Related
Does anyone feel like posting their benchmarks on the custom ROMs they are running? I know not every GTab will run the same but I would like to get a basic idea of what the hottest scores are. Thanks.
TNT Lite 4.3.x with stock kernel is ~40 fps (Nenamark) and ~2300 in Quadrant. On average.
There are definitely higher scores than that, with some of the other modded ROMs.
2200 with vegan 5.11 Benchmark Atuntu
Thank you guys for posting your benches. I had seen some one some where, posting that they get 60fps. Any one getting 60fps?
there is guide in dev forum where you can get up to 77fps, but the recomended is under 75.
You might mean the frame rate. The default is 50, but TNT Lite and gADAM up the frame rate to 60. At least one mod ups it to 77.
That's not really a benchmark, though - I assumed you meant something like Quadrant.
Im running caulkins rom and clemsyn's kernel #6. I'm averaging around 2400 on quadrant and 3000 on smartbench. The only thing faster on smartbench is overclocked xoom
It looks like most of the new ROMs run pretty fast. If i can get 2200-2500 in Quadrant I will be happy.
I get a little over 3000 qudrant
johnboyjr said:
I get a little over 3000 qudrant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what ROM/mods you are running?
i got several scores in the 2400s today and one personal best of 2518.
@johnboyjr
Are you bull****'n? 3000? i havent seen anyone say they are hitting the 3000 mark. I'd like to know what you're running too. Did you overclock? I dont think i want to overclock mine.
nsmartinez79 said:
Im running caulkins rom and clemsyn's kernel #6. I'm averaging around 2400 on quadrant and 3000 on smartbench. The only thing faster on smartbench is overclocked xoom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the same setup on my gtab... got 39.1 fps in nenamark, and 2399 in quadrant.
I just set my gtab up today so it doesn't have much on it yet.
There is a post in the development section by chengu that has a loopback fix that enhances read/write speeds on the internal SD. This makes the I/O part of quadrant way faster. I have posted on that thread vegan stock 10x average is 2500+. With the loopback fix its a 10x average of 3100 with peaks of 3333. So no its not BS but really how much do quadrant (or any other test) effect daily functionality.? It is great for bragging rights though, especially to xoomers.
Sent from my Chromatic Magic using XDA Premium App
Mantara said:
There is a post in the development section by chengu that has a loopback fix that enhances read/write speeds on the internal SD. This makes the I/O part of quadrant way faster. I have posted on that thread vegan stock 10x average is 2500+. With the loopback fix its a 10x average of 3100 with peaks of 3333. So no its not BS but really how much do quadrant (or any other test) effect daily functionality.? It is great for bragging rights though, especially to xoomers.
Sent from my Chromatic Magic using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mantara, do you still have the link for loopback fix? I could not find it .
Thanks a lot in advance.
njshkb said:
Mantara, do you still have the link for loopback fix? I could not find it .
Thanks a lot in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=902426
Fyi: restart your tab 5 or six times, I know I sounds weird but it takes that many to streamline it completely. Let it stabilize after boot and then power down, wait 20 sectonds and and power on. It wil take up to six minutes on first boot and get less each time.
It uses boot time to write changes.
Have fun ;-)
loopback fix like others have said
Is there any down fall to using the loop back fix? Heat issues or failure? Why isnt anyone implementing this into their ROMs?
No adverse side effects that I have noticed. Most people have noticed a slight increese in playing video from internal memory and web browsing cashed sights. Read the thread its full of good info.
Sent from my Chromatic Magic using XDA Premium App
I was bored at work and decided to run Quadrant Standard on our demo phones (out of the box/factory reset). This is what I got. Figured some people would be interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMa8zz6zmmM
flawlessbmxr said:
I was bored at work and decided to run Quadrant Standard on our demo phones (out of the box/factory reset). This is what I got. Figured some people would be interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMa8zz6zmmM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm assuming the last / highest score was the Photon? Couldn't really tell, lmao. Needed to pan out a bit on the last few phones.
No way I trust Quadrant with dual core phones right now.
I was getting 2400 on my stock unrooted Evo 3D when others were bragging on 2000 with overclocked. After I posted pix of that, I got rooters tinkering until they got 3000.
If you can game the benchmark, what are you testing?
Personally, and no one asked me - I recommend CF-Bench for CPU/Java info, Nenamark2 for dual core fps tests, and if you're interested in checking out your browser, Vellamo.
Hope this helps!
Bandage said:
I'm assuming the last / highest score was the Photon? Couldn't really tell, lmao. Needed to pan out a bit on the last few phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea...last one was the Photon. Looks like it was clocking in @ 2320.
Don't need quadrant scores to tell the Photon is a faster phone.
