Database Info

WM6 and Performance Tweaks?

Most of the recent WM6 rom chefs have been advocating making NO performance tweaks, in favor of keeping as large a RAM pool as possible. As I rarely need 30mb to run a program, I am happy to give up what I don't need if it will help get data back and forth to the SD card and so on faster. Has anyone got thoughts or data about this? I don't own a benchmarking program so I can't check it out directly. I have been making all the tweaks anyway, but does it matter?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Ed
X-Plore 1.1
IPL/SPL 3.08
GSM 2.69.11

edhaas said:
Most of the recent WM6 rom chefs have been advocating making NO performance tweaks, in favor of keeping as large a RAM pool as possible. As I rarely need 30mb to run a program, I am happy to give up what I don't need if it will help get data back and forth to the SD card and so on faster. Has anyone got thoughts or data about this? I don't own a benchmarking program so I can't check it out directly. I have been making all the tweaks anyway, but does it matter?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree completely! I'd like to see a WM6 ROM with all the performance tweaks and 8 MB page pool. I know jwzg is working on an 8MB pp ROM based on Faria's up coming Vanilla WM6 ROM.
Check out this thread for more info http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=299584&page=10

Thanks for the link. I really don't understand the drive for smaller and smaller page pools either...

Some Answers!
OK, here is my contribution to the WM6 literature...
I am running battery status 1.04 beta 3 with the following settings in all tests: cpu speed 247, cpu scalar min 143, boost 278. set on wakeup, remember last speed. My base setup is as per my signature. I ran SK Tools v 3.1.1.0 in demo mode. I also removed the HKLM\init launch100 key in both cases.
All tweaks, No tweaks
Integer (moves/25us) 134.0864, 134.4001
Floating point MWIPS 3.490, 3.489
RAM Access speed index 345, 328
Draw bitmaps speed index 503, 522
Main storage (w) KB/sec 607.78, 612.14
Main storage (r) KB/sec 3670.25, 3469.23
Storage card (w) KB/sec 412.76, 423.11
Storage card (r) KB/sec 3353.71, ! 1119.13
As you can see, the major difference is in the storage card read speed. This led me to retest using only the SD card speed tweak, and no others. Surprisingly, the result was unchanged from using no tweaks! So, likely there is some interaction with the other file system tweaks that is involved. (See the wiki-WM5 performance tweaks). At some point maybe I'll try to pin it down further.
Regards,
Ed
BTW: Sorry for the poor formatting, for some reason the extra white space between columns is being suppressed in the post.

When I was using NotTooSmart's ROM, it had some performance tweaks. I don't have a benchmark prog but it was definitely much faster. I would say it's comparable to when I had it overclocked to 234-247MHz...
I believe what made the most difference was the System Cache... I lost ~10MB of RAM but the ROM was flying... Start up was scary though... I think it went <2MB w/ the progs I had...
edhaas said:
Thanks for the link. I really don't understand the drive for smaller and smaller page pools either...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of people tend to be RAM fanatics... that's probably what drove cooks to have smaller and smaller page pools... Another thing is people and numbers.. many tend to feel the bigger, the better.. High IPL/SPL, High Radio, High OS, High Storage, High RAM.. I think you get the picture.. =P

Update on tweaks
I think I'm near the max. I maxed out the file cache, and filter cache, kept the SD cache at 256 and re-ran the benchmarks. Slightly higher numbers all round, but a dramatic increase in SD card read rate, now up to 6.5 mb/sec! I would expect this would speed loading those big programs and files from the SD card, and is 6 times the "stock" speed!.
Regards,

There was a post a few weeks ago (I think) where someone did comparisons with playing with PagePools and the performance. They compared 4MB, 6MB, 8MB, and 12MB pagepools. As I recall there was very little difference between 12MB and 8MB performance. I think 6MB was the worst of the 4.
Again this was all from memory, but I just remember after reading that, I no longer was that concerned about the differenence in performance over the added extra memory available by dropping to 8MB.

Performance tweaks
Actually, in thinking about the issue, it occurs to me that the standard benchmarks we are using (SPB Tools) don't measure things that would likely be changed by a change in page pool. CPU calculations, memory access speeds, would not change by changing the page pool or buffer sizes. The only measurement which would change would be the speed of swapping programs and data in and out of memory (by suppressing the actual need to do so) or accessing the memory card. However, these things *would* impact on "real life" apparent speed of the device in activation of programs and quick response times.
Thoughts?

Forgive my obvious ignorance... This is the closest thread I have found for my search, "SD card speed tweak" so can you please help me? point me to the tweak to speed up my SD card?
thanx in advance!

