Now that both kernels are out and a lot of people have had time to play with them, I was just curious as to anyones preferable tastes, stats, why's, issues, side by side comparisons, recommendations, settings, what rom your running, things of that nature.
Well apparently BFS was developed by an Australian anesthesiologist and everyone knows Australia sucks, so go with CFS.
Seriously though, I get consistently higher Quadrant scores, 5-10 points at the most, with BFS but the applications and webpages seem to load slower. I don't normally use Quadrant to call or text so I have CFS flashed. Thanks to Decadenc3 and Conap they're both pretty stable and easily interchangeable.
CFS is the standard honestly. CFS is best for multitasking and general use. If you're going to use something like an emulator or a lot of heavy games I suggest BFS, since it's best at single tasks and making the best of minimal hardware.
I agree with the above. I got a 480 with BFS on the Quadrant benchmark test, but CFS is better for me in terms of day to day and I still hit high 460s.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA App
CFS is running flawlessly for me on Nonsensikal. Everything feels more responsive.
Sent from my Nonsensikal Froyo Eris of beastly-ness.
CFS
Sent from my FroyoEris using XDA App
Y'all like some chicken fried steak!
Ok, since it hasn't been stated:
in a nutshell..
BFS is designed to focus on the main app installed, and process everything around the open app.
CFS is built around multi-tasking power.
If you want high scores (aka focused power), use BFS.
If you want fluidity and ease of use throughout the full phone (multitasking) use CFS.
In general most people will prefer CFS because you notice less issues. If your a single app kind of person use BFS since your focused, but your scrolling, and swiping actions will be a little more laggy.
Izeltokatl,
That's basically what I was getting at in post #3, if you want to do a single task as fast as possible use BFS, otherwise stick to CFS for overall stability and multitasking.
Thanks guys, CFS it is!
Related
So I've gotten anywhere between 2.5 to 5.1 MFLOPS using various ROMS and have yet to be able to notice something incredibly different.
710...768...806 - What does it matter? What program other than Linpack shows a sizable difference? Sure, maybe things open quicker? What am I missing here?
I read all this about achieving high MFLOPS and OC Kernels yet I still can't achieve smooth game play on 16 bit emulator on my phone with 5 MFLOPS.
MFLOPS mean jack when there is little way to observe the difference.
Carreno43 said:
So I've gotten anywhere between 2.5 to 5.1 MFLOPS using various ROMS and have yet to be able to notice something incredibly different.
710...768...806 - What does it matter? What program other than Linpack shows a sizable difference? Sure, maybe things open quicker? What am I missing here?
I read all this about achieving high MFLOPS and OC Kernels yet I still can't achieve smooth game play on 16 bit emulator on my phone with 5 MFLOPS.
MFLOPS mean jack when there is little way to observe the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linpack MFLOPS - measures the floating point performance of your phone.
710...768...806 - refers to CPU frequencies
increasing the CPU frequency should equate to better general-case performance, including things opening quicker as you mention, but also other types of general snappiness like moving between screens and so forth.
"I read all this about achieving high MFLOPS and OC Kernels yet I still can't achieve smooth game play on 16 bit emulator on my phone with 5 MFLOPS." - This may have less to do with the performance of your phone and more to do with the emulator itself. Emulation is a surprisingly CPU intensive operation, especially if the emulater isn't well written. Rather than looking a ton into overclocking and JIT, etc, maybe you ought to look for a better piece of software.
Yea,
I've tested most emulators. Wish there was an Atari emulator!
Thanks for the response.
Carreno43 said:
Yea,
I've tested most emulators. Wish there was an Atari emulator!
Thanks for the response.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have run roms with 5.1 MFLOPS and now am running a rom that gets 3. I can honestly say I see no difference.
Spencer_Moore said:
I have run roms with 5.1 MFLOPS and now am running a rom that gets 3. I can honestly say I see no difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see a difference... in battery life! Lolz
g00gl3 said:
I can see a difference... in battery life! Lolz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha Awesome
it looks like to me that everyone is look at the wrong things.
for example:
I am running a Tom that is getting on a average of 4.9 mflops.
I get smoother screen changes....
streaming videos online is so much faster compared to a 3.0 mflop rom. ...
tubetube and other....... websites.
to me everything I do is faster...
I.don't play game on my phone so I don't know how that is.... but everythng else I do is very much faster.
I love high mflop roms...
I have notice about mflops is that it matters about the kernal that u use.
