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.
So I installed SetCPU today. Been testing the kernels ability to work underclocked at the max of 918mhz. Also set the scaling to conservative. After a days use it's been as good as normal full speed, 1512mhz
The battery lasted throughout the day, compared to my first two days of stock settings with only 6 hours of good use.
I'll keep playing. Still want to do some testing and benchmarks to make sure it's not under performing. But at least at the user level it seems to react the same.no lag.
I did confirm the clock speed out side of SetCPU using system panel.
Sent from my rezound.
Don't bother using benchmarks to rate a phones performance that is a fatal error there. Benchmarks never effectively rate a phones performance. I just go by how smooth the phone runs and it does it run everything I throw at it. If so gg pz end of story.
zetsumeikuro said:
Don't bother using benchmarks to rate a phones performance that is a fatal error there. Benchmarks never effectively rate a phones performance. I just go by how smooth the phone runs and it does it run everything I throw at it. If so gg pz end of story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but people still like to get the general idea. There are many factors.hence why I said the over all feel seems the same. Im going to use antutu, and quadrant. 5 times each to get a range.=-)
Sent from my rezound.
Izeltokatl said:
True, but people still like to get the general idea. There are many factors.hence why I said the over all feel seems the same. Im going to use antutu, and quadrant. 5 times each to get a range.=-)
Sent from my rezound.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well whatever works for you. Just saying Quadrant is a poor tool to use to bench for many reasons which I won't go over. Antutu is nice for SD speed testing I think, oter than that meh. Benches are just for numbers for people to flex their epeens with. They just really don't truly gauge a devices performance.
zetsumeikuro said:
Well whatever works for you. Just saying Quadrant is a poor tool to use to bench for many reasons which I won't go over. Antutu is nice for SD speed testing I think, oter than that meh. Benches are just for numbers for people to flex their epeens with. They just really don't truly gauge a devices performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks do have a some good uses... while comparing different phone models with benchmarks can be iffy, it can give an overall insight, (things like graphics capabilities with very GPU extensive games) but in the end user experience and daily use are the real judges.
Where benchmarks can be of the most use, is when comparing changes to the same phone model.
E.G. Comparing performance impacts of AOSP vs Sense, overclocking and under-clocking, and de-sensing/bloat removal.
When used for these reasons, you can get a really good feel for how changes are affecting your device overall. Even then, benchmarks are not the be all end all, and user experience is still important. As you may introduce lag or other performance issues that do not show up in benchmarks.
Which temp root method are you using? Mine isn't staying rooted long enough for me to justify using setCPU at all...
The new version and the one that comes with the newest clean tool stays until reboot.
Marine6680 said:
The new version and the one that comes with the newest clean tool stays until reboot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thx for the info, guess I must still be using the outdated method. I'll run the latest version of Scott's Clean tool and give it a shot.
Izeltokatl said:
So I installed SetCPU today. Been testing the kernels ability to work underclocked at the max of 918mhz. Also set the scaling to conservative. After a days use it's been as good as normal full speed, 1512mhz
The battery lasted throughout the day, compared to my first two days of stock settings with only 6 hours of good use.
I'll keep playing. Still want to do some testing and benchmarks to make sure it's not under performing. But at least at the user level it seems to react the same.no lag.
I did confirm the clock speed out side of SetCPU using system panel.
Sent from my rezound.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please let us know what settings you use that work for you.
I generally stay temprooted unless I'm going to be away from a charger for a bit and need BT (since you can't turn BT back on after temproot). I wouldn't have SetCPU autostart on boot (since it won't ever be able to get root access immediately after boot).
Meanwhile, I also set it to conservative and will see what that accomplishes.
A kernel needs to support setcpu, stock kernels do not. You need to flash a custom kernel, so you need a development phone or s-off.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
This kernel apparently does work with SetCPU. I've confirmed using other cpu monitoring apps that the clock speed changes are capped.
