i try quadrant standart and i have low score
{
"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"
}
next i see into system information uses only one core
i try disable mobile data but still only one core. next i try fly mode and there are 2 core. but when i try disable fly mode and enable again there is only one core.
when i reboot phone i have 2 core about a few minutes
and score is better
what is wrong?
The second core activates when needed so since you were using the phone it 'came alive' thus giving you the better score.
but when i run test, secound core is needed but still run only one. when i work on phone and look into quadrant still writes only one core.
I tried to run the test 5 times, but still is low score
stevocz said:
but when i run test, secound core is needed but still run only one. when i work on phone and look into quadrant still writes only one core.
I tried to run the test 5 times, but still is low score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're new here, aren't you?
Don't use quadrant. It's crap, and has been for a long while. And also, the "new" scores are since it was updated for multi core, they are much lower all around.
our CPU is built to only use 1 core most of the time. But when a threshold on cpu0 is reached, cpu1 activates until a lower threshold is reached.
And no, it's not good to force the 2nd CPU to be online always, as it actually makes the phone slower.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk
Related
I purchased SetCPU about two weeks ago. I stopped using it because my phone started to get choppy, so i disabled all my profiles and disables start at boot. I kept the widget alive cause i had a free space on my widget screen but since i installed that, i see that the CPU stays a lot at this speed. I rarely see it at 1500mhz. Not sure if its normal
{
"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"
}
could be that widget isn't refreshing because app is no lo.Ger installed, which is probably the case
yes it is refreshing because the temps keep changing, the app is installed, i just disabled it from managing my cpu but its still there. also, if you knew how setcpu works youd know the max is the highest frequency allowed and the low, the lowest, it is not by any mean a indication of current mhz, so something keeps changing my cpu profile...but what?
polish_pat said:
I purchased SetCPU about two weeks ago. I stopped using it because my phone started to get choppy, so i disabled all my profiles and disables start at boot. I kept the widget alive cause i had a free space on my widget screen but since i installed that, i see that the CPU stays a lot at this speed. I rarely see it at 1500mhz. Not sure if its normal
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can check your CPU levels with the app cpuspy on the market.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using XDA App
I've been a big fan of Antutu and have been using it to compare performances for several phones. However, I noticed that in several places when they compare Att vs. International hox, no one posted the Antutu benchmark results.
Below is the result from international HOX.
{
"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"
}
And this is the result from my local Att store's HOX
There is a huge difference. And they still say that the two phones are comparable in processor performance, why?
Sent from my HTC One X on Leedroid's ROM v5.0.0.
This topic has already been discussed ad nauseum in this forum. Antutu is highly threaded and thus able to take advantage of all four cores on the Tegra 3. In the rare situations where an app is able to take full advantage of four cores of the Tegra3, it will come out ahead. However, this does not represent the common use case. Even on the desktop, few apps take advantage of more than one core, let alone two. The advantage of four cores is debatable. The advantage of faster, more energy efficient cores is not.
I agree. Every benchmark has it's own bias.
For example, the dual core will destroy the quad in something like linpack. Or increasing just the SD cache size will add a ridiculous amount to your quadrant score.
None of them truly represent actual performance. The only ones that can would be actual in-game benchmarks of games with the FPS shown. And that's just if you want to benchmark the gaming performance.
Below is first Quadrant Standard test I did after official update...WOW!
{
"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"
}
Sent from my HTC VLE_U using Xparent Skyblue Tapatalk 2
i'm somewhat of an idiot to this quadrant speak...can you explain, to the lay person, what this means?
Jimmmycrackcorn said:
i'm somewhat of an idiot to this quadrant speak...can you explain, to the lay person, what this means?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is just an app that benchmarks your phone. Or simply put runs a series of tests on your phone to determine how fast your phone can perform tasks. It tests GPU, CPU and how efficient your phones ram is along with other things. It will then provide a score for how well your device has performed the tasks. The higher the score the better.
i get also scores >6400 (stock), whereas my friends (stock) galaxy S3 gets only 5800. I kow benchmark scores does not really say anthing about everyday-use-performance but also in this area i prefer to use the One S and can say it is indeed more fluid than S3. we can say the One S is the best phone <4,5" ..
HTC did a well done job in releasing such a powerful phone which does not have sizes of tablets but a comfortable easy to handle 4.3" screen. I hope they release Sense 5 soon, and i am waiting for the successor of One S with same dimensions but higher pixel density and higher battery-capacity.
I'm on Twisted Kernel OC'd at 1.9GHz and I'm only getting a 4k score. When I was on ViperOneS, I had a 5.8k score or something. Not fair :x
when it comes to benchmarks, for me stock was always the one with most points. does not say anything about overall performance tough
Ok can anyone else confirm. I used cpu spy and other variouse kernel tuners to see that all 8 core will not go past 1.5 GHz. I am on the tmobile 920T and others are not going past 1.5. I am not coplaining about performance but if the exynos cpu is not putting out then we have a problem.
{
"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"
}
It's only showing the A53 cores speed and not the A57 cores.
Elisha said:
It's only showing the A53 cores speed and not the A57 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look at the better battery stat screenshot. Time in state for all frequencies has a highest level on 1.5ghz only.
I did benchmarks too and still not passing 1.5ghz.
There is no problem ,CPU spy cannot read the frequency correctly for a BIG.little CPU
It shows frequency for little([email protected]) cluster only ,not the BIG(A57) cluster which goes up to 2.1Ghz.
P.S Hopefully you understood this
i9100g user said:
There is no problem ,CPU spy cannot read the frequency correctly for a BIG.little CPU
It shows frequency for little([email protected]) cluster only ,not the BIG(A57) cluster which goes up to 2.1Ghz.
P.S Hopefully you understood this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This^^^
Side Note:
I do believe its big.LITTLE though? Or am I off base. Could've sworn it was this way though. One of those odd things I remeberd because of the slight irony.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
I hope this is 100 percent true. I even looked at trickster mod and it wouldnt let me set the frequncies higher than 1.5 either.
Hello,
Is my Geekbench score okay or something is wrong?
{
"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"
}
Quite under the expected range. Did you perform it at ambient temperature, or used a heavy-load app stressing the chip just before running the test?
I remember my first one gave similar results, I then ran an other one and it was more accurate to the chip advertised performances.
Jaxom84 said:
Quite under the expected range. Did you perform it at ambient temperature, or used a heavy-load app stressing the chip just before running the test?
I remember my first one gave similar results, I then ran an other one and it was more accurate to the chip advertised performances.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried to run it after a while and it performs much better now, I don't know what caused it, before first test I was using Chrome nothing much...
hiMLASTAR7 said:
I tried to run it after a while and it performs much better now, I don't know what caused it, before first test I was using Chrome nothing much...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you look at your screenshot, it seems the CPU is also focusing on how energy is spent (energy_aware), which could also explain the first results. The device can understand how you use it and adapt the power usage depending on what you "teach" it. So nothing to worry about.
Also, the Android 13 Beta is showing some improvements for Exynos versions of the device, so expect it to run even better with time.
Here are my current results with the Android 13 Beta 1 on my Exynos 2200, so you can see the little improvement.
Android 13 one ui 5 beta exynos 2200