Isn't it true that the MSM7201 in our phones is already overclocked to get to 528mhz as it is? I see a lot of different places saying Qualcomm chips in general are just not worth overclocking... and since our chip is factory overclocked to begin with... just seems like we're pushing the already-pushed here. But the way this board goes crazy for overclocking... it's contradictory. I don't know what to think, cause I've run Linpack myself and gotten ~4.9 with JIT + OC versus ~2.5 without... but I'm with the OP on this one... only difference I'm seeing is my battery draining faster and my phone getting physically hotter.
xatch said:
Isn't it true that the MSM7201 in our phones is already overclocked to get to 528mhz as it is? I see a lot of different places saying Qualcomm chips in general are just not worth overclocking... and since our chip is factory overclocked to begin with... just seems like we're pushing the already-pushed here. But the way this board goes crazy for overclocking... it's contradictory. I don't know what to think, cause I've run Linpack myself and gotten ~4.9 with JIT + OC versus ~2.5 without... but I'm with the OP on this one... only difference I'm seeing is my battery draining faster and my phone getting physically hotter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have OC and JIT and getting about 5.1 mflops and haven't had worse battery life or a hotter phone. It could be the battery I'm using but meh (got a replacement one that's 2000 mAh) but I got worse battery life on leak 2.1 than with the rom I'm using now that has OC, JIT, LWP, etc. I can go about 8 hours with heavy texting, moderate internet usage and my lwp's running and it only goes to about 65%
so OC and Jit don't make that big of a difference in gameplay?
Sent from my Eris using the XDA mobile application powered by Tapatalk
What the OP and all the respondents are noting is frankly quite typical of what happens when performance tuning focuses on a single benchmark: the results obtained are essentially meaningless for different kinds of activities on the same device.
That's because there's a whole chain of dependencies that are specific to a given task, any number of which could become the rate-limiting factor; and a different task on the device will have a different set of dependencies and therefore different rate-limiting behaviors.
For instance, let's take writing to an SD card as an example: there's really no way that OC'ing will speed that up in a measurable way - because the CPU isn't the rate limiting factor.
That Linpack benchmark measures floating-point performance using a software library (as the Eris has no hardware FP capability). Most of the apps on the phone do very little FP work at all. But, it's not a bad test of CPU speed, because it performs no I/O. It also may not be very memory bandwidth intensive, either (if the problems it works on stays in the uP cache and there are few page faults).
OTOH, a game emulator needs to write to the graphics display (at a minimum) and possibly also do read I/O from flash.
Different task, different results. Sometimes things can be improved by hardware or firmware; sometimes the software itself needs to be improved.
bftb0
im sorry, but could you just answer in plain english
Sent from my Eris using the XDA mobile application powered by Tapatalk
TheSonicEmerald said:
im sorry, but could you just answer in plain english
Sent from my Eris using the XDA mobile application powered by Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lima beans bad.
Pork good.
Slow phone bad.
Fast phone good.
bftb0
Thanks for my laugh of the day on that one.
What I'm trying to get at is -
I should be able to play, at the basic level, Sonic or Mario - Without issues.
At the very least
I prefer roms over market games any day (Sonic, Mario, Zelda, DK-Country) and it cripples the phone, at least in my view, that I cannot enjoy the fruits of old games.
Although, I was able to find some old Atari games - which, thankfully, work without stuttering.
I know for the droid there are lots of custom kernels that use very low voltages for high speeds. Do we have custom kernels like this?
The processor in our phone is that of the original 2g/3g iPhone, the 528mhz Qualcomm (that should have been updated 3 years ago).
The processor in the Droid is the same as the iPhone 3gs (except 550mhz clocked instead of 600mhz).
The Droid processor has a floating point co-processor (sort of) which is why the Linpack scores are WAY higher than ours (it doesn't actually mean the phone is faster, it just does certain floating point operations faster).
The Droid processor is also SEVERELY underclocked, probably for power reasons. There is more of a demand in the Droid crowd to control power usage while still increasing speed (hence the low-voltage kernels, etc). "Lower voltages" are found by using different ways to multiply the frequency, but in a processor like ours, we are limited in the different speeds we can multiply (not to mention a ceiling of reasonable operation being usually 800mhz or below).
See, some people want their droids to be at 800mhz. They want that great battery life, to keep things cool, and a small performance boost.
Some want to go up to 1300mhz, maybe because they play games, or because the think they're cool, or whatever. That requires different methods for overclocking (depending on which exact speeds) and uses a lot more juice. You could use a 1300mhz kernel and keep it down around 800mhz (or whatever specific speeds the kernel allows), but that kernel might not be built for low voltage - you might just be still multiplying a number that keeps your voltage high, instead of the 800mhz Kernel that only goes so high, but keeps things easier on the battery.