I own 7 android phones, and have been rooting, overclocking, undervolting each and every single one of them (well one I still cant get rooted). I know when the cpu is under clocked and when it is not. Been doing these tweaks for 4 years now. If you use a tool like System Panel, at stock settings you can see the max cpu around 1500 on our little bad boy. When it peaks out the clock speed is shown. When you under clock it, then check again it won't go beyond the max cpu set in my testing I put a ceiling at 918mhz. System Panel reported full CPU usage (100%) at clock speed 918mhz. Typically with stock kernels, your absolutely right, changes to SetCPU do nothing at all to the real cpu. Which is confirmed, when I reboot and dont have root, if I attempt to use SetCPU and make the changes, System Panel reports 1500mhz (roughly) at full load regardless of what I set it to in SetCPU. If I did this to any of my other phones with stock kernels, you are correct it makes no difference as SystemPanel reports the stock max setting.
No I'm not being mean or aggressive, just saying. =-) And no don't believe me, but test it yourself and confirm or prove me wrong some other way and I admit error. Either way, half the fun is messing with the phone and trying to get it to do things it should not do.
Grnlantern79 said:
A kernel needs to support setcpu, stock kernels do not. You need to flash a custom kernel, so you need a development phone or s-off.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my rezound.
Izeltokatl said:
No I'm not being mean or aggressive, just saying. =-) And no don't believe me, but test it yourself and confirm or prove me wrong some other way and I admit error. Either way, half the fun is messing with the phone and trying to get it to do things it should not do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or I would say, "half the fun is messing with the phone and trying to get it to do things it should have always been allowed to do...." Just sayin'.
Are you using the profiles at all? Im interested to know what seems to be working out the best for you.
Izeltokatl said:
True, but people still like to get the general idea. There are many factors.hence why I said the over all feel seems the same. Im going to use antutu, and quadrant. 5 times each to get a range.=-)
Sent from my rezound.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my view, the "benchmarks" would be an OK measurement if you were comparing apples to apples.
I tried running both Linpack and Quadrant on the very recently and dearly departed Incredible right after a fresh reboot and having charged the battery overnight...when the thing should have been at it's freshest.
I got wildly different scores each time I ran it after a reboot...knowing that on both programs the scores would improve the more times you ran the test.
It didn't seem to me that either program was a reliable indicator of what my phone was capable of. I didn't even trust them to tell me whether something I'd done...cleared cache or deleted bloatware...had any real effect.
It simply boils down to how the phone feels. That's not scientific, but it works for me.
douger1957 said:
In my view, the "benchmarks" would be an OK measurement if you were comparing apples to apples.
I tried running both Linpack and Quadrant on the very recently and dearly departed Incredible right after a fresh reboot and having charged the battery overnight...when the thing should have been at it's freshest.
I got wildly different scores each time I ran it after a reboot...knowing that on both programs the scores would improve the more times you ran the test.
It didn't seem to me that either program was a reliable indicator of what my phone was capable of. I didn't even trust them to tell me whether something I'd done...cleared cache or deleted bloatware...had any real effect.
It simply boils down to how the phone feels. That's not scientific, but it works for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linpack and Quadrant are not reliable benchmarks. TBH I don't take any of the benchmarks seriously, they are more for entertainment for me. But to each their own right?
Yeah some of the benchmark apps are a bit unreliable to say the least...
If I use one, I try to use ones that Anandtech uses. I trust them to find the better benchmark tools.
So I installed a CM10 port (found http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1803557). Other than being a little buggy, it is surprisingly smooth and full-featured. Getting about 4k Quadrant Standard score. I decided to play w/ the Performance settings a bit and despite selecting 1600Mhz as top clock-speed, it refuses to go above 1300Mhz. Does anyone know if this is a common issue with custom ROMs or specific to Jelly Bean ports? And of course, I would love a work around or fix. I suspect it has something to do with losing access to Asus' own performance settings, like maybe its stuck in power saver or balanced and can't go to Performance mode. Any help or advice is appreciated!
No one else is experiencing an issue like this? Should I try to reflash?
yes i guess it-s normal
ka1z0ku said:
No one else is experiencing an issue like this? Should I try to reflash?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi,
well yes im also using cm10 rom &(no cherry picks one) and it does not go above 1300. even though i wouldnt go mad about it, responsiveness has never been so great, and there are almost no hard tasks for this rom. I have set min to 475 and max on 1300 with interactive gov.