My lowest Quadrant score on the Photon has been 1600, and the highest 3100 (yes, it actually hit this ONE time). My typical score is around 2500.
With such variability, I wouldn't trust this benchmark as far as I can throw it. Bottom line is that the phone is more than fast enough for me, and plays all of my Tegra 2 games without issue. And, anyways, I don't think we'll see any truly game-changing increases in performance until the next generation comes around (I'm liking Kal-El myself), so letting benchmarks sway one's phone decision today seems a little short-sighted.
Hello XDA
This is my first tome to start a thread, hopefully I do it right
I am just confused on how ROMs show High Benchmark results in there screenshots, but when I try to do a benchmark on my Ace I get a VERY Low result compared to what it's supposed to be, Though I have made sure no apps are running in the background, and cleared my RAM, even after checking the Media tweak, Still Very low result, Can anyone Clarify me on how to make my phone better or is that I am doing something wrong?
I am using the glmst v2 KPO ROM
Don't even worry about it. With coderom I had 1927 max. Now with gingerReal I only get 1000+, but I feel this rom much better. So I dont rely anymore on quadrant scores. I suggest you to do the same.
even if u got trillion benchmark score it doesnt mean anything.. nowadays benchmark score is crap, doesnt mean a squat. i said that because gingerbread had some problem with quadrant, thus its result is inconsistent. even there are rom makers that spoof quadrant score by tinkering with phone i/o value to make their rom looks like it got highest benchmark score. i even found an app here on xda that automate that i/o spoof, install it and u'll get godlike quadrant score.
edited: the app to spoof benchmark score like i said is that in skynet post below. that should spike anyone quadrant score to 5000
Quadrant benchmark does not mean anything....its only relevant for lagfix or filesystem changes or some kernel tweaks. Otherwise it can be hacked easily to show high benchmark scores. Someone even showed quadrant benchmark above 2100 in ace by an app which hacked quadrant .
Yes there is even an app called quadrant booster which utilizes i/o hack to boost scores by Doomlord here-http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=17110408
Ok thanks guys..... Its that it gets annoying when u dont get what the rom promises ya
I'm debating on taking back my device due to getting such low stock Quadrant scores. Around 850 stock on average.
What's everyone else getting? Am I the only one with such low scores? I appreciate any feedback!
Benchmarks are worthless in general, Quadrant is incredibly worthless because it doesn't break down the scores and is EASILY gamed.
For example, disabling per-file fsync on an ext4 system gains you 600 points or so instantly.
Enabling Stagefright on Samsungs gets you 500-1000 points but breaks media playback.
I'm not talking about using mods at all though. I'm just saying I'm getting half of what I've seen as the average STOCK 1Ghz score for this device. My 800 @ 1Ghz vs. others 1600-ish @ 1GHz. I just want to know if anyone else is getting around my scores (800ish) without mods.
What other devices?
I get about 1300-1400 stock...
Hi,
I just ran it on my (US/rooted) SGP5, and got 947.
I noticed that on the comparison graph, there's Samsung Galaxy S, that had slightly lower number ...
Jim
P.S. FYI, I used Fast Boot, to kill all processes, just before running the Quadrant test. I'm not sure if that affected anything.
BTW, Quadrant gives HEAVY weighting to file I/O scores - so Voodoo Lagfix-enabled devices and native-ext4 ones will smoke RFS devices.
tcb4 said:
I get about 1300-1400 stock...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Wow! Do you know how you got such scores? What have you done to your device (and what is it)?
As I posted, I just got 947 on my SGP5. It's stock, other than being rooted.
Jim
Entropy,
Your completely missing my point... Here it is again. "My SGP5 is getting around 850~average scores on Quadrant stock, as in, in the state it was when I took it out of the box. Reviewers and other owners of this device are getting much higher quadrant scores with their STOCK devices as well.
When I overclock to 1.3GHz, I get around 1400 average while other SGP5's get around 2k+ at 1.3GHz. I just want to see how many are also experiencing such low scores as I am.
As I said, many of the reviewers online say that the SGP5 gets around 1400-1600 with Quadrant without any modifications or rooting. I get around 850. Please stop with the "Well Quadrant isn't accurate because, if you mod it like this.. you get this", I'll say it again, My. Device. Is. Stock. It's not modified, I didn't do anything to it to boost the score or lower it.
You're missing my point.
Quadrant is unreliable and inconsistent as hell. It can vary by hundreds of points from run to run, it's easily gamed, it will do weird unpredictable things if you look at it the wrong way. Plain and simple, it sucks and its results are utterly and completely worthless.
You ARE benchmarking with the CPU governor set to performance, right? Benchmarks with the governor in play are even more worthless and variable.