Our Eris processors are more limited. Pretty much, you want your Eris OC'd (usually to the 700+mhz somewhere is all you get), or you don't. If you don't want it OC'd, you just don't install SetCPU. If you do, you install and use it (or whatever other overclocking app/widget you want).
To use your Eris low voltage, you pretty much need to stay 480mhz or lower. I keep my sleep SetCPU Profile at 122mhz-480mhz. VERY good on battery, and it throttles up to 480mhz (so the phone rings faster) when it's time for a call to come in.
Some Kernels have some things enabled (netfilter for wifi tethering and other things, a2sd enabled, overclocking, etc - depending on how it's put together). It's probably best to have a kernel that allows everything, since with our processors, there's not much of a power drain penalty (none that I know of in fact) for having a different kernel, and just running at 528mhz. I notice no battery difference at 806mhz in fact, it's a matter of having SetCPU profiles (or whatever) set up correctly and effectively.
Here are a few Kernels you might find (but most are incorporated in ROMs already, so you'll virtually NEVER have to flash it - except that I use Ivan's Eris_Official 1.0 ROM with zanfur's beautiful v3 kernel - it works perfectly at 806mhz on my Eris).
AOSP kernel with all the goodies:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=688275&highlight=kernel
Zanfur's kernel (my favorite):
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=679102&highlight=kernel
Kaos posted this one for AOSP:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=688439&highlight=kernel
Darchstar posted this one:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=686797&highlight=kernel
The point is that for us, it's not that useful to flash kernels. Most of the ROMs you'll download (even the most 'basic' ones) have all the goodies enabled on the Kernel.
Different phone, different hardware, different ballgame.
God damn. Best answer I could have hoped for. Seriously thanks a ton man, that was everything I could have wanted to know thoroughly explained.
nvm. answered my own question hah
I'm on Conap's new CFS Kernel. I multitask a lot so that's the kernel for me. Everything feels more responsive. Like 1.5x the responsiveness from the (I think) BFS kernel nonsensikal comes with. I typed all of this without even a hint of lag.
Sent from my nonsensikal froyo using XDA App
Yeah I've learned a lot since I made this topic a few months ago lol
I'm on V4 cfs
5thAgent said:
I'm on Conap's new CFS Kernel. I multitask a lot so that's the kernel for me. Everything feels more responsive. Like 1.5x the responsiveness from the (I think) BFS kernel nonsensikal comes with. I typed all of this without even a hint of lag.
Sent from my nonsensikal froyo using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which keyboard did you use?
I'm using Kaos's DroidX keyboard - Froyo port.
Sent from my nonsensikal froyo using XDA App
Hey all,
I come from an extensive background in OC'ing my own systems, pushing them to the extreme for noticeable performance increases. The one thing I know though, is that it does add wear and tear on the components, and shortens their lifespan. Is overclocking the Vibrant really worth it? I'm not sure if, with a ROM like Axura 2.2.5.7 which is blazing fast already, an extra 100 or 200 mHz is really worth the risk/performance.
What do you all say?
howetechnical said:
Hey all,
I come from an extensive background in OC'ing my own systems, pushing them to the extreme for noticeable performance increases. The one thing I know though, is that it does add wear and tear on the components, and shortens their lifespan. Is overclocking the Vibrant really worth it? I'm not sure if, with a ROM like Axura 2.2.5.7 which is blazing fast already, an extra 100 or 200 mHz is really worth the risk/performance.
What do you all say?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the only reason i OC is basically just so i can tell myself that i am OCing. If that makes ANY sense. its basically just my phone OCD.
to answer your question, even though you kind of already answered it yourself: the only reason you would actually NEED to OC is if you game a lot on your phone, if you do a lot of multitasking, or if you have a lot of data transfering going on (which i do). other than that, our processor is pretty powerful, and can handle 95% of what is thrown at it.
With that said, since youve indicated that you are satisifed with your phones performance, i would say the only thing you should definately do is install a lagfix (if you havnt already). if you dont need to OC, do your battery/hardware a favor, and dont.....unless you have phone OCD like myself.
PS - not to ramble on, but there was actually a 2-day period where i actually wasnt OCed and i didnt know it (i guess my app reset itself or something). i remember saying to myself during that time that my phone phone seemed a little laggy and much slower than usual....then once i discovered that my OC wasnt applied, it made sense. but keep in mind, i have my phone doing a lotttttt of things constantly, so OCing may not have the effect on lighter users that it does on myself. pretty crazy what a .2 ghz difference makes
Like above stated, OC is only needed if you do some intensive task on your phone. In addition, most of the Overclocking Kernels are targeted at a broad audience, what I meant by that is the developer bumps up the voltage enough so that only a small amount of people experience crashes. However, user generally have no control over the voltage themselves and any increase in voltage is bad for electronic components. (exception being some of Eugene's kernels which allows UV by user).