Re: Speed tweaks
Sure, If you want awesome numbers on SK Tools SD read benchmark, (particularly when combined with overclocking) make these registry changes:
HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>MMC_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>SDMemory_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
HKLM>System>StorageManager>FATFS:
Change CacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
HKLM>System>StorageManager>Filters>freplxfilt:
Change ReplStoreCacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
The larger the numbers the faster the benchmark. However, some of the other benchmarks run slighly slower, and I'm not sure I see significant "real life" improvements in responsiveness. I'd be interested in your impressions. One thing to watch out for, particularly when using the 16384 settings, is that available memory can drop to "dangerously" low levels on start up from soft reboot. If you're using batterystatus you can monitor this. As long as you stay above 2mg or so at the minimum you're ok, as the situation resolves after the start up routines finish. If you do go below, I've had the screen blank temporarily and hang for a moment, but it eventually booted fine anyway.
Have fun!

Thank you for your prompt and courteous answer!! I am still learning this PocketPC stuff. Someday I hope to be able to contribute. It already seems faster!

email tweaks
is there anyway to make my pics in emails auto download?
(instead of having to click "download pics" every time...)
and to create shortcuts to my text messages and other applications, how can i do that?

b.mann said:
is there anyway to make my pics in emails auto download?
(instead of having to click "download pics" every time...)
and to create shortcuts to my text messages and other applications, how can i do that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This question is slightly offtopic, but I'll answer you anyways.
Go to the email account you want to change:
Menu/Tools/Options/Choose The Account (it will take you into email setup):
Next/Next/Next/Options/Next/Next/Download size limit (drop down menu - choose what you want)/Finish

Hi,
I saw the benchmarking results that you guys posted and the difference between "with tweaks" and "without tweaks". The numbers sure show a difference with the benchmarking results but what i'd like to ask and what i'd really like to know is - have you noticed a significant difference in actual/real life performance on ur wizard? Was it obviously faster?
I mean, for me and IMHO, i'm not much of a fan of "benchmark" results and all that unless I actually see a "real" difference in speed when i use my PPC. I don't think i'll go for the performance tweaks if i'll loose 10+MB of RAM and am only able to see "benchmark" results being better instead of overall actual performance. That's why i'd like to get ur inputs on this whole performance tweaks thing...is there a noticeable difference in speed? (not just benchmark data)

WM 6.1 Tweaks
Hi,
Even the thread is quite old,
after some time of using WM6 and 6.1 and test meny mor etweaks, there I post some of them who i found usefull.
TKS to all contributors form xda or another.
1. Stop 3G services: settings\phone\ HSDPA must be disabled; RAT set to GSM; the internt still accesible trought GPRS for the most operators
Result in: less batery consumption 1-2 days stdby increase to 3-4 days
reduce blockings and wake-up problems
2. Disable Power management for SD card: use poket toolman or others and uncheck Enable Power Mgmt for SD card; or use regedit and change to
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Drivers\SDCARD\ClientDrivers\Class\SDMemory_Class]
“DisablePowerManagement“=dword:00000001
Other option:
Change reg into
[HKLM\System\StorageManager]
“PNPUnloadDelay“=dword:8196
[HKLM\System\StorageManager]
“PNPWaitIODelay“=dword:8196
Note that the 8196 should be entered as a DECIMAL value. The HEXADECIMAL (HEX) equivalent is 0×00002004.
Result in: Less blocking and sd diseaparing fix or slow upload sd when wake-up
More consumption on batery, about 10% more, but with tweak 1 still OK
3. Uncheck today timeout: settings\items\ uncheck Today timeout
Result in: less delay when a phone call income o r standby resume
4. Try to instal the alarm programs and sounds files direct into main memory instead of SD; to avoid sd blocking when standby resume
5. Install .NET Compact Framework 3.5 (last vers) to your device, as:
1. Download .NET Compact Framework 3.5 from Microsoft and save it on your PC.
2. Run the downloaded MSI file and let it install.
3. Connect your device to Activesync/Windows Mobile Device Center and finish the automatically launched installation on your device.
4. Soft reset your device.
5. Open a Registry editor and navigate to HKLM\Software\Microsoft\.NETCompactFramework where you will see two entries for the (now two) existing version references: the old one, which came with your device and the new one you just installed.
6. Change the DWord value of 3.5.7283.00 from 0 to 1 (thus enabling it) and all the other values (i.e.: 2.0.7045.00) from 1 to 0 (thus disabling it/them).
7. Soft reset your device.
Result in: shorter time (gain 0.5 sec) to navigate trough windows menus and buttons actions.
6. Activate lock applet on today menu; Without this function when the phone is in stand-by and a call income the phone delay has about 8-10s to wake-up.
Result in: the wake-up on call is shorter (gain 4-5 sec) than without this lock checked in today settings; somehow WM use this library to pass trowght to wake up.
7. Speed-up the SD card read; tks to edhaas contributor from xda-developers.
Action: increase some SD cache into registry:
a) HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>MMC_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
b) HKLM>Drivers>SDCARD>ClientDrivers>Class>SDMemory_Class:
Change BlockTransferSize to 256 decimal
c) HKLM>System>StorageManager>FATFS:
Change CacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal
d) HKLM>System>StorageManager>Filters>freplxfilt:
Change ReplStoreCacheSize to 4096, 8192, or 16384 decimal (16384 is dangeours high, some blank screen at startup)
a), b) settings are regulary set by default to 256; c), d) is by default to 0, so change-it and see if gain some perf.
All of them has tested and works fine.
Apply and now I found my i-mate ultimate 6150 OK, instead of first phone impression when I blame-it.

