Related
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.
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.
I am considering using a custom ROM on the transformer, but is it worth it, I am mainly after performance increases. I see on a few that there are higher benchmark results, but does this actually translate into a real world speed increase?
I remember some custom ROMs for the original i9000 Galaxy S doubled the benchmark performance, but that was more down to "cheating" the benchmark than anything else, although it certainly was noticeable at times.
One of the slight criticisms I have of the TF101 is a slight amount of lag / lack of responsiveness occasionally - not a deal breaker, but if it can be improved then why not? Obviously not at the cost of stability though.
I think the SGS2 has spoiled me a bit here!
apparently there is a big increase (mostly from overclocking). i had the standard firmware for 3 days only, so I can't really tell, but one of my co-workers has a locked B70 and was wow-ed by my TF, the smoothness and speed of it.
Yes, I'm waiting too, to root it and put a cutom ROM on. I read, heard and saw the performance difference. Mainly from the overclock, but also thanks to kernel tweaks and stuff. So If you can root, do it
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using xda premium
I've never been that keen on the idea of overclocking, as I prefer to have a bit of headroom, but I guess if it is safe and makes a big difference, then I would give it a shot. What would be a good middle ground for stability / speed ?
1.4 IMO is very stable and doesn't increase heat or use more battery but the real world performance is noticable. I have never run a benchmark so I can't give you any numbers. Just my normal use.
Cheers for the reply.
Is there any one ROM that stands out as being the best performing?
Contrary to what people think they all perform about the same. There is no source so everyone is building of the same stock rom. If you want the same look then go with Revolution. If you want a little tweaked then go with Prime (What I'm on). If you want the tweaks and a nice tools package then go with Revolver (What I was just running). All 3 devs are really responsive to problems
If you start from a clean base and don't restore any system data from other builds then they will all be fast. The real speed difference is in the kernel and those can be flashed seperately from the rom. Clemsyn is really putting out kernels this week. Some good. Some not so good. Go with whats right for you.
EDIT: I have actually installed all 3 roms in the last week and run them at stock and at 1.4 Ghz. They all performed exactly the same for me. They were all equally stable. I don't use benchmarks because they can be fudged.
I've used all three too. I notice huge improvements with webpage rendering. It's almost as fast as my laptop, where as before I avoided using the browser if possible. The ability to hide the status bar is a really nice addition to the latest version of revolver.
Edit: autorotate is also alot faster.
Sent from my Sensation using XDA Premium App
tameracingdriver said:
What would be a good middle ground for stability / speed ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no such thing as an overclocking "middle ground" when dealing with mobile chipsets such as the Tegra. It's not like overclocking a desktop computer where the CPU will constantly run at the specified speed; mobile chipsets are pre-configured to utilize only as much power as necessary. For that reason I always ramp up my tablet to the max clock speed it can reliably handle, because then the governor will handle balancing between speed, stability, and battery life. My clock speed can range from 216Mhz to 1624Mhz, and on the interactive governor I can still achieve a good 8 hours of battery life from a single charge.
Of course that's not to say that you couldn't constantly run at 1624Mhz all the time, and I do sometimes lock it to that speed for games. But for much of the OS interaction, it's not necessary to run at full speed all the time, and you won't notice a difference even if it is locked at full speed. It just comes in handy every once in a while for things like loading apps, loading web pages, and playing games.
I've been searching around for a bit and cant find a definitive answer on the affects of performance mode on the infinity (Not rooted, running stock). I wanted to get everyone's opinion on how exactly it affects the OVERALL performance of the infinity.
Is the trade off worth the decreased battery life? Does it alleviate some of the lag we sometimes see in battery saving and balanced mode? What areas ( browsing, app draw animation, switching between home screens etc...) do you see the greatest increase in performance?
Also i don't really care about the different benchmark scores that are out there. I want opinions on EVERYDAY USAGE, not benchmark results. Thanks in advance guys!
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
running stock deodexed rom in performance mode,
set cpu with on demand governor and minimum clock bumped up to around 240,
browser to ram installed along with system tuner tweeks I couldn't be happier.
