I recently switched from hellfire phoenix running faux kernal OC'd to 1.54ghz to Weapon 3.0 R1 and faux kernal OC'd to 1.54ghz.On HP i average a 7800 score using Antutu. When i first put weapon on i did a quick Antutu benchmark to see how it compared to HP i got like 74xx which was a bit lower than my top HP score but OK. Now when ever i try to benchmark i get around 5000-6000.... and i cannot figure out why. Any thoughts? performance is fine, and i don't care to much about benchmarks but i'm just a little curious. I also tried quadrant but i also get a score that's actually lower than the stock rom on the g2x :/
thanks!
They updated the application on the 13th, the scores are different now. You'll score around the same with HP if you reflash it.
cool, thanks
Related
Folks,
I was originally running the stock kernel + TnT Lite (latest) and using quadrant standard was achieving benchmark scores in the 2400's - now after installing pershoot kernel (latest with no modules) and the latest VegaN I am now seeing a score of just over 1700 - is this something I should be particularly concerned about? Are there, for lack of a better term, optimizations that are missing either from this ROM or kernel that are coming in the future?
Stock kernel and vegan tab 5.1 gets me mid 2400's
CPU governor
I believe this is because pershoot uses the ondemand cpu governor instead of performance. Gives better battery, but benchmarks are lower. In daily use you really shouldn't see a difference as the cpu will ramp up when you need it.
that totally makes sense... thanks...
I have a custom compiled ROM from ejhart in #tegratab and I get 2000 in Quadrant but I run Dungeon Defenders flawlessly, so I could give two s**ts about Quadrant
TheJesus said:
I have a custom compiled ROM from ejhart in #tegratab and I get 2000 in Quadrant but I run Dungeon Defenders flawlessly, so I could give two s**ts about Quadrant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too don't necessarily care about break-neck speed results in Quadrant but what I do care about is if lower scores are being caused by bleeding-edge drivers that may cause problems for me down the road vs. power saving techniques being employed by the kernel - hence my original question.
But at the end of the day, if what you need runs smoothly, then its all moot
Rumbleweed said:
Stock kernel and vegan tab 5.1 gets me mid 2400's
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am running VEGAn 5.1.1 with the stock kernel also but I am getting scores of 1800-1900 with Quadrant Standard
How can I figure out why I am not seeing a higher level of performance? Thanks.
Jay
Just ran it and got 2559 - Vegan 5.1.1 - Clemsyn Kernel and libsqlite.so and plenty of stuff running.
I'm pretty sure it has always been around 2100+ on any ROM or stock kernel I have tried.
That is strange..
Am i the only one that has noticed my score is about 500 points lower for gaming when i'm on CM RC1 compared to Stock 2.3.2?
RC1 gives me a score of about 2600 while stock gives 3k+ while using Smartbench.
I wonder if this is due to the video drivers not being fully up to date or optimized on the CM builds?
I have also noticed that quadrant scores do not seam to be affected whether on CM or Stock. My experience with the N1 was CM helped with performance a lot.
What do you guys think about this? Have you experienced the same?
TheRiceKing said:
Am i the only one that has noticed my score is about 500 points lower for gaming when i'm on CM RC1 compared to Stock 2.3.2?
RC1 gives me a score of about 2600 while stock gives 3k+ while using Smartbench.
I wonder if this is due to the video drivers not being fully up to date or optimized on the CM builds?
I have also noticed that quadrant scores do not seam to be affected whether on CM or Stock. My experience with the N1 was CM helped with performance a lot.
What do you guys think about this? Have you experienced the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I normally run at 1.4GHz and get about 3.3-3.4k on the games index. (Just got 3232). I don't really ever run on stock so its hard to say but I can say that I've hit 1800/3700 at 1.6GHz before.
I just got my Zoom and I have had other tablets, so Im not totally new to rooting/etc and Ive been reading the Overclock thread in development and my quadrant scores at 1GHZ is 1722 and at 1500 (setcpu) its 2211. In the thread, people report 22xx at stock 1GHz speed and arouns 28xx with the overclock.
Any ideas why my scores are much lower?
Thanks
I wouldn't worry about Quadrant scores, ever.
If the Xoom is fast at tasks, it's fast at tasks, the end.
Good point ... Ill have to check it out in a few games and see how it goes.
Thanks
I agree that benchmarks in general and Quadrant specifically aren't what matters, but my Xoom wifi got 1892. So, scores can be all over the place.
My Xoom scores over 3000 at 1500mhz on my Xoom... it means nothing.
an oc'ed archos 101 running on ext4 at 1200mhz can reach 2900. but it's real world performance is far from what the xoom can do... excluding video playback - the archos can do high profile 720p with ac3 5.1.