18533 is significantly faster than 18538!!!

Here's the results of sk-tools benchmark (both overclocked at 624Mhz)
18533 (pdaviet 2.11.15F)
Integer : 311.2776 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.393 MWIPS
RAM access : 2213 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1391 Speed index
18538 (ivan v3.9)
Integer : 259.6454 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 6.934 MWIPS
RAM access : 1840 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1175 Speed index

Good thread, maybe it's time to start using some test tools for comparing results coming from different builds/ROMs.
Used SKTools v3.1.11.1.
My results from a already running Universal for a few days(no boot):
1 - Overclocked at 624Mhz:
Integer : 309.6257 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 6.965 MWIPS
RAM access : 1652 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1157 Speed index
Results after a cold boot:
1 - At 520Mhz:
Integer : 242.9738 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 7.008 MWIPS
RAM access : 1619 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1126 Speed index
2 - Overclocked at 624Mhz:
Integer : 307.1136 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 6.983 MWIPS
RAM access : 1635 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1134 Speed index

I have Ivan ce v3 (18538), my results:
Integer : 309.7286 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.375 MWIPS
RAM access : 2194 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 920 Speed index

try to race with me
unreleased wm6 rom made by me running at 624
Integer : 350.1514 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.984 MWIPS
RAM access : 2308 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1691 Speed index

mo3ulla said:
try to race with me
unreleased wm6 rom made by me running at 624
Integer : 350.1514 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.984 MWIPS
RAM access : 2308 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1691 Speed index
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow! that's some speed! why is it not released yet?

MAMAICHs rebuilded sdhc drivers and transcend 8 gb class 6 with command query optimization
Storage Card (write); 1630.67;KB/sec
Storage Card (read); 4629.06;KB/sec

mo3ulla said:
MAMAICHs rebuilded sdhc drivers and transcend 8 gb class 6 with command query optimization
Storage Card (write); 1630.67;KB/sec
Storage Card (read); 4629.06;KB/sec
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
when will you release it?

mo3ulla said:
MAMAICHs rebuilded sdhc drivers and transcend 8 gb class 6 with command query optimization
Storage Card (write); 1630.67;KB/sec
Storage Card (read); 4629.06;KB/sec
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, Mo3ulla has my full attention now His previous ROMs have been fast as hell ... when is this one being released? can't wait to switch!!

Wow Smoking Rom!!!!
can't wait to test your super ROM.......Cheers!
mo3ulla said:
MAMAICHs rebuilded sdhc drivers and transcend 8 gb class 6 with command query optimization
Storage Card (write); 1630.67;KB/sec
Storage Card (read); 4629.06;KB/sec
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

by now sd drivers have some bugs and some not good things
1. sometimes after sleep sd write operatons totally not working .. sd becames as read only
2. command quering (addon for system storage manager) . takes some processor time 3-8% depens on many things..
3. system predictive read (new system service)(works on all system flash disks )- takes 2mb of ram // also not good for 64mb unis ... becose buffer size (this buffer creates for all disks ,, 1 disk 1 buffer) floating (2-10mb) also as feature this thing can lost data
4. also entire fat filesystem will stored in ram (1 mb)
5. system predictive write (service ) which virtually splits free space on blocks (1 mb free continius space then 3mb then 10 mb then 50 then 100mb ) this help system to define write place .. takes 1-2 mb (also it will alert about critical fragmentation )

and final thing ..... system storage (G3) via new imgfs driver and new services
Main storage (write); 1707.18;KB/sec
Main storage (read);3213.26;KB/sec
softreset in 15 seconds