Battery life is still great and I get really good performance with Dolphin and good performance with Chrome.
lafester said:
running stock deodexed rom in performance mode,
set cpu with on demand governor and minimum clock bumped up to around 240,
browser to ram installed along with system tuner tweeks I couldn't be happier.
Battery life is still great and I get really good performance with Dolphin and good performance with Chrome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like i said, looking for info on COMPLETE stock, not rooted... running the performance mode option on the inifinity.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
Good question...
I don't see much difference tween performance and balanced.
Gaming is a tad better in performance maybe because it pushes the GPU a bit.
As far as everyday use and battery life not much more speed in performance.
Just another button to push versus a root tweak.
Hmmm, OP - why not just try it yourself and see?? Who would be a better judge than you, on your own device, using the apps that you use??
Everyone uses these tablets differently and just because someone else gets better results with their setup, doesn't mean that you would see the same results...
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
I use Power Saving for everything except Gaming, works nicely with upto 9 hours of screen time.
jtrosky said:
Hmmm, OP - why not just try it yourself and see?? Who would be a better judge than you, on your own device, using the apps that you use??
Everyone uses these tablets differently and just because someone else gets better results with their setup, doesn't mean that you would see the same results...
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have tried it, but obviously im not the only one who owns a tf700, nor is my use of the tablet the same as everyone else. Also there have been obvious differences in individual tablet performance regardless of performance mode. Hence why im asking everyone's opinion. That way i can compare my results to those of everyone else and see if there is a correlation. Cant do that by just looking at my own individual results
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
hiemanshu said:
I use Power Saving for everything except Gaming, works nicely with upto 9 hours of screen time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok...but how does your tab perform in performance mode as compared to battery saving? Not really getting alot of info from that post. Thanks for responding though!
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
pierrekid said:
I have tried it, but obviously im not the only one who owns a tf700, nor is my use of the tablet the same as everyone else. Also there have been obvious differences in individual tablet performance regardless of performance mode. Hence why im asking everyone's opinion. That way i can compare my results to those of everyone else and see if there is a correlation. Cant do that by just looking at my own individual results
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess I misunderstood your post - I thought you were trying to determine if you should use performance mode or not...
So, what were your conclusions when you tried it?
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
jtrosky said:
I guess I misunderstood your post - I thought you were trying to determine if you should use performance mode or not...
So, what were your conclusions when you tried it?
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly no real difference. Seems like a lot of wasted power for no gain and decreased battery life. But i might be wrong.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
pierrekid said:
Like i said, looking for info on COMPLETE stock, not rooted... running the performance mode option on the inifinity.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want good performance you need to at least root your device.
as far as cpu speed goes, all performance mode does is kick up the max from 1.5GHz to 1.7GHz. in power saving mode the max is 1GHz. not sure about gpu changes.
i tend to use power saving mode unless im playing a resource intensive game, which honestly doesn't happen all that often. i don't really see a difference between the modes as far as changing between home screens, launcher drawer, etc.
lafester said:
If you want good performance you need to at least root your device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Understandable, but that's not what im asking. If i wanted to know the what rom to use and how that specific rom performed on performance mode, then i would ask that. But im not asking that. Thanks anyways.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
urrlyx said:
as far as cpu speed goes, all performance mode does is kick up the max from 1.5GHz to 1.7GHz. in power saving mode the max is 1GHz. not sure about gpu changes.
i tend to use power saving mode unless im playing a resource intensive game, which honestly doesn't happen all that often. i don't really see a difference between the modes as far as changing between home screens, launcher drawer, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the response. Very informative. What do you usually use your tab for?
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
If its like the 201 which I assume it is then:
Performance mode has higher maximum speed and is more aggressive with powergating. It also has higher contrast and I think faster bus link speed. 3d speed is best at this setting.
Balanced will scale to quad core but will be more hesitant to hit high speed and ungate cores compared to performance mode. The net is a slight stutter. The contrast is lower. 2d balanced performance is the same as performance and powersave is about half the 2d speed.