I don't, its not needed. I like my battery life.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
I dont usually oc unless I am near a power source. last night i tried the Dow kernals and wow my phone was dead within ours even while in standby. Imo thats just nuts. Even while Oc'd it shouldnt die that way.
What I am looking for is a kernal thats compatible with nero v3 that will maintain battery life aslong as I dont oc.
I have seen this post http://eb-productions.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=samsungsgs&action=display&thread=28&page=1 on Eugenes forum but non of the info makes sense. The one that does make sense has a older modem than the one I am using.
I guess I am use to the hd2 in which I would underclock to maintain decent battery life and use profiles. It doesnt seem like this cpu likes the profiles. amirite?
I would OC no question if we could get a UV kernel with good battery life like we did with Eclair. I won't do it with Froyo because of the terrible battery on i9000 kernels.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
What TopShelf10 said is correct. Basically the trade off is this.... faster kernel.......quicker battery drain. That is the trade off. I have used oc kernels ...I do not use the phone for games, so EVERY thing I do on the phone the oc is not necessary. That statement is true for 95% of us.
BUT, that said, there is some cool macho feeling you get when your phone is in overdrive, just like my car, 350 hp but I live on an island that only allows 25mph speed limit...still, it doesn't change that feeling of awesomeness I get when I start the engine
I had nothing but issues with each and every OC ROM I tried. App alarm, pandora, slacker, ect. It was always something. My phone would actually get random freezes so it made the phone feel slower. Voodoo or OCLF on the other hand work wonders.
is it worth it?
well, here were the trades i had with dow14:
going from 13-14mflops to 18-19mflops in linpack (yeah, it's a benchmark, but it's hard to otherwise convey how the oc directly translated to the phone being extremely fast otherwise).
battery life went from easily going 22+ hours between charges to going 6-8 hours between charges.
however, with the core 1.2 oc i had great battery life and performance. so i assume (and have gathered from reading people more knowledgeable than me) the battery downside is due to it being a i9000 kernel. so hopefully/eventually we will get source for the vibrant 2.2 kernel and get an oc kernel with similar performance but much better battery life.
and until i flashed nero v3 and using voodoo, i kept super io and dow14 kernels on my phone so i could flash the oc if i wanted the performance or flash super io for battery life/day to day.
Ever since I got my hands on MIUI and the Glitch ML kernel, I've been amazed at the undervolt results I've been able to achieve.
I assume I'm not the only one messing around with their voltage settings, nor am I the only one doing so on the Glitch kernel.
Question is, how low can you go? My settings are in my signature, but how far have the rest of you Glitch folk been able to go using the ML or LL kernels? Post your results below!
For myself, I'm currently testing out the low end of the spectrum, seeing how low I can get the 100mhz and 200mhz range and still be stable. Even using 200/100 as my Screen Off profile. I never get sleep of death with Glitch ML.
Either no one reads the General forums, or few people care much for battery savings. Oh well.
It's not that, the lower the volts, the slower the phone. I'm undervolt; games lag
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Why would undervolting lag the phone? I'm undervolting, not underclocking. Games I play are as snappy as they've ever been.
It depends on phone i cant go under 25 my other vibrant could go -200 on 100mhz
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Hello! i am in the process of overclocking my thunderbolt in order to get better performance with the eternity rom, and i was wondering what you guys oc your phones to? and if you do, what program/setting do you use to do so? (i plan to use a script in init after have found suitable settings)
I, personally, find it pointless to OC the Thunderbolt. The phone is fast and smooth enough for me on the stock speed, plus the battery life is bad enough without adding more strain to it.
However, if you insist on OC'ing, 1.2GHz is a safe bet. Some people can get to 1.4GHz, but then you run into freezing and random reboots. Also remember that individual phones handle overclocking differently. Where one phone can run perfect at 1.4GHz, another might freeze instantly when going that high.
Good OC'ing programs include SetCPU, No Frills CPU, and ROM Toolbox.
I don't overclock. That being said i have OC'd my phone b4 i have had it up to 1.8 Ghz stable, but it doesnt seem to make anything run faster. I use the Thundershed version of CM7 and its super fast. I dont think it could get much faster. and without overclocking i get better battery life.
thanks for the info actually ended up going with the lean kernel which is oc'd on the kernel level, works fairly well
lacrosse1991 said:
thanks for the info actually ended up going with the lean kernel which is oc'd on the kernel level, works fairly well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Leankernel is tops. I use battsaver mode which is stock speed and undervolted. Smooth as butter on my phone.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium