Is My Note II Defective? - Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II

This is gonna be a pretty long story with photo's. I want to show you my situation as accurate as possible, so if someone can help me with this, that'll be amazing.
Has anyone here been noticing their phone lagging?
Swipe to unlock used to have fluid animations, not anymore. It hardly recognizes my gesture to unlock the device, I have to do it a few times.
Swiping through pages there are lag. Scrolling through App Drawer there is lag, especially in the Widgets section.
This phone has 4 cores and Project Butter, I don't get it. I'm thinking it could be from my SD card? Since it's only 16gb, and a class 4, it's taking longer for the phone to read the information on it? I think some of the apps I have are saved on the card (not sure how, but I think it is).
Anyway, if it's not from the SD card, do you guys have any idea why it would just be lagging like this? Are any of you guys experiencing performance hiccups?
I know I shouldn't be acting this way, but the phones less then a month old, and it should be smoother and faster..
I had 3 different launchers on my phone: Nova, Apex, Go, and I uninstalled all of them. Prior to uninstalling them, I never really set either one of them up, so there were no widgets on any of the launchers on the homescreen.
Here are a bunch of screen shots of the apps that I had on my phone, and how my phone was behaving..
Here are the apps that I have downloaded:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Here is my Device storage, and I don't understand why I have OVER 5GB of Miscellaneous stuff..
Here are all the apps that are running in the background, some have been running for over 400 hours!
And from all of those apps that are running, I disabled most of them, based on this list [http://forums.androidcentral.com/verizon-galaxy-s-iii/202816-safe-disbable.html] of Apps that are safe to disable:
I ran a test on Quadrant Standard and my phones getting 37-41 fps in the 2d and 3d rendering. My total score was at 4239, much lower then the HTC One X.
I was at the Verizon store today...
Two Words: Factory Reset.
Man, such a big difference in performance! I think one of the apps that I had installed was causing the lag, I just gotta figure out which one.
After I did the factory reset at Verizon, I did the Quadrant Standard Benchmark, I scored 54xx, and then I scored 62xx with an fps of 55-63, and I got real happy. Fast forward 3 hours and I do the same benchmark, and now I'm scoring at 42xx again with an fps of 40, and I got disappointed. I just don't get it. Is it defective? Is it not defective? I dunno.
The only app I have installed so far is the Quadrant Standard app, everything else is complete stock.
My Device Memory is 386 MB used and 10 GB free.
When it comes to RAM, 760 MB used and 1 GB free.
Inside the Quadrant Standard app, I clicked on System Information, and I got:
CPU
Current frequency: 1,100 MHz
Max frequency: 1,600 MHz
Min frequency: 200 MHz
Cores: 4
Architecture: 7
Memory
Total: 1834220 kB
Free: 289936 kB
Inactive: 266112 kB
GPU (OpenGL)
Vendor: ARM
Renderer: Mali-400 MP
Version: OpenGL ES 2.0
Max texture units: 8
Max texture size: 4096
Max lights: 8
I know I don't have a screen shot, but I noticed that in Quadrant Standard, it says that my Max Frequency is 1,600 MHz, and that my Current Frequency is 1,100 MHz. My friend has the Note 2 also (Different Carrier), and his Max Frequency is 1,600 MHz also, but his Current Frequency is 1,600 MHz too!
Why is my frequency so low? Is that the cause for my phone not performing the way that it's supposed to? Is it a defect? Would I have to get my phone replaced, or would I be able to fix it myself?
I'm thinking of flashing a ROM on it also (never done this before), and I don't know if that will fix the problem or make it worse.
Currently, I still have only one app downloaded on my phone, and that's the Quadrant Standard app, everything else is stock.

Please read forum rules before posting
Questions go in Q&A
Thread moved
Thank you for your cooperation
Friendly Neighborhood Moderator

xMoKax said:
Why is my frequency so low? Is that the cause for my phone not performing the way that it's supposed to? Is it a defect? Would I have to get my phone replaced, or would I be able to fix it myself?
I'm thinking of flashing a ROM on it also (never done this before), and I don't know if that will fix the problem or make it worse.
Currently, I still have only one app downloaded on my phone, and that's the Quadrant Standard app, everything else is stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because you have Power Saving mode enabled. Turn it off and your current freq should be 1,600

CBConsultation said:
Because you have Power Saving mode enabled. Turn it off and your current freq should be 1,600
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shouldn't the current frequency be lower if not under a lot of load? I was pretty sure our phones only clocked themselves up to 1600 when they needed to for battery saving reasons like other phone processors and i3/i5/i7s etc. Also, if I'm not mistaken it said that after the reset when it is acting fine.
I'm not familiar with most of your apps so I can't really help you narrow it down much. My best guess is that one of them had a background task to check for an update or something and somehow got stuck in a loop where it was calculating something, though even then unless it used multiple threads you shouldn't have had lag since 3 cores should be plenty for just moving around the interface. Did you try restarting your phone before the reset? And I'd read reviews of the apps as you redownload them to see if anyone has complained about an update doing this, etc.

flaring afro said:
Shouldn't the current frequency be lower if not under a lot of load? I was pretty sure our phones only clocked themselves up to 1600 when they needed to for battery saving reasons like other phone processors and i3/i5/i7s etc..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that's right.
That "current frequency" listed in quadrant is never right.
The free app CPU Spy is a good way to read what the processor speed really is.

jmorton10 said:
Yes, that's right.
That "current frequency" listed in quadrant is never right.
The free app CPU Spy is a good way to read what the processor speed really is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's right and wrong. Typically when not under a load, the CPU cycles down to a lower frequency. But when you start Quadrant, the app automatically ramps up the clock frequency. I did the same test 4x on my device, twice with power savings on and twice with it off. And when power saving mode was enabled, my clock frequency showed 1100. When power saving mode with disabled, my clock frequency showed 1600.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

Related

[DEV] CM7 Kernel performance comparisons (stock vs OC)

So, for all us CM7 users, there have recently been alot of questions as to why there is such a disparity between the stock CM7 kernel, and the 1.1Ghz kernel, given both are made by the same person (dalingrin). Really, there are two questions -
1) Why is the quadrant score different between the kernels?
2) How does this equate to real-world use?
To help answer #1, i went ahead and purchased a copy of Quadrant Advanced. The advanced version lets me run the bench offline (helpful at work ), and also shows each piece of the score (the important part, as seen in the results). this breakdown shows where the difference is.
But to answer #2, I have to go well beyond Quadrant, and look at many different benches. I tried to find a variety of both system and 3D benches in a hope to uncover any problems anywhere. If there is a more widespread problem, it may be uncovered in other benchmarks. So, without further ado, the test system:
CM7- nightly 27, running on eMMC
Stock CM7 Kernel, 925Mhz, Performance Governor
OC CM7 Kernel, 1000Mhz, Performance Governor
OC CM7 Kernel, 1100Mhz, Performance Governor
I kept the gov on performance, to help rule out any differences between governors. Performance runs the CPU at full speed all the time, so it keeps the benches comparable. For every CPU speed/kernel change, i rebooted the system, and ran each bench once in the order listed. And the results!
Stock kernel
CPU @ 925, Performance gov,
Quadrant (First run only):
Total: 1536
CPU: 2504
Mem: 1080
I/O: 3629
2D: 188
3D: 278
Linpack:
12.078Mflops
NenaMark:
16.7 Fps
Benchmark PI (https://market.android.com/details?id=gr.androiddev.BenchmarkP):
Pi found in 1636ms
Antutu System benchmark (https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark):
Total Score: 1675
Memory: 407
CPU Integer: 578
CPU Float: 129
2D Graphics: 100
3D Graphics: 276
Database IO: 10
SD Card Write: 5.0 MB/s
SD Card Read: 12.5 MB/s
An3DBench (https://market.android.com/details?id=com.threed.jpct.bench):
Fillrate ST/MT: 6.21/6.22 MP/s
High object count: 27.03 Fps
Multiple Lights: 40.19 Fps
High polygon count: 19.97 Fps
Keyframe animation: 39.97 Fps
Game level: 30.04 Fps
Total score: 4278
3/16 Overclock Kernel
CPU @1000Mhz, Performance gov
Quadrant (First run only):
Total: 960
CPU: 2693
Mem: 1099
I/O: 522
2D: 202
3D: 286
Linpack:
12.983Mflops
NenaMark:
17.0 Fps
Benchmark PI:
Pi found in 1627ms
Antutu System benchmark :
Total Score: 1832
Memory: 445
CPU Integer: 631
CPU Float: 144
2D Graphics: 109
3D Graphics: 302
Database IO: 20
SD Card Write: 5.8 MB/s
SD Card Read: 12.3 MB/s
An3DBench:
Fillrate ST/MT: 6.23/6.19 MP/sec
High object count: 30.46 fps
Multiple Lights: 39.96 fps
High polygon count: 20.16 fps
Keyframe animation: 40.40 fps
Game level: 30.43 fps
Total score: 4397
CPU @1100Mhz, Performance gov
Quadrant (First run only):
Total: 1001
CPU: 2833
Mem: 1085
I/O: 566
2D: 213
3D: 306
Linpack:
MFlops: 13.917
NenaMark:
16.8 Fps
Benchmark PI:
Pi found in 1460
Antutu System benchmark:
**Would not run at 1100**
Total Score:
Memory:
CPU Integer:
CPU Float:
2D Graphics:
3D Graphics:
Database IO:
SD Card Write:
SD Card Read:
An3DBench :
Fillrate ST/MT: 5.89/6.01
High object count: 17.53 fps
Multiple Lights: 40.22 fps
High polygon count: 20.13 fps
Keyframe animation: 40.37 fps
Game level: 30.44
Total score: 4054
The results speak alot, i think, and yet they don't. The big difference, is that the IO score on Quadrant tanks on the OC kernel, but is fine/better on every other test. Specifically, i noticed that file system writes takes much longer on the OC kernel, than the stock. 3D performance makes obvious gains with increasing clock speed, and other CPU / IO benches show no problem either.
The antutu bench failing at 1.1 is very odd, since my system has never shown any instability at this speed. It crashes almost immediately , where are 1.0Ghz makes it through just fine. Could it be my system is instable? Possibly...
just for the heck of it, i set the gov to interactive, and here is what i got (1100Mhz, OC kernel, Interactive Gov):
Antutu System benchmark:
Total Score: 1089
Memory: 481
CPU Integer: 701
CPU Float: 154
2D Graphics: 101
3D Graphics: 209
Database IO: 10
SD Card Write: 4.9 MB/s
SD Card Read: 10.4 MB/s
who knows....
Thus, I am left with this question: Is the Quadrant bench testing an IO function that no other bench i tried is, or is it testing something in a way no other bench does, and just doesn't like this kernel? Obivously, SOMETHING is going on, becuase the problem is measurable and repeatable. The kernel change showing the problem alludes to a possible issue, but other benches say that the likelyhood of noticing it is minimal.
That said, our device isn't the only one that seems like it has a problem with IO scores: http://androidforums.com/samsung-captivate/136969-quadrant-scores.html
Hopefully, this is a starting point for people, and might even help a dev or two pinpoint what might be happening. I am no expert, but am willing to help where i can.
Data Formatting
Thanks for the bench scores. Hopefully its a starting point to understand the issue.
Here is a better looking version of your numbers :
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Wow.. many thanks for the awesome graph; it really makes things so much neater!
Also the guesses that it may be a problem with quadrant may pan out. I always thought the OC kernel seemed snappier as far as user interaction (especially launching the applications list w/ animations.)
chisleu said:
Also the guesses that it may be a problem with quadrant may pan out. I always thought the OC kernel seemed snappier as far as user interaction (especially launching the applications list w/ animations.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The user interaction improvement is due to increased CPU clock and 2D performance. IO matters when you install or load something.
amtrakcn said:
The user interaction improvement is due to increased CPU clock and 2D performance. IO matters when you install or load something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except those numbers are inaccurate.
chisleu said:
Except those numbers are inaccurate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The performance increase I've experianced with the o/c kernal leads me to agree with your point about the quad benchmark numbers being off the mark. That said, I was wondering if your statement is based on a deeper understanding of what is causing the low io quadrant numbers, and if it is, that you would be willing to share your thoughts. Thanks.
I think the statement really is worth looking into - the performance variance should be explored; just because quadrant is the only bench that shows and issue, doesn't mean there isn't one in the system...
Divine_Madcat, just wanted to say I appreciated the way you analyzed the issue and presented your findings. I learned alot from your approach. Enjoying your post. I'll send a thanks your way next time I sign in from my web browser.
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA App
vizographic said:
The performance increase I've experianced with the o/c kernal leads me to agree with your point about the quad benchmark numbers being off the mark. That said, I was wondering if your statement is based on a deeper understanding of what is causing the low io quadrant numbers, and if it is, that you would be willing to share your thoughts. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not making a statement based on personal knowledge, but simply parroting something the guy who manages the kernal builds said.
So which should we use?
evilmerlin said:
So which should we use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The OC Kernel. The OP was documenting something in detail to try to help out. There is a weird issue causing the OC kernel to show up slower than the stock in one benchmark. It's faster in all other benchmarks. There is probably something wrong with the benchmark.
chisleu said:
The OC Kernel. The OP was documenting something in detail to try to help out. There is a weird issue causing the OC kernel to show up slower than the stock in one benchmark. It's faster in all other benchmarks. There is probably something wrong with the benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for all the feedback guys. Chisleu, i would say you are correct, that it probably is the bench. Yet, there is just this small nagging part of me that wonder if quadrant isn't using something nothing else is, and found a hidden problem. Needless to say, i am not done looking at all this yet.
Divine_Madcat said:
Thanks for all the feedback guys. Chisleu, i would say you are correct, that it probably is the bench. Yet, there is just this small nagging part of me that wonder if quadrant isn't using something nothing else is, and found a hidden problem. Needless to say, i am not done looking at all this yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is worth investigating though I must say it is low on my priority list. I don't put much weight in Quadrant and especially their I/O tests. Their I/O tests are known to be especially flaky.
When I get a chance, I will go through and remove the tweaks that are not in common with the CM7 kernel to see what is causing it. Unless someone beats me to it. *hint hint*
Thank you, Mr. Divine_Madcat! Hopefully you will continue your highly valuable benchmarking work with every significant CM7 nightly and RC, and Froyo/HC, to show the progress and better appreciate the work of our devs.
Quadrant marks peculiarities are, yes, puzzling. And they are not just in their absolute values, but the scatter of these between consequent benchmarkings.
Also, I know it's not the opportune time, but just to get into an understanding of a baseline FPS for OpenGL ES HW acceleration (or lack thereof), it might be worth the effort to do Neocore, at least on CM7 builds.
Thank you.
dalingrin said:
It is worth investigating though I must say it is low on my priority list. I don't put much weight in Quadrant and especially their I/O tests. Their I/O tests are known to be especially flaky.
When I get a chance, I will go through and remove the tweaks that are not in common with the CM7 kernel to see what is causing it. Unless someone beats me to it. *hint hint*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got confused going into the kernel code. It looked like you guys only changed 8-10 lines of code from the B&N release. The last CVSystem I've used was CVS. heh. This new fangled "git" thingie is blowing my mind.
EDIT: NM... I wasn't seeing all the commits. Now I get it. Do we have to make config/menuconfig/whatever to setup the kernel, or are all the flags ready to go?
EDIT: Man I have some catching up to do. I remember when menuconfig was hot ****. The last kernel I built was 2.2.something IIRC.
Can't find the .config. Surely it's not hidden?
i know that quadrant puts a big emphasis on i/o score. just going from ext3 to ext4 on a archos 101 gave ~800-1000 pts.
scores have been around 2900 on quadrant for a device that feels slower than a galaxy tab.
I seem to have more touchscreen lag/miscalibration when using the oc kernal. It's only really apparent when i'm typing on the keyboard. I was using the stock kernal for about a week with no real issues. Is this something anyone else is experiencing? I was going to flash back to stock, but if it seems isolated, and i'll just flash the new nightly and the OC kernal on top of it again.
xwint3rxmut3x said:
I seem to have more touchscreen lag/miscalibration when using the oc kernal. It's only really apparent when i'm typing on the keyboard. I was using the stock kernal for about a week with no real issues. Is this something anyone else is experiencing? I was going to flash back to stock, but if it seems isolated, and i'll just flash the new nightly and the OC kernal on top of it again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
search for the touchscreen calibration. it's like 1 su/adb command.
chisleu said:
I am not making a statement based on personal knowledge, but simply parroting something the guy who manages the kernal builds said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the clarification. I take it you are referring to dalingrin. I think I recall the issue being addressed in a thread but I can't remember exactly what was said or where it was brought up. Do you have the threads post number by chance, since any observations on his part are worthy of serious consideration. Just hoping to learn something new here. Thanks in advance.
Web page refresh showed post by chisleu which quoted dalingrin on the io issue. If this was the post You were referring to then please ignore the above request.

Is the Mali-400MP better in the SGS3?

Despite both having the same GPU, I have heard that the SGS3 version will be better some how? Higher clock speed?
Can anyone shed some light on this?
otester said:
Despite both having the same GPU, I have heard that the SGS3 version will be better some how? Higher clock speed?
Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also have more cores i believe.
FISKER_Q said:
Also have more cores i believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this they both have 4 cores.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos
otester said:
According to this they both have 4 cores.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, could've sworn there was a discussion about it having more cores when it was announced, my bad then.
As far as I know the GPU will have higher clock frequency. Also both S2 and S3 have the Quad-Core Mali-400MP.
Faryaab said:
As far as I know the GPU will have higher clock frequency. Also both S2 and S3 have the Quad-Core Mali-400MP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This will largely be the decider on whether I get it or not.
(As I am designing a GPU intensive 3D game).
otester said:
This will largely be the decider on whether I get it or not.
(As I am designing a GPU intensive 3D game).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, S2 had the fastest Mobile GPU and now S3 has the fastest one. So if you really want the best GPU go for the S3 but S2 will also work really well.
Faryaab said:
Well, S2 had the fastest Mobile GPU and now S3 has the fastest one. So if you really want the best GPU go for the S3 but S2 will also work really well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I need some proof though, no one seems to really know for sure, just want to be sure before splashing £500
This seems to explain it:
the main thing is the smaller process node design, the increased memory bandwidth, cleverer memory bandwidth architecture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung announced that they have switched to high-k materials and metal gates (HKMG) and further claimed it can provide superior performance with less power than conventional poly-Si/SiON used at 45nm. Samsung demonstrated that Exynos 4212 (32nm version) SoC can produce 35% to 50% more horsepower than the older Exynos 4210 (45nm version). So clearly Exynos 4412 quad core wins the “CPU Horsepower” battle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While they haven’t officially announced this yet, I believe the GPU is the same one they promised for the dual core 1.5 Ghz Exynos 4212 chip. They said that GPU had a 50% increase in performance over the current one in the Galaxy S2. This improvement is most likely possible because of the jump from 45nm for the dual core Exynos to the 32nm Exynos 4412 (they used the more efficient transistors to increase performance at the same or lower power consumption).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
source
I had the Note which was dualcore Exynos 1.4ghz and same GPU, but 1280x800, it could handle just about all the games thrown at it, ie. RipTide, Asphalt 6. I only felt Mordern Combat 3 could have higher fps, although very smooth and playable.
eksasol said:
I had the Note which was dualcore Exynos 1.4ghz and same GPU, but 1280x800, it could handle just about all the games thrown at it, ie. RipTide, Asphalt 6. I only felt Mordern Combat 3 could have higher fps, although very smooth and playable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the game I'm working on, just tried it on my phone today (haven't tested in a few months) and I have noticed some lagging with the new faster animations.
otester said:
With the game I'm working on, just tried it on my phone today (haven't tested in a few months) and I have noticed some lagging with the new faster animations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing is that if you are hardly able to run the game on a Mali-400MP then the game would lag like hell even on T2/T3.
Faryaab said:
The thing is that if you are hardly able to run the game on a Mali-400MP then the game would lag like hell even on T2/T3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T2/T3?
Also I wouldn't say it hardly runs, minimum of 20FPS, lots of optimizations to be done though such as LOD (basically chops poly count down on far away models).
For lower devices...
Dynamic lighting turned off.
Light maps could be baked into the texture
Normal maps removed.
Specular maps removed.
At the moment it's probably the same or exceeds the quality of Shadowgun THD.
Check available benchmarks .)
You should have looked around more for available benchmarks.
This show clarly that the s3 is much faster than the s2:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
source and source
Hironimo said:
You should have looked around more for available benchmarks.
This show clarly that the s3 is much faster than the s2:
source and source
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wanted to know the technical reason, I've already looked at the benchmarks.
otester said:
I wanted to know the technical reason, I've already looked at the benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Higher clock, optimised drivers, maybe hardware optimisation
Mopral said:
Higher clock, optimised drivers, maybe hardware optimisation
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People at the HTC sensation forum extracted Adreno 225 Drivers and used it on their Adreno 220 powered phones and they gained a huge performance boost!
as we know Adreno 225 is Adreno 220 with double the frequency (thanks to that new manufacturing process of the CPU also the GPU still using the same process...)
so can't someone extract the new drivers so everyone with Mali 400 GPU can use it?
Because S3's Quad-core GPU frequency is 400MHz. S2 only 275MHz.I am a Chinese grade 9 student andlooking forward to GS III.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda premium
sorry for my bad English. the frequency isthereason that some tablets with realtek rk2918 board(mali400 mp2)'s 3d performance is higher than GS II.because mali400 on rk2918 is400MHz but GS2 only 275MHz.
Sent from my GT-S5570 using xda premium
Just wonder whether clocking up the GPU might pose heating issues.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