Powersave is more conservative with speeds and gating. Is good for video playback if you can get over the dynamic contrast which is higher in this mode.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
tf201 said:
If its like the 201 which I assume it is then:
Performance mode has higher maximum speed and is more aggressive with powergating. It also has higher contrast and I think faster bus link speed. 3d speed is best at this setting.
Balanced will scale to quad core but will be more hesitant to hit high speed and ungate cores compared to performance mode. The net is a slight stutter. The contrast is lower. 2d balanced performance is the same as performance and powersave is about half the 2d speed.
Powersave is more conservative with speeds and gating. Is good for video playback if you can get over the dynamic contrast which is higher in this mode.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great post thanks man
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
hiemanshu said:
I use Power Saving for everything except Gaming, works nicely with upto 9 hours of screen time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? My Infinity is incredibly slow in PS Mode. Running stock ROM, not rooted.
pierrekid said:
Honestly no real difference. Seems like a lot of wasted power for no gain and decreased battery life. But i might be wrong.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had noticeable lag in balanced mode while watching 1080P video. I get zero lag with performance mode. I also notice the graphics frame rate is smoother and higher on performance mode as well. Especially when you play games that totally utilize the tegra 3 chip set.
pierrekid said:
I appreciate the response. Very informative. What do you usually use your tab for?
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the time I've spent with the tablet so far has been flashing roms (stock based and cm10 testing which tends to be very time consuming lol) and tweaking stuff. When I do actually USE it, it has been for media consumption most of the time (displaying photos for friends that are over, reading ebooks, looking up something on the web, reading XDA, etc). Nothing really resource intensive.
Stock, non-rooted, not unlocked, no tweaks, turned off most bloatware. Running a Live Wallpaper (Steampunk Droid). Have had it since about a week before the release. (yes yes, the store cheated.)
My everyday use is mainly: checking mail, typing documents (books), watching videos (tvshows, films), working in Photoshop Painter and Sketchbook, reading pdf magazines, playing (non-casual) games, reading 9gag, vlc remote, design presentations, playing music, webtesting layouts.
From what I've noticed:
Power Saving:
Delay in loading apps, changing screens, scrolling and swiping (4-5 seconds to load the icons on homescreen). Typing (120wpm) on the dock keyboard drives it completely insane, I have to wait about two minutes for it to finish catching up, and it usually ends up as complete gibberish; Highly amusing, but not very useful. Videos of any size pretty much won't render properly at all. Websites take quite a while to load. Saves the most battery in sleep mode (+-1% loss over 10h wifi off)
Balanced:
Smooth screen transition, appscreen loads (almost) instantly. Lags slightly during intensive use (typing with keyboard, video loading, heavy games, multiple browsing tabs). Videos work alright, anything over 720p won't work properly, Tegra3 games lag (fps of about 5). Ordinary games run fine.
Performance:
Bit more snap-responsive than Balanced, by a fraction of a second. Not vital, still noticable if you're looking for it. Blurays run (more or less) smoothly (ICS isn't designed for it) (tested with Timescapes 4K bluray 1080p mp4 in VLC Béta, it ran the video for 8 hours on high brightness&ips+ with dock connected.). Heavy games (MW3, NOVA3) run fine. No delay between swiping, switching screens or launching apps.
There is no difference in screen contrast or brightness between Balanced and Perfomance as far as I can see.
Personally, I use Battery Saving when I put the device to sleep or on idle (the occasional email it can handle just fine). For normal use, I go for Balanced mode. If I notice it is a bit sluggish in games and videos, I switch to performance for the duration and then just swap back once I'm done. Using performance for anything other than when it has trouble rendering is a waste of battery and power.
Hope this helps.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T 64GB
It's hard to conceptually understand unless there really is background optimization, but whatever it is as others suggested performance after JB update seem to go up after an hour of use or so. Just as many stated on Prime forum, I am surprised by the improvement in the browser (ICS stock) performance.
Now this could be simply due to time to settle thing, but I felt like my browser speed bump got noticeable almost immediately after uninstalling Browser2ram. In fact, I am going to continue using stock browser without browser2ram as it is very fast and smooth.
So if anyone feeling browser (stock) is slow and still has browser2ram, try uninstalling and see if it makes any difference.