I just saw 600 points difference between two runs with the same kernel - 992 once, 1619 the next.
I've gotten consistent bench marking results every time, consistently low, but consistant.... Do you own a SGP and can say this from experience or just because you have a similar Android device? I actually own a SGP5 and haven't seen the "992 once, 1619 next" at all... I've never gotten above 1619 or ever had a jump of more than 100 on the same frequency.
Unless your testing this for yourself on the device in question, please stop once again...
Yes, I own an SGP 5. I unboxed it last night. I actually ran Quadrant again, 1700 the next time around. Just more evidence that it's crappy and meaningless. Benchmarks in general suck, but Quadrant is especially bad. At least Antutu is fairly consistent AND breaks out scores by category.
It's consistent with every other device I've ever owned - run-to-run variances of a few hundred points.
Note that over time, your scores will go down on this device because RFS sucks and becomes slower as it's used, and as I said, I/O performance is weighted HEAVILY.
RFS sucking is a known problem with old Samsungs, that's why Voodoo Lagfix exists.
Returning a device based on Quadrant scores is stupid on an epic scale given what a horrifically worthless and inconsistent benchmark it is...
Around 1300.
Heh, anyways.
What's Voodoo lagfix? And RTS? If you don't mind me asking, not familiar with those two. And so far it performs pretty well @ 1.5GHz with 2000+ quad scores, downloading Antutu now.
ZaIINN said:
Heh, anyways.
What's Voodoo lagfix? And RTS? If you don't mind me asking, not familiar with those two. And so far it performs pretty well @ 1.5GHz with 2000+ quad scores, downloading Antutu now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RFS is ? File System - it's some special Samsung file system that just kinda sucks.
ext4 is the current standard Android filesystem format, which is MUCH better.
(think of it as being like NTFS vs FAT on a PC)
Voodoo Lagfix is a set of initramfs scripts that automatically convert RFS partitions to ext4, improving read/write performance a lot.
Entropy512 said:
RFS is ? File System - it's some special Samsung file system that just kinda sucks.
ext4 is the current standard Android filesystem format, which is MUCH better.
(think of it as being like NTFS vs FAT on a PC)
Voodoo Lagfix is a set of initramfs scripts that automatically convert RFS partitions to ext4, improving read/write performance a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah interesting, I looked into the Lagfix; Think it would work the same for the SGP as it does for the galaxy?
ZaIINN said:
Ah interesting, I looked into the Lagfix; Think it would work the same for the SGP as it does for the galaxy?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes - it's on my todo list once I get CWM to play nice.
Here is my issue, i decided to randomly run quadrant and found out i had bad results.
Around 3000, i had very low memory and i/o scores, memory being 2000 and i/o around 5000. I then flashed speedmod kernel and got even lower results, 2811 quadrant and 1500 memory, which is far from the default expected values. This happened in GB whith checrom V6 and Siyah Kerner, CM9 and SlimICS with both speedmod and fluxx kernel.
Antutu scores are lower then 6000 ranging from 4900 with SlimICS 5400 with GB and 5300 with CM9, i got back to Slim and cleared cache and got 5900, but quandrant still was performing poorly
You shouldn't rely on quadrant scores to decide whether the ROM is good or not, you should make that judgement for yourself. Sometimes, developers of ROMs make tweaks to purposely increase the quadrant scores.
Casterina said:
You shouldn't rely on quadrant scores to decide whether the ROM is good or not, you should make that judgement for yourself. Sometimes, developers of ROMs make tweaks to purposely increase the quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was just trying to see if there was something wrong with my phone. Not that i would keep the highest numbered ROM. That's why i got worried, the scores were low in almost all of them
Really want to test, flash stock rom and see the numbers flying
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
you can try using different kernels with different cpu governors to see a difference in benchmarks.
Bench marking and quadrant scores are for *******.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA
Basic problem is benchmarks vary from one run to another and are not reliable .
jje
Will a higher score change the way you use your phone?
What difference do the scores mean? Does it make your phone unuseable when you get a lower score? What answers are you hoping to get?
Dont use benchmarks....they arent needed, we already know our phone is fast...just use the phone and enjoy it
mattyh77 said:
Bench marking and quadrant scores are for *******.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lmao
Its all relative to the rom you're using. CM9 I found scored lower on benchmarks, but on real life usage people report better performance
CM7 scored higher for me then stock based GB roms, quite comfortably. So that was the other way round.
However, WanamLite ICS which im using now scores between 6200 and 6300 for me, highest being 6330.
Again its all very relative to the rom you're using. If you're really that bothered flash a stock based ICS rom, run some benchmarks, see the higher values, get content, then either stick or go back to CM based roms with whatever wisdom you've aquired!
By the way all the above was using Antutu.