learning to read dates.. -.-
Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk
some one should run tests again
I tested Trinity vs Faux in AnTuTu and got pretty much same results on charger,but off charger Trinity got about 50 more (6000 off charger and 6125 while charging)
I use UV kernels clocked at 1100.
Switched to Faux because Trinity has bugs like reboot hangs the phone and sometimes waking up take a while. Also boot image and animations are not that nice and boot sound with kernel doesn't even seem to be working.....
Trinity 6004-6120
Faux 5918-6124
CM Stock around 5500
kolyan said:
some one should run tests again
I tested Trinity vs Faux in AnTuTu and got pretty much same results on charger,but off charger Trinity got about 50 more (6000 off charger and 6125 while charging)
I use UV kernels clocked at 1100.
Switched to Faux because Trinity has bugs like reboot hangs the phone and sometimes waking up take a while. Also boot image and animations are not that nice and boot sound with kernel doesn't even seem to be working.....
Trinity 6004-6120
Faux 5918-6124
CM Stock around 5500
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you getting such low scores? Not OC'd maybe? I'm using Fauxs newest kernel and my Antutu score was 7566. Average scores around 7300-7600
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
mike7169 said:
Why are you getting such low scores? Not OC'd maybe? I'm using Fauxs newest kernel and my Antutu score was 7566. Average scores around 7300-7600
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Faux's newest kernel is ~1.5 correct?
He's probably using the Trinity battery saving kernel clocked at 1.1 and undervolted.
I use the Trinity 1.1GHz kernel and undervolt to -200mV (for the lower ones, leave the top three at stock for stability reasons) and I score around 6100 in Antutu.
redmonke255 said:
Faux's newest kernel is ~1.5 correct?
He's probably using the Trinity battery saving kernel clocked at 1.1 and undervolted.
I use the Trinity 1.1GHz kernel and undervolt to -200mV (for the lower ones, leave the top three at stock for stability reasons) and I score around 6100 in Antutu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That makes sense. I just did a benchmark @1.1ghz and I got 6007. Ya the Faux kernel max is @1.5ghz. Its undervolted too, not much, just enough to get great battery life.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
I said in post that I use UV kernels clocked at 1100mhz
I now use Trinity Kernel because Faux did not have 216Mhz option in SetCPU. I also UVed by -25 for now and set charging profile to 400+ Mhz to avoid SoD
I wonder whats the difference in battery life if you use 1100Mhz or 1500Mhz ?
kolyan said:
I said in post that I use UV kernels clocked at 1100mhz
I now use Trinity Kernel because Faux did not have 216Mhz option in SetCPU. I also UVed by -25 for now and set charging profile to 400+ Mhz to avoid SoD
I wonder whats the difference in battery life if you use 1100Mhz or 1500Mhz ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a significant difference. I don't have any data to back it up. But I've accidentally left it on the max after a benchmark and it would be in a free fall. Especially when playing a 3D game like MC3
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
I've tried using both Kernels as well as stock. Granted they both seem to run better then stock, I'm currently on Trinity with Standard Voltage, because the Under voltage versions of both Faux and trinity seemed to freeze on reboots for whatever reason. They both appear to run about the same set at 1100 which is what I've set to.
I'd like to say thank you for performing scientific and useful benchmarks!
Hi, i have searched the forums, but haven't been able to find an answer, simply put i don't believe my xoom is overclocking. I have been testing it with an app called neocore, but have tried quadrant as well. It doesn't matter if i am at 1000 or 1700 Neocore always says that my xoom runs at between 34-36 fps, which is the same as when it was bonestock, quadrant is the same. No change in animation speed or results no matter what i have set the clock too. I currently have eos nightly 77 for 4g on my xoom, I was using the stock kernel that came with the rom, and recently downloaded the.3.0.5 tiamat overclock kernel, which after flashing think it was the same(I am a noob). I was originally trying to use android overclock to adjust my settings, now have completely uninstalled it and using eos's settings, no change. What am i doing wrong, or have missed?
Thanks for any help you can give me
For increased smoothness in animation, etc, I believe it is the overclocked gpu that helps as opposed to the cpu. Not all the eos kernels are overclocked. Quadrant score appears to be meaningless. Believe me, the eos kernels permit overclocking. What governor are you using? Is your setting stable?
I have it currently at interactive, after you mentioned the governer, i put it to performance and ran the neocore benchmark to see what would happen, 38.2. Well if it requires a gpu overclock that would make sense that i am not noticing a difference with the apps i am using. But raises another question,what is a overclocked cpu good for? More apps running at once? My overclock is ALLOT more stable with 77, i was previously on 74. Before it would get glitchy allot more often, and random reboots on anything above 1000. 1400 and i was having to watch the temperature, 1500 seemed to work the best, but still got random reboots (still better than what I got on honeycomb. I still get glitches here and there on 77, but still have yet to get a.random reboot.
Unrelated to my topic, thank you so much for your guide to rooting and romming, i had read a couple others and hemmed and hawed about whether to do it, even though my mouth watered about the benefits, your guide made me clap my hands together and say "let's do this"
I went back over the kernel I downloaded and flashed, it is the team tiamat overclocked gpu 3.0.5 kernel that was realeased 2/19/2012... sorry, this stuff is new to me so I am learning as i go along
Draxin said:
I went back over the kernel I downloaded and flashed, it is the team tiamat overclocked gpu 3.0.5 kernel that was realeased 2/19/2012... sorry, this stuff is new to me so I am learning as i go along
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem...the EOS nightlies are on a newer kernel, but I think the lastest don't have oc gpus.
I'm running cleanROM DE... Chose to overclock to 1.8. And also flash dual core mod. Question is, when I set it to max at 1.8 and minimum at 1.8 along with performance, and I run a benchmark, it says max is 1.8 but almost all of them say current frequency is 1512??? Is it just an incognito mod? But I have to say, the Damn thing is absolutely blazing fast!!! Not to mention I keep it on a strict diet too, only a couple games and the nessesary apps.. but here's a screenshot of my quadrant run...
InflatedTitan said:
I'm running cleanROM DE... Chose to overclock to 1.8. And also flash dual core mod. Question is, when I set it to max at 1.8 and minimum at 1.8 along with performance, and I run a benchmark, it says max is 1.8 but almost all of them say current frequency is 1512??? Is it just an incognito mod? But I have to say, the Damn thing is absolutely blazing fast!!! Not to mention I keep it on a strict diet too, only a couple games and the nessesary apps.. but here's a screenshot of my quadrant run...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure it's been mentioned somewhere in the CleanROM DE thread. Mine does this too. SetCPU will show my clock up at 1.8 but the cpu time monitor and CPUSpy never report the 1.8 frequency.
Yea i used CPU benchmark and it indeed got all the way down to 418 Ms @ 1809 MHz... So its all good I guess. I like mine full throttle as i usually keep my charger on me so battery usually isn't an issue. (Mine walks all over my buddy's gsIII in their current forms)... Thanks for the second opinion bro.