I can say that despite not being at his top performance i-m happy with it and i realized it while playing the latest batman game. it would lag a lot on ics while its pretty fluid now on jb with this settings.
it looks our prime needed this jelly beans. i cant wait till its stable.
tried ez overclock?
ka1z0ku said:
So I installed a CM10 port (found http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1803557). Other than being a little buggy, it is surprisingly smooth and full-featured. Getting about 4k Quadrant Standard score. I decided to play w/ the Performance settings a bit and despite selecting 1600Mhz as top clock-speed, it refuses to go above 1300Mhz. Does anyone know if this is a common issue with custom ROMs or specific to Jelly Bean ports? And of course, I would love a work around or fix. I suspect it has something to do with losing access to Asus' own performance settings, like maybe its stuck in power saver or balanced and can't go to Performance mode. Any help or advice is appreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you wanna try ex overclock app, you find it in the development section...
Hey guys I just got NFS: Most Wanted on the ATT Note. The gameplay and the controls are great but the game sort runs in slowmo. Anybody else getting different performance in other ROMS?
I'm running flapjaxx's AOSP ICS rom W/ GPU OC and CPU OC. I assume the slowness is due to the Note's large resolution and it's not quite as optimized as it could be for our phones. It is smooth but just terribly slow.
UPDATE
OOOOKAY guys I am back with some interesting results!
I continued to try more roms and see the performance with Need for Speed Most Wanted. I first tried Flapjaxx's stock ICS rom with touchwiz with an overclock kernel and gpu OC. That ran better than any of the AOSP but still had some slowness to it.
Seeing as the stock roms tended to give more performance, I tried another stock rom. This one: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1766933. No OC kernel, everything stock pretty much. Here is what happened:
1. I restored NFS from titanium
2. NFS says this android is not compatible
3. I uninstall NFS and install it from the Playstore and redownload the SD data
4. Ran the game and observed that there was little to no lag! Well I'm sure it could be a bit better, the frame rate was totally playable and it actually felt speedy!
Now i'm not sure what is happening here. Either 1. the game downloaded a new SD data with lower graphics requirements, 2. the game recognized the device as a different device and choose the graphics setting accordingly, OR 3. the device just performs better @ mostly stock. Now can anybody inform me on how the SD Data actually works that would be great so I can pinpoint what it is.
My next test will be using the above rom that yielded good performance with flapjaxx's OC/GPU kernel to see if it speeds up the frames anymore.
UPDATE 2
After a bit more testing I see that without the OC kernel and using the kernel from 'better stock' ROM above, the road actually is missing some water and effects which is probably leading to the smoother gameplay! If anybody else is testing this let me know what your results are!
UPDATE 3
Trying out flappjaxx's Jelly Bean rom with his GPUOC and CPUOC. No surprise there, graphics got bumped up.
What I did notice is that there is almost NO DIFFERENCE in frames (from what I could see) from Stock rom + AOSP/JB roms with OC kernel in BUMPER CAMERA MODE despite the higher graphics. To be clear, those of you on AOSP that are already using bumper mode will not get higher frames in bumper mode on something like a stock rom. There is little to no difference in bumper modes. Should be all that I can test now. I will be sticking with this Jellybeanie and playing NFS in bumper camera mode myself (in car view).
EA, give us graphic options. That is all.
UPDATE 4
In conclusion:
Game is somehow determining the graphics through the kernel
SD Data downloaded is the same on every rom, don't have to download new SD Data.
Some roms perform better than others. I had a lot of luck with Jelly Bean roms on stock kernel, no need to overclock.
Figured I'd give you guys a ranking list from roms. Going from best to worst
1. Latest Jelly Bean Nightly 11/21 Stock Kernel - Great out of car and even faster in car - graphics medium
2. Flapjaxx's FJ Stock Rom Mod - OCGPU/CPU best performance (in car view only) - graphics high
3. Electro's Stock Rom - Stock Kernel with no OC Okay performance in both out of car view and in car view - graphics medium
im running AOPK milestone 1, You can kinda play the game....but all the cars are black the buildings are black and the road is black....Not really sure what is going on! but I do get the slowmo at first but after I go to the menu and go back to playing the game it starts to run smoothly....in black that is!
I noticed the slowness as well, I switched to the in car view and it runs much better. Give that a try...