With Pdaviet 2.11.15F (18533), my results:
Overclock at 624 mhz:
Integer : 311.2670 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.382 MWIPS
RAM access : 2204 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 938 Speed index

Mike117 said:
With Pdaviet 2.11.15F (18533), my results:
Overclock at 624 mhz:
Integer : 311.2670 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.382 MWIPS
RAM access : 2204 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 938 Speed index
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got faster results with this modifications:
1. Change the file system cache and file filters cache to automatic (0)
2. Change the glyph cache back to default (8192)

willy792003 said:
I got faster results with this modifications:
1. Change the file system cache and file filters cache to automatic (0)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you change it (where is it)?
Marco.

Jmp_3f8h said:
How did you change it (where is it)?
Marco.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HKLM\System\StorageManager\FATFS\CacheSize=0
HKLM\System\StorageManager\Filters\fsreplxfilt\ReplStoreCacheSize=0

willy792003 said:
Here's the results of sk-tools benchmark (both overclocked at 624Mhz)
18533 (pdaviet 2.11.15F)
Integer : 311.2776 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.393 MWIPS
RAM access : 2213 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1391 Speed index
18538 (ivan v3.9)
Integer : 259.6454 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 6.934 MWIPS
RAM access : 1840 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1175 Speed index
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think i know why there's so much diff. on ivan's rom, although i use the performance tool to oc to 624Mhz, it never really goes there (i use sk-tools to check the current cpu clock). so i am wondering is there anything needs to be done before i can oc my uni (registry edit, etc.)?

willy792003 said:
i think i know why there's so much diff. on ivan's rom, although i use the performance tool to oc to 624Mhz, it never really goes there (i use sk-tools to check the current cpu clock). so i am wondering is there anything needs to be done before i can oc my uni (registry edit, etc.)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interesting.
and on other roms - when you check with sktools, you see 624mhz?

shlomki said:
interesting.
and on other roms - when you check with sktools, you see 624mhz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. i see 624Mhz on pdaviet's rom.

this will prove that the performance tools doesn't have effect on ivan's v3.9
i install phm and oc my uni to 624Mhz
here's what i got:
Integer : 314.3258 Moves/25usec
Floating point : 8.395 MWIPS
RAM access : 2192 Speed index
Draw bitmaps : 1372 Speed index
now it's similar to what i get on pdaviet rom with performance tools.
any idea?

willy792003 said:
this will prove that the performance tools doesn't have effect on ivan's v3.9
any idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the same problem with latest Jwrightmcps rom (2.12.08): the performance tool (non shipped with the ROM, used as add-on) seems not having effect (altough it states that the overclock is active).
Maybe the performance tool is just an interface to configure some OS component not present in our ROMs
Marco.

New (more accurate) Benchmark? Post Scores!

So I found a "new" benchmarking app. PassMark Perfomance Test Beta.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.passmark.pt_mobile
PassMark is a developer of some PC benchmarks, so I believe them to be reputable programmers. Anyways, it has a slew of testing "stuff" (for lack of a better word), similar to CF-benchmark, but is more well rounded instead of CPU-centered. I would like to see if kernels/roms/etc have any impact on performance in this benchmark.
Here are my scores:
Samsung Droid Charge
GummyCharged 1.9.1
imoseyon 13.3 kernel, voodoo lagfix enabled
100-1400MhZ; I/O-Deadline; Governor: conservative
Loopy Smoothness, V6 Supercharger, 3G Turbocharger
32GB Samsung Class 2 SD
CPU: 1590
Integer Math: 44.8 MOps/Sec
Floating Point Math: 57.3 MOps/Sec
Find Prime Numbers: 24.8 thousand/sec
Random String Sort: 400 thousand/sec
Data Encryption: 232.1 Kbytes/sec
Data Compression: 195.5 Kbytes/sec
Disk: 6843
Internal Storage Write: 73.3 Mbytes/Sec
Internal Storage Read: 23.4 Mbytes/Sec
External Storage Write: 76.9 Mbytes/Sec
External Storage Read: 13.2 Mbytes/Sec
Memory: 1175
Memory Write: 189.7 Mbytes/Sec
Memory Read: 495.2 Mbytes/Sec
2D Graphics: 1646
Solid Vectors: 3515.2 Vectors/Sec
Transparent Vectors: 2567.6 Vectors/Sec
Complex Vectors: 82.4 Vectors/Sec
Image Rendering: 589.8 Images/Sec
Image Filters: 54.3 Filters/Sec
3D Graphics: 2076
Simple: 57 FPS
Complex: 56.8 FPS
Combined Score: 13330
I also have scores from my Galaxy Tab 7 if anyone would like to see them, but I don't have time to post right now.