The stock score, was that before or after setcpu? If it was after, then it must be on the MIN/MAX settings and/or the governor settings you're using. Mine scores 2300+ stock as well.. I have the 3G verizon version..
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium App
The lower score was with SetCPU on the stock 1GHz, and my second score was with SetCPU at 1500. At the 1500 settings I seem to be scoring what most do at stock, which is why I was curious.
Its quick overall, but to test a HEavy Flash Site I hit Disney.com with Dolphin and its a bit slow to load up, but I have to assume thats the Flash Issue.
I do love this Xoom (Wifi Version)
PensFan66 said:
The lower score was with SetCPU on the stock 1GHz, and my second score was with SetCPU at 1500. At the 1500 settings I seem to be scoring what most do at stock, which is why I was curious.
Its quick overall, but to test a HEavy Flash Site I hit Disney.com with Dolphin and its a bit slow to load up, but I have to assume thats the Flash Issue.
I do love this Xoom (Wifi Version)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try rebooting, running Quadrant from a fresh boot with nothing else running... also set the governor to 'Performance,' will likely boost your high score.
I am getting 1669
With [EE4] GummyCHARGED 1.5 and PeanutButta Jelly Time voodoo kernel.
What are you getting?
I can live with mine.
It varies between 1450-1690
Sorry. Bad shot...it was 1496
Sent from my Verizon Charge!
How do you take a screenshot from within Quadrant? Holding my back key keeps sending me back to the homescreen.
Regardless, just scored 1790 Been between there and 1650 or so.
On GC 1.5 + PBJ
ColonelSeitan said:
How do you take a screenshot from within Quadrant? Holding my back key keeps sending me back to the homescreen.
Regardless, just scored 1790 Been between there and 1650 or so.
On GC 1.5 + PBJ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ShootMe from the market.
1701: This is EE4 debloated with PBJT and Voodoo enabled.
Thanks for the shootme note Just got 1719, here's my screen
Gc 1.5 + pb&j = 1709
i dont have alot of free time right now so i only have EE4 with root, voodoo lagfix and cwm recovery kernel installed , stock other than that.
Edit: how do i make the pic small like the rest?
thanks
Sent from my Verizon Charge!
1748
Sent from my SCH-I510 using XDA Premium App
using imnuts' EE4 Debloated V4.2.1
I'm at work now so I don't have a screenshot, but I've been getting between 1550 and 1710 running pb&j with stock rom and the chainfire3d driver. phone feels a lot snappier, games run much better thanks to the driver, and battery life is about the same if a not a little bit better.
2011
OC 1.4Ghz with voodoo lagfix and GummyCharged 1.75 ROM
I like Antutu better becaue it breaks down the score into the various tests (and its free).
PBJ @ 1.4Ghz
I know people like to disregard these Quadrant scores, but I wonder what causes the LG Revo's stock 1ghz to get the same scores as these 1.4ghz OC'd devices.
But at the same time, the graphics were noticeably choppier on the Revo vs the Charge when I had them run the same [simple] Flash-based game.
I tested all 3 4G phones side-by-side in the store with various methods. The graphics processing is what tipped my scale to the Charge over the Revo.
binglejellsx2 said:
I know people like to disregard these Quadrant scores, but I wonder what causes the LG Revo's stock 1ghz to get the same scores as these 1.4ghz OC'd devices.
But at the same time, the graphics were noticeably choppier on the Revo vs the Charge when I had them run the same [simple] Flash-based game.
I tested all 3 4G phones side-by-side in the store with various methods. The graphics processing is what tipped my scale to the Charge over the Revo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the hummingbird is just better with graphics but the 2nd gen snapdragon does better in data reads or calculations etc..
asenduk said:
the hummingbird is just better with graphics but the 2nd gen snapdragon does better in data reads or calculations etc..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah thanks, got it! Good to know.
Quadrant puts a heavy emphasis on CPU scores, which the Snapdragon processors do great at (same goes for I/O as far as scores are concerned). They don't weight the graphics scores as highly, which is where the Hummingbird wins.
beat that. Jk
EE4 debloated, CWM, voodoo lagfixed, gummy charged 1.75 and OC kernel at 1400
hi,beafore I run a test I close all apps, and I got a very low score in quadrant benchmark, only 2434. I did this test few times and always is the some
Does any one have the some issue?
Hi, you may try to use Advanced Apps Killer before.
Some told that after updating to V10d build got 2680 points.
However, if you want to get more than 3000, try this:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1168480
I got 3300 on my O3D; and 2400 is not a bad score for stock. The Evo 3d barely does any better overclocked
Sent from my SCH-I510 using XDA App