Sounds like u downloaded the wrong SD data
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
ksprelude01 said:
im running AOPK milestone 1, You can kinda play the game....but all the cars are black the buildings are black and the road is black....Not really sure what is going on! but I do get the slowmo at first but after I go to the menu and go back to playing the game it starts to run smoothly....in black that is!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's jelly bean right? I had some problems running games and with graphical glitches in jelly bean until I turned off HW overlay and that stopped my problems.
omniphil said:
I noticed the slowness as well, I switched to the in car view and it runs much better. Give that a try...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, yeah running in that camera mode is a lot better. Hopefully the fix the issues completely. Thanks for the tip!
geeksquadryder said:
Sounds like u downloaded the wrong SD data
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you mean?
Seems to run a little laggy on mine, and it's a real battery hog as well
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Tomdg07 said:
Seems to run a little laggy on mine, and it's a real battery hog as well
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ditto, switching to in-car view is definitely a lot smoother, has decent graphics but looks like the limit of S3 Adreno 225 chip has been reached, this (and other games of similar graphic quality) may be enough reason for me to upgrade to note 2 later. I also have slow down problem with NBA 2K13.
No real graphic glitch however, if you see missing textures it has to be wrong sd data, remember we are Snapdragon NOT Mali.
Im on liquid RC7 with KK.12 kernel no overclocking and the game seems to run fine for me with no lags..however Tomdg07 is right its a battery hog which quite frankly isnt a surprise. I just got off a 30 minute subway ride and I was playing it the entire time..used up exactly 20% of the battery.
kingofkings11 said:
Im on liquid RC7 with KK.12 kernel no overclocking and the game seems to run fine for me with no lags..however Tomdg07 is right its a battery hog which quite frankly isnt a surprise. I just got off a 30 minute subway ride and I was playing it the entire time..used up exactly 20% of the battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? No lag? Hmm, what's that ROM? Is it one of the Jellybeanies? Have you tried in car view to see if it is even faster than out car?
Metsuna said:
Really? No lag? Hmm, what's that ROM? Is it one of the Jellybeanies? Have you tried in car view to see if it is even faster than out car?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes indeed no lag at all - Liquid is a jellybeanie you can find it in the original development thread. To be honest I havent had the need to try in car view because the out car view has been working fine.
I should mention though that whilst I have not over clocked I am using several build prop tweaks some of which Im sure optimize graphics and what not.
kingofkings11 said:
Yes indeed no lag at all - Liquid is a jellybeanie you can find it in the original development thread. To be honest I havent had the need to try in car view because the out car view has been working fine.
I should mention though that whilst I have not over clocked I am using several build prop tweaks some of which Im sure optimize graphics and what not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just tried NFS Most Wanted on Liquid with KK Kernel and no luck. I even tried some build prop tweaks. It just feels too slow. Weird.
Going to try deleting it and redownloading the SD Data instead of restoring it from Titanium. Will report back with results.
EDIT: No go either. Still low frame rates. On a good note however, Liquid Jellybean Rom is probably the most stable of the Jellybeanies.
OOOOKAY guys I am back with some interesting results!
I continued to try more roms and see the performance with Need for Speed Most Wanted. I first tried Flapjaxx's stock ICS rom with touchwiz with an overclock kernel and gpu OC. That ran better than any of the AOSP but still had some slowness to it.
Seeing as the stock roms tended to give more performance, I tried another stock rom. This one: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1766933. No OC kernel, everything stock pretty much. Here is what happened:
1. I restored NFS from titanium
2. NFS says this android is not compatible
3. I uninstall NFS and install it from the Playstore and redownload the SD data
4. Ran the game and observed that there was little to no lag! Well I'm sure it could be a bit better, the frame rate was totally playable and it actually felt speedy!
Now i'm not sure what is happening here. Either 1. the game downloaded a new SD data with lower graphics requirements, 2. the game recognized the device as a different device and choose the graphics setting accordingly, OR 3. the device just performs better @ mostly stock. Now can anybody inform me on how the SD Data actually works that would be great so I can pinpoint what it is.
My next test will be using the above rom that yielded good performance with flapjaxx's OC/GPU kernel to see if it speeds up the frames anymore.
UPDATE
Tried the OC Kernel on the stock ROM which lead it to being slow again! I'm not sure now what to think. Going to wipe and go back to the 'better stock' kernel not the 'pure stock'.
