Related
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.
Hey everyone, i just upgraded to a Nexus S 4G this morning from the ol samsung transform, and i was planning on applying cyanogen but then i messed with the phone a bit, did root and restored a couple of my game apps...it seems to work with very nice speed, only serious issues ive noticed are just with the signal, sensitivity of keyboard, and i havnt had time to see battery life yet..
But i was wondering, since the stock rom is so clean and fast, why are we putting on different roms like cyanogen?
More importantly, as far as kernel, whats the best kernel right now for nexus 4g? im running stock kernel, but naturally and ideally id like even more speed(not sure what id use it for, but always nice), better battery life, and better data signals..
ive been reading about overclocked kernels a little bit and such, so basically im wondering about what you guys would say to all this? should i change rom &/Or kernel? to what? why? does overclocking at 1.4ghz like these kernels say have any negative side effects? things like that.
Thanks for your response!
~ Master Ramy
Master Ramy said:
Hey everyone, i just upgraded to a Nexus S 4G this morning from the ol samsung transform, and i was planning on applying cyanogen but then i messed with the phone a bit, did root and restored a couple of my game apps...it seems to work with very nice speed, only serious issues ive noticed are just with the signal, sensitivity of keyboard, and i havnt had time to see battery life yet..
But i was wondering, since the stock rom is so clean and fast, why are we putting on different roms like cyanogen?
More importantly, as far as kernel, whats the best kernel right now for nexus 4g? im running stock kernel, but naturally and ideally id like even more speed(not sure what id use it for, but always nice), better battery life, and better data signals..
ive been reading about overclocked kernels a little bit and such, so basically im wondering about what you guys would say to all this? should i change rom &/Or kernel? to what? why? does overclocking at 1.4ghz like these kernels say have any negative side effects? things like that.
Thanks for your response!
~ Master Ramy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are quite a lot of things that can be changed by flashing a custom ROM. Cyanogen is reported to be more responsive than stock android, and a slight improvement on battery life and performance. Also, with other ROMs like MIUI you can completely change the entire GUI basically. The lockscreen becomes changeable by one click in the themes app. I've also noticed a slight improvement in battery life/performance and responsiveness.
Also, with regards to kernels, they add extra features (like voodoo sound, BLN notifications, UV'ing, OC'ing, etc). Now if you're looking to overclock your CPU AND save on battery life then that is probably not going to happen. If you OC the CPU you'll as a result draw more battery power when it reaches it's peak. Hence why I went with the TEUV88 kernel. This kernel undervolts the CPU yet manages to give me the same performance as the stock kernel. It runs extremely nicely and the battery lasts me about 24-30 hours on moderate usage where as before I was getting around 16.
Hope this helps.
Edit:: note that both undervolting and overclocking can be dangerous for any phone. The kernel developers put their kernels through testing though to ensure they are stable enough for most people (I hope anyways). But be aware that it is possible to damage the hardware be either of these methods.
yeah im looking at more undervolting for battery life cause current performance seems great for me as of this point. but i mean cyanogenmod doesnt change much since its built on gingerbread, its just slightly more customized, but on the actual performance side, it is a slight increase? so whats the best kernel for undervolting and still getting stock performance or more? im guessing its the one u just mentioned? cause i saw a voodoo kernel or something on main dev page and itwas undervolted and OCed to 1.4 i think...idk.
Yeah you might be talking about the matr1x kernel. It ocs to 1.44 and is uved also. Plus has voodoo sound, bln and bld. Some people have issues with cm7 and some don't. I really don't like the look of miui so I can't say for it. But I use decks 1.3d with zero issues and matr1x kernel with zero issues along with heavy use 4+ hrs screen time in over 12hrs. Personally running 1.44 your phone will prolly lock up but I run 1.2 non stop no freezes or lockups or reboots. Try them and see qhich ones fit you and what you like.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA App
I'm still on stock with mine and honestly, I don't need anything else... i get 12-15 hours of moderate use and i don't really know what lag is because i never experience it with my phone.
The above posters are correct in everyway. I mean it definitely comes down to preference. I was averaging about 13-15h on my stock kernel/rom but my phone would be basically completely dead.
I switched to TEUV88-rammstein2 (Trinity Undervolted rom). It has Voodoo sound, BLN (backlight notification), and with todays update it has touchwake mod. So as you can see my phone lasted 15h (still with 35% battery left) with 3h of screen on, and 45m of audio streaming, and lots of texting.
Check out my post: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=17108560&postcount=3154
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.
Hello,
i'm new on the Nexus S. I had a Milestone and tried pretty much every custom rom, as the Milestone stock rom was slow, unstable and outdated.
I read many times "great battery life" within the description of Nexus S custom roms (e.g. Codename).
BUT, is it better than the stock-kernel battery-life? And how much better (guess)?
I ask, because most of the Roms are overclocked and perhaps the "great battery life" is relative to those speed-optimized roms.
For me the speed of the stock rom is totally okay and it seems totally stable. I would only "custom-ize" it, if the battery life would be (significant) better – else: "Never change a running system!"
AK
p.s. Links are welcome, as i didn't find any comparison like this.
I have found stock GB rom was a battery hog. I tried a few roms but loved that CNA will pull all your apps from the market for you(I didn't have to download them all manually)
With a custom rom you can change more settings, you can change governors, you can change the cpu speeds and voltage. With deep idle sleep working your phone sips power when in your pocket. I like the Air Kernel,3.x with the scary setting, seems to use lower cpu frequencies more often.
you can find roms that are stripped down to next to nothing, these should give you better battery life then stock, to fully loaded roms that most likely will not give you better battery life.
I have my cpu set to 200 min and 1400 max running air kernel with the scary governor. scored around 2500 on Quadrant and battery last pretty good as when I just have the screen on, not doing much the cpu is running 200Mhz and the phone goes in to deep sleep right away.
try CPUspy and cool tool, CPUspy lets you see the states the cpu is using for a given time and cool tool can display cpu/power details in the top bar.
Through my ROM testing with ICS, most ROMs give very comparable battery life. Battery life relies very little on the ROM itself assuming there is no wakelock or similar issue which is because of the ROM, which in a good ROM there won't be. There may be some settings which are added or changed that have some effect, but likely nothing very major, especially in my experience.
Normally the bloatware is what drains battery with unused apps opening in the background.
Custom ROMs omit and give the option of certain bloatware.
Also some ROMs have great idle compared to stock.
But overall if u control ur mobile data, wifi, gps and sync then u can better or great battery life on any ROM just as long as its not a newer ROM that is still testing. And most custom ROMs have the pull down notifications that make it easier to control all of them.
I personally use SLIM ICS and its comes simple enough that u customize it.
Vs Nexus S 4G
My wife uses a rooted Bolt running Virus' Eternity ROM with Sense 3.5. I'm open to trying new ROMs and other less drastic measures as well. I've thought about switching to an AOSP ROM that might free up more memory. I personally use Liquid Smooth and have been trying tweaks to see if my battery life improves before trying to change hers. She uses the FM Radio a lot at work which is the primary culprit of her battery consumption. It's generally fully dead after 6 hours. What options do I have that might increase that life a little longer?
You may wanna take a look at THIS THREAD
Thank you much. I'm not sure how I've missed that thread as I've spent a good bit of time on those forums as well looking at different tweaks.