Seems good, I'll post back in a day or two with my scores, calibrating teh batturiez right now.

Non-oc imnuts kernel on humble 1.51
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk

Arrow New (more accurate) Benchmark? Post Scores!
Please delete

kvswim said:
So I found a "new" benchmarking app. PassMark Perfomance Test Beta.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.passmark.pt_mobile
PassMark is a developer of some PC benchmarks, so I believe them to be reputable programmers. Anyways, it has a slew of testing "stuff" (for lack of a better word), similar to CF-benchmark, but is more well rounded instead of CPU-centered. I would like to see if kernels/roms/etc have any impact on performance in this benchmark.
Here are my scores:
Samsung Droid Charge
GummyCharged 1.9.1
imoseyon 13.3 kernel, voodoo lagfix enabled
100-1400MhZ; I/O-Deadline; Governor: conservative
Loopy Smoothness, V6 Supercharger, 3G Turbocharger
32GB Samsung Class 2 SD
CPU: 1590
Integer Math: 44.8 MOps/Sec
Floating Point Math: 57.3 MOps/Sec
Find Prime Numbers: 24.8 thousand/sec
Random String Sort: 400 thousand/sec
Data Encryption: 232.1 Kbytes/sec
Data Compression: 195.5 Kbytes/sec
Disk: 6843
Internal Storage Write: 73.3 Mbytes/Sec
Internal Storage Read: 23.4 Mbytes/Sec
External Storage Write: 76.9 Mbytes/Sec
External Storage Read: 13.2 Mbytes/Sec
Memory: 1175
Memory Write: 189.7 Mbytes/Sec
Memory Read: 495.2 Mbytes/Sec
2D Graphics: 1646
Solid Vectors: 3515.2 Vectors/Sec
Transparent Vectors: 2567.6 Vectors/Sec
Complex Vectors: 82.4 Vectors/Sec
Image Rendering: 589.8 Images/Sec
Image Filters: 54.3 Filters/Sec
3D Graphics: 2076
Simple: 57 FPS
Complex: 56.8 FPS
Combined Score: 13330
MORE INFORMATION YES, BUT TAKES LIKE 3 TIMES LONGER TO COMPLETE...
My scores are almost the same as the ( ^^^^^^ ) post #3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Won't let me install My charge is greyed out on the market page. Running GummyGBE

hoppermi said:
Won't let me install My charge is greyed out on the market page. Running GummyGBE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strange. Have you tried clearing market data?
Sent from my Droid Charge running GummyFroyo 1.9.1

Imoseyon kernel 1 ghz. Humble 1.51.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk

Very slow Random Write Speed on Androbench result, on Android Pie os

Hi all,
I wrote the below message in HTC forum, but unable to upload picture
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear HTC,
1) Refer to this webpage: https://www.notebookcheck.net/HTC-U11-Plus-Smartphone-Review.287370.0.html
The Androbench result under Oreo os is as follow
Random Write 4KB @ 135.69
Random Read 4GB @ 132.39
Sequential Write @ 207.94
Sequential Read @ 728.37
2) Refer to my attached picture
The phone is now under Pie os
Why does the Random Write speed being reduced drastically ? it is on 20mb/s now.....What is happening ?
Why does HTC do this ?
Please explain
Please revert the Random Write Speed back to the value same as Oreo os
---------------------------------------------------

My thread in HTC forum is this
https://community.htc.com/tw/chat.php?mod=viewthread&tid=103073

Am really very disappointed with HTC

slow Sequential Read affecting mobile performance.

My Redmi Note 6 pro was showing a delay in opening an app. My older phones were definitely not that slow.
So I thought something is surely wrong with my phone. after lot of investigation, I found that my sequential read speed of flash was slow. So It also slowed boot time.
I used "cross platform Disk Test" from playstore.
All other parameters were OK but the Seq read was nearly 5 times slow.
My mobile seq Read speed 34MB/S
My older mobile speed was around 135MB/S
The reference of other Note 6 was 200MB/S
Now I am not sure if my flash went bad ( which I feel unlikely) or its New update MIUI Global 12.0.1
is a problem.
Can someone here please test with "cross platform Disk Test", if your mobile has MIUI 12.0.1 and post results here. That would help me understand if the update is a problem.
I am attaching my mobile test screenshots.
Thanks

Simply try another ROM