After a bit more testing I see that without the OC kernel, the road actually is missing some water and effects which is probably leading to the smoother gameplay! If anybody else is testing this let me know what your results are!
I really just wish there was an in-game settings option to reduce the graphics quality...... (if there is and I'm missing it please fill me in)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Tomdg07 said:
I really just wish there was an in-game settings option to reduce the graphics quality...... (if there is and I'm missing it please fill me in)
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Right now there is no way to change graphics quality. Certainly would save me trouble. What I think is happening is that with some Roms and Kernels the game thinks we have higher hardware and cranks up the graphic quality thus slowing down the performance of the game.
What I found is every time I used an OC kernel of some type, the game slows. So it might be a kernel issue.
I just cant comprehend why despite having the same phone and same setup (i.e. rom, kernel etc) we get totally different results.
PS> Tomdg07 props to your state for pushing obama over the 270 he needed to win. Americans totally made up for giving dubya two terms.
I was testing some more Roms yesterday including Black IV and Electro's stock debloated Rom. Black IV had flapjaxx's kernel with the ability to OC and on the Electro was not OCable.
My results were the same. Something about flapjaxx's kernel or kernels with the ability to OC makes the game bump up in graphics thus making it slower. The game must be scanning the clockspeed or something or maybe it's something deeper than that. If I can I want to test out AOSP roms again to see if its the kernel or both the kernel + the rom.
Trying out flappjaxx's Jelly Bean rom with his GPUOC and CPUOC. No surprise there, graphics got bumped up.
What I did notice is that there is almost NO DIFFERENCE in frames (from what I could see) from Stock rom + AOSP/JB roms with OC kernel in BUMPER CAMERA MODE despite the higher graphics. To be clear, those of you on AOSP that are already using bumper mode will not get higher frames in bumper mode on something like a stock rom. There is little to no difference in bumper modes. Should be all that I can test now. I will be sticking with this Jellybeanie and playing NFS in bumper camera mode myself (in car view).
EA, give us graphic options. That is all.
UPDATE: Those of you that are finding this page and reading this post. Look on the front page for what roms are the best for this game.
Got an alert to update the game when opening it, after updating it won't even open, anyone else issues after update?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Tomdg07 said:
Got an alert to update the game when opening it, after updating it won't even open, anyone else issues after update?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same issue. Luckily I had a backup of the SD data on my hard drive so I can revert back. But yeah something messed up in that download messed up the game for us.
Metsuna said:
Same issue. Luckily I had a backup of the SD data on my hard drive so I can revert back. But yeah something messed up in that download messed up the game for us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only form of a backup I have is in the nandroid backup I did before flashing cm10, I suppose I could dig it out of there somehow, but I'll give them a day or two to fix it first
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Alright so: found the fastest sensless ROM was slimrom. With quadrant I scored about 4k on funky kernel. Mostly all sense based ROM scored around that that's with funky. Now that I installed rage ROM aosp I'm getting laggier performance in games and about a 2- 3k quadrant benchmark score. Same with antutu benchmark. Lower scores then on sense. This dosnt make sense. I thought aosp ROMs (cm9) were so pose to be godly and around faster then she sense based. But lower benchmark and lower fps and lag in games this sucks. Still running funky. I noticed that system tuner was acting up and making it do all weird things so I cleared data and uninstalled rebooted and still got same scores. Force GPU was checked in all ROMs and kernel versions. And all benchmarks were dine with ball the same CPU setting. Maybe an app is acting up and robing performance? I'm not get any abnormal heat or batter drain.
Did you check the built in cpu manager within the settings? If you have an app to govern it, they will battle over control causing lag.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Squirrel1620 said:
Did you check the built in cpu manager within the settings? If you have an app to govern it, they will battle over control causing lag.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes and I only use the built in one to control. I was reading that this is a common problem with cm9 and going from android v 4.0.4 to 4.0.3 might fix it. As in different cm9 ROM.
Told you this before and hate to sound like a broken record. Don't use System Tuner with my kernel, use Android Tuner or CPU Tweaker (these replaced System Tuner for a reason) on Sense roms.
Snuzzo said:
Told you this before and hate to sound like a broken record. Don't use System Tuner with my kernel, use Android Tuner or CPU Tweaker (these replaced System Tuner for a reason) on Sense roms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't touch any CPU settings with ST. None. Its pretty much installed for freezing apps task manager to see what's running and the widget. That's it. All CPU settings are dine through CM in the performance section.
NEVER NEVER NEVER turn force GPU rendering on (breaks MANY apps), thats the BIGGEST mistake MANY people do on these forums along with those so-called universal "build.prop" tweaks which do absolutely nothing. Try using the stock kernel first to see if its kernel related.
richii0207 said:
NEVER NEVER NEVER turn force GPU rendering on (breaks MANY apps), thats the BIGGEST mistake MANY people do on these forums along with those so-called universal "build.prop" tweaks which do absolutely nothing. Try using the stock kernel first to see if its kernel related.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tested both games mc3 and nova 3 and both run better with it enabled. I've also tried multiple versions of kernel. Found 1.4 gives good performance and battery I've read tho that it is is a cm9 problem and that its "known"??r idk how true that is tho. Its mainly just games that I'm lagging on.
Quadrider10 said:
I've tested both games mc3 and nova 3 and both run better with it enabled. I've also tried multiple versions of kernel. Found 1.4 gives good performance and battery I've read tho that it is is a cm9 problem and that its "known"??r idk how true that is tho. Its mainly just games that I'm lagging on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not have GPU rendering enabled, on stock kernel and my games run smooth.
Quadrider10 said:
I don't touch any CPU settings with ST. None. Its pretty much installed for freezing apps task manager to see what's running and the widget. That's it. All CPU settings are dine through CM in the performance section.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should probably uninstall ST reboot and see if that fixes your issues.
zetsumeikuro said:
You should probably uninstall ST reboot and see if that fixes your issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tried. Nothing.
Any ;new when Neo is gonna push out his CM10 build? I think aims just wait for that see if that dolv s the problem if not them back to slimrom.
It won't be released until the CM10 devs give the go ahead. But I don't think you'll like it any more than what you've been running.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium
whens that gonna be?
cm10 is based off of JB though and from what i read, jb is crqzy smooth because vsync was disabled? idk but i read that its insanely smooth
Quadrider10 said:
whens that gonna be?
cm10 is based off of JB though and from what i read, jb is crqzy smooth because vsync was disabled? idk but i read that its insanely smooth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Triple buffering. You're thinking about triple buffering. We'll only get all those benefits with a full implementation of Project Butter, which is not automatic with jellybean. Right now, what we have is very uneven. Some things are smooth, some things are choppier. Getting a full ION implementation should smooth things out, but it still won't be Project Butter.
shrike1978 said:
Triple buffering. You're thinking about triple buffering. We'll only get all those benefits with a full implementation of Project Butter, which is not automatic with jellybean. Right now, what we have is very uneven. Some things are smooth, some things are choppier. Getting a full ION implementation should smooth things out, but it still won't be Project Butter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ohhh i see.... but like is that lag and fps drop just a problem with cm9, or is it just my phone?
what auntutu benchmark and quadrant scores do you get?
Quadrider10 said:
ohhh i see.... but like is that lag and fps drop just a problem with cm9, or is it just my phone?
what auntutu benchmark and quadrant scores do you get?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
8860 - Antutu
3030 - Quadrant
nolimit78 said:
8860 - Antutu
3030 - Quadrant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what was your fps on both tests?
my antutu score was 8094 cpu and everything set to max speed.
Quadrider10 said:
what was your fps on both tests?
my antutu score was 8094 cpu and everything set to max speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which part on each test? I'll have to do it again to check.. the test results don't tell me that info.
nolimit78 said:
Which part on each test? I'll have to do it again to check.. the test results don't tell me that info.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
in the knights test it tells you on bottom.... in sense roms i got about 59 in cm9 i get about 45-50. in both tests. somehting has to be wrong your getting a score of 800 better then me and running close to the same kernel and rom ish....
Quadrider10 said:
in the knights test it tells you on bottom.... in sense roms i got about 59 in cm9 i get about 45-50. in both tests. somehting has to be wrong your getting a score of 800 better then me and running close to the same kernel and rom ish....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
56.74 FPS