[KERNEL] Clemsyn's Elite Kernel: Pushing the Limits of Nexus 7. Now with 700mhz GPU.

MOD NOTE: IT APPEARS THIS KERNEL IS FOR 4.1.x ONLY. Flashing on 4.2 will result in bootloop. also, this kernel is unsupported by the OP, so thread is currently CLOSED
First and foremost, I would like to thank _motley for his kernel since this is based on his kernel. I chose his kernel because I have worked with him and IMO is the best kernel out there at the moment . Second, I would like to thank pinoyto and secret for testing the kernels. Also thanks to Koush, Blades, faux123, pershoot, chatch15117, all the Gtab, Asus Transformer and Motorola Atrix users, and other devs that I may have missed. BIG THANKS to my beloved wife for watching the kids while I do this.
I call this kernel elite since the timings are pretty aggressive and voltage are decreased on the low side and increased on the high side. This kernel might not work on your device because of these so be sure that you have a backup and and that you are familiar on restoring your device.
The following are the difference with motley's kernel
1. JRCU is implemented
2. Lowest backlight setting set to 5 (save battery and better reading at night, if you have screen flicker issue it will be more noticable because of this so I suggest covering the ground pin of wifi)
3. Core voltage increased from 1200 to 1250mv on the high side to hit 1.7 frequency and 600 GPU but decreased from 950 to 900mv on the low side.
4. Increased CPU voltage to 1240mv for 1.7 frequency but allows decreased 750mv in low side
5. Increased GPU clock to 600 and pixclock increased (please let me know if you have problems on screen due to pixclock increase but so far no issues on testers)
6. Built using gcc 4.5.2 ( I know, I'm an oldie)
7. DVFS core table completely changed to allow max clock of host1x and pll_c and hit most max frequencies.
8. Enable Thermal_Sys to throttle at 68 (BTW, if you are using system tuner, the reading is +10 as per secret)
Added 484 GPU and 520 GPU. LMK how it goes.
Link is below
Source in compliance with GPL
https://github.com/clemsyn/Grouper
IF YOU WANT THE UNDERVOLTED VERSION PLEASE SEE SECOND POST
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATED 09/23/2012
Releasing another 1.8ghzCPU and 650mhz GPU
Here are the differences with the last 650gpu
1. Used Linaro compiler
2. Increased 3d/2d bus, pll_c, and host1x for higher scores
3. Removed the pixclock overclock, This is running on default pixclock by Asus. This will limit the fps to 60 fps max, so old benchmarks will not score over 100 fps but will only max at 60. I suggest newer benchmarks like GL2.5 or Benchmark 2.0 ES Taiji...
4. EMC voltage decreased to 1.100 mv (Not sure if your device can handle this but pinoyto's device was fine with it)
Here is the link
https://rapidshare.com/files/2462982943/1.8ghz650GPUNopix.zip
If you like my work, please click on Donate button on my Sig and add on to my Nexus 7 fund Thanks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATED 9/20/2012
*** SPECIAL RECOGNITION goes to PINOYTO for the first donation of this project. THANKS for rewarding my hard work!! ***
Thanks to masterg0g0 for 2nd donation
Also thanks to all the testers of the 700mhz GPU.
This latest kernel comes with the 1.8ghz CPU and 700 GPU with 3 types of pixclocks.
First off is the max pixclock. This has the highest pixclock of all the kernels and will limit your fps to over 100 fps. The downside is the pink screen issue.
https://rapidshare.com/files/901768617/1.8ghz700GPUMAXPIXoc.zip
Second is the mid pixclock overclock. If you have a pink issue on the first one, try this. This will limit your fps to about 90 fps. The downside is you might still have a pink screen
https://rapidshare.com/files/4017246162/1.8ghz700GPUMEDPIXoc.zip
Third is the NO pixclock overclock. This for sure will have no pink issue but will limit your fps to about 65 fps.
https://rapidshare.com/files/258377771/1.8ghz700gpuNOPIXOC.zip
Here are the changes made from this latest kernels
1. GPU increased to 700 gpu, vcore and vrail voltages increased
2. pll_c, host1x increased to accomodate the increase in GPU speed
3. Compiled using Linaro toolchain.
WARNING:
The timings in this kernel are very aggressive, voltages although within Nvidia limits are high. Please make sure you backup and be very familiar in recovering your device.
IF YOU LIKE MY WORK, PLEASE CLICK on the "DONATE TO ME" BUTTON UNDER MY SIG TO SHOW YOUR APPRECIATION and ADD on to my "NEXUS 7 FUND". Your donation will be GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU.
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATED 8/17/2012
Overclocked to 1.8ghz with GPU at 650..WARNING THIS IS GOING TO GET HOT!!!
https://rapidshare.com/files/1034477848/Clemsyn1.8GPU650.zip
Pink fix
https://rapidshare.com/files/223841402/Clemsyn1.8GPU650Pinkfix.zip
Changes:
1. Temp limit increased to 70
2. Voltages increased to accomodate 1.8ghz and 650 gpu
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW, if you like my work, please dont hesitate to click on the Donate button under my username. Thanks.
Updated 8/23/2012
This new kernel is based upon what I believe is the best overclocking speed (1.5 ghz) and a cpu nominal voltage of 1.150mv and a core of 1.175 mv (core default is 1.2) while lowering the lowest voltage of 750mv and 900mv respectively. This kernel hits the max speeds of the GPU at 600 while utilizing the lower voltages to insure better battery life and less heat. Also pixclock has been decreased to minimize pink issues on the screen Again, this might not run on all Nexus 7 due to aggressive lowering of voltages. HAVE FUN!!
Also make sure you have a backup and familiar with restoring your device.
BTW, if you like my work. Don't hesitate to DONATE and help me buy some diapers Thanks
Finally got the issue why most devices where not working right. Also was able to undervolt MORE because of this finding. Here are the changes
1. Vcore undervolted to 1.15 mv (default at 1.2) cpu mv at 1.15 mv running 1.5ghz
2. pll_c decrease from maximum (this was what was causing all the issue)
3. This kernel is set to 1.5ghz automatically. However if your ramdisk is programed to 1.3, then it boots to 1.3 intially. After pressing the power button once (or letting it sleep), it automatically resumes to 1.5 ghz without any CPU program.
I highly recommend that these settings be used for better battery life, LESS HEAT and power usage... Good for daily use
Here is the link
https://rapidshare.com/files/1026092132/Clemsyn1.5extremeUndervoltedFINAL.zip
BTW, if you like my work please show your appreciation and click on the Donations link under my signature. Thanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: 8/17/2012
OK, updated this version of the kernel to increase CPU Core to 1.2mv for some stability for some users...Here is the link
link deleted for latest version above
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
This new kernel is based upon what I believe is the best overclocking speed (1.5 ghz) and a cpu nominal voltage of 1.150mv and a core of 1.175 mv (core default is 1.2) while lowering the lowest voltage of 750mv and 900mv respectively. This kernel hits the max speeds of the GPU at 600 while utilizing the lower voltages to insure better battery life and less heat. Also pixclock has been decreased to minimize pink issues on the screen Again, this might not run on all Nexus 7 due to aggressive lowering of voltages. HAVE FUN!!
Also make sure you have a backup and familiar with restoring your device.
BTW, if you like my work. Don't hesitate to DONATE and help me buy some diapers Thanks
Downloading now. Will reply with results asap
Edit*
Booted up fine but didn't last too long, saw temps hit 72C and then it rebooted.
Now I guess I could give this a try and report on smoke or injuries if anything.
Rafase282 said:
Now I guess I could give this a try and report on smoke or injuries if anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, doubt about the smoke because of the Thermal control at 68 but if you would be willing to test my 1.8ghz kernel with 700 GPU LMK (kidding).
clemsyn said:
LOL, doubt about the smoke because of the Thermal control at 68 but if you would be willing to test my 1.8ghz kernel with 700 GPU LMK (kidding).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had to clearn and uninstall system tuner and reinstall to be able to set thing right.
1. I noticed it goes from 1.5 to 1.5, then 1.54 then 1.54 then 1.7
Is it supposed to be like that?
2. What tools do you want me to use for testing? Any recommended way for testing like turn off wifi or something?
You can have my first born. This thing flies!
Holy smokes! This sh!t sounds dangerous! I am all over it
Sent from my Glazed-over Nexus 7
Very interesting. Thanks for making this. I already downloaded. Ill give this a go shortly. Ill make sure to delete data from system tuner to make sure no default voltages are saved from motleykernel.
I hope my device can handle the 1.7ghz, since you increased the top end voltages. With 1.7ghz and 600mhz gpu oc, I'm not expecting this to e old on battery. It's more like you said, pushing the limits of what we capable of. Wish me luck! Lol. Anxious to see how this benches. Did you add the I/o tweak and disable fysnc in this build? Or will running commands from motley thread do the trick? I'm notbsure if tkt app will allow fsync on faster if the file path tnot the same on this kernel.
Ill report back letting you know how it went
evonc said:
Downloading now. Will reply with results asap
Edit*
Booted up fine but didn't last too long, saw temps hit 72C and then it rebooted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Temp is actually 62, secret says that System Tuner reading is +10.
demandarin said:
Very interesting. Thanks for making this. I already downloaded. Ill give this a go shortly. Ill make sure to delete data from system tuner to make sure no default voltages are saved from motleykernel.
I hope my device can handle the 1.7ghz, since you increased the top end voltages. With 1.7ghz and 600mhz gpu oc, I'm not expecting this to e old on battery. It's more like you said, pushing the limits of what we capable of. Wish me luck! Lol. Anxious to see how this benches. Did you add the I/o tweak and disable fysnc in this build? Or will running commands from motley thread do the trick? I'm notbsure if tkt app will allow fsync on faster if the file path tnot the same on this kernel.
Ill report back letting you know how it went
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's based from _motley, using his defconfig to build it (aside from the GPU overclock and JRCU) so his commands should work.
scarygood536 said:
You can have my first born. This thing flies!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for trying it I already have four kids and they take a lot of my time
I get reboots when running CF-Bench with interactive and sio at 1.7 stock voltages.
---------- Post added at 01:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 AM ----------
clemsyn said:
Thanks for trying it I already have four kids and they take a lot of my time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sell the 5th for body parts. Organs are not easy to find.
Dude.... WTF!? 106 FPS!!?! That can't be right, can it?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my Glazed-over Nexus 7
Rafase282 said:
I had to clearn and uninstall system tuner and reinstall to be able to set thing right.
1. I noticed it goes from 1.5 to 1.5, then 1.54 then 1.54 then 1.7
Is it supposed to be like that?
2. What tools do you want me to use for testing? Any recommended way for testing like turn off wifi or something?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Skipped 1.6 since _motley kernel has that so next stepping is 1.54
Try benchmarking it or undervolting it using system tuner but I suggest keeping 1.7 at 1240 mv.
boynamedstacy said:
Dude.... WTF!? 106 FPS!!?! That can't be right, can it?
Sent from my Glazed-over Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup its right, GPU at 600 with max timings in the table
Rafase282 said:
I get reboots when running CF-Bench with interactive and sio at 1.7 stock voltages.
---------- Post added at 01:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 AM ----------
Sell the 5th for body parts. Organs are not easy to find.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, sorry didn't work for you, Timings on this kernel is pretty aggressive. If it works, you are lucky to have an elite device. Try 1.54 with GPU at 600 and see how it goes.
clemsyn said:
LOL, sorry didn't work for you, Timings on this kernel is pretty aggressive. If it works, you are lucky to have an elite device. Try 1.54 with GPU at 600 and see how it goes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wont give up
boynamedstacy said:
Dude.... WTF!? 106 FPS!!?! That can't be right, can it?
Sent from my Glazed-over Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mines booted up. Got scared for a moment..lol. seemed stuck on Google screen. Bit it eventually booted up. Running default speed. I haven't cranked it up yet to test top speeds.
As for your fps scores, I'm not surprised with this being 600mhz gpu. Bit the crazy thing is our displays can't handle or really display more than 60fps.
Please report CPU temps running at 1.7ghz. Especially while benchmarking, gaming, and normal use.
Battery life would be interesting also.
106 fps?! what trickery is this?!

Slow CPU and Memory

In AnTuTu Benchmark i get worse score for CPU and Memory. Is it my Phone Died? I will never again buy used Phone. I have new Gigabyte GSmart Roma R2 (Plus Edition) with very fast CPU and Alcatel Pop C3 and both works great.
Sandi1987 said:
In AnTuTu Benchmark i get worse score for CPU and Memory. Is it my Phone Died? I will never again buy used Phone. I have new Gigabyte GSmart Roma R2 (Plus Edition) with very fast CPU and Alcatel Pop C3 and both works great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The CPU and Memory benchmarks depend on the ROM, the number of Apps you've installed, and a lot more factors. Also, this phone is 4.5 years old now, so what more do you expect out of it? Your phone is not dead. Go ahead and try out some custom ROMs, Kernels and MODs for your i9100.
Sandi1987 said:
In AnTuTu Benchmark i get worse score for CPU and Memory. Is it my Phone Died? I will never again buy used Phone. I have new Gigabyte GSmart Roma R2 (Plus Edition) with very fast CPU and Alcatel Pop C3 and both works great.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's your antutu score? Anything above 12000 should be considered alright. I personally get around 15000 on antutu. Perhaps look more at the specs of the cpu and etc to confirm if product is gunuine or not.
gsstudios said:
What's your antutu score? Anything above 12000 should be considered alright. I personally get around 15000 on antutu. Perhaps look more at the specs of the cpu and etc to confirm if product is gunuine or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
12735 (Version 5.1). I tried PassMark PerformanceTest and Quadrant Standard Edition and i got lower Results on the same ROM. Something is wrong with CPU and Memory.
EDIT:
I got Score 13451 in version 5.7, but CPU and Memory Score are too bad.
@Sandi1987
Put your phone in a fridge for 1 hour . Clear recent apps menu and ram and run the test again. Tell us results.
And i'm not joking about 1 hour in fridge.
Wysłane ze Slim-fonika 9.0 powered by Apolo 7.3
In SuperPI i got normal Results (1M) and Games works normally.
Sandi1987 said:
12735 (Version 5.1). I tried PassMark PerformanceTest and Quadrant Standard Edition and i got lower Results on the same ROM. Something is wrong with CPU and Memory.
EDIT:
I got Score 13451 in version 5.7, but CPU and Memory Score are too bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CPU and memory scores affected by version of android (as well as runtime and etc). Usually stock won't give the best performance, but custom roms usually have more performance. Installing a custom kernel can also boost performance too.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Same Android and AnTuTu version.
I have:
RAM: 970
CPU Integer: 1205
CPU Float-Point: 205
CPU Float-Point Score is so bad.
Why i have lower Scores then on Alcatel Pop C3 with 1300 MHz Dual Core in Benchmarking Software, but Games works normally like always? Android System works fast.
My CPU works only at Max. 800 MHz, not 1200 MHz. This is the reason why i get lower Scores. I Overclock CPU from 1200 MHz to 1400 MHz and it's works only at 800 MHz.
EDIT:
I found the problem. I have Enabled Energy Saver.

Honor 7 graphics GPU problem?

Hi! Suspecting a graphics problem.
So... I just bought this phone. I charged it and updated to 6.0, then installed my apps.
It seemd a bit sluggish when handling graphics, which made me test it with 3dmark. I ran SlingShot ES3.1 and got quite poor results in the graphics section. Physics were fine (CPU related, I guess). Screenshot below. The graphics score was 323 (in one review, which I cant link) and the reference score in app is 283. Mine is 71. I had nothing running background and the phone was recently restarted. What could be the reason?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Edit. Power plan is also set to "performance".
As you may know, this SOC does perform well in multitasking but not so in single task and graphics. It's common to all Kirin SOC.
That said, I got 69 score and 1320 Physics, so pretty standard.
It's not a gamer GPU.
zinko_pt said:
As you may know, this SOC does perform well in multitasking but not so in single task and graphics. It's common to all Kirin SOC.
That said, I got 69 score and 1320 Physics, so pretty standard.
It's not a gamer GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, good at single and multi core but not on graphics
memht said:
Actually, good at single and multi core but not on graphics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparatively to Qualcomm apples-to-apples you're wrong, due to it's higher frequency. Check P9 (Kirin 955) and Honor8 reviews when compared with SD820 and SD652.
zinko_pt said:
As you may know, this SOC does perform well in multitasking but not so in single task and graphics. It's common to all Kirin SOC.
That said, I got 69 score and 1320 Physics, so pretty standard.
It's not a gamer GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then how is it possible that the same device has got very different scores when tested in reviews?
futuremark.com/hardware/mobile/Huawei+Honor+7/review
qtba said:
Then how is it possible that the same device has got very different scores when tested in reviews?
futuremark.com/hardware/mobile/Huawei+Honor+7/review
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Different test settings. Apps installed, accounts, phone settings...
Sent from my PLK-L01 using Tapatalk
But the results surely should not be that bad? I mean, the graphics score I got was less than fourth of what I saw in different reviews. Only difference was, that the tests in reviews were ran with android 5.x still on board and I ran the test with 6.0 just installed. The futuremark test is standard.
My phone was mint condition. No programs on background. Nothing but the standard applicatins installed. Did not make a difference. I ran the test several times just to make sure (with reboots etc.). Socres were 66-71 (graphic score around 53-55).
qtba said:
But the results surely should not be that bad? I mean, the graphics score I got was less than fourth of what I saw in different reviews. Only difference was, that the tests in reviews were ran with android 5.x still on board and I ran the test with 6.0 just installed. The futuremark test is standard.
My phone was mint condition. No programs on background. Nothing but the standard applicatins installed. Did not make a difference. I ran the test several times just to make sure (with reboots etc.). Socres were 66-71 (graphic score around 53-55).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could even be different app versions. Unless you provide the reviews we'll be around endless speculation.
Having different kernel (5.1 vs 6.0.1) also makes a difference.
qtba said:
Hi! Suspecting a graphics problem.
So... I just bought this phone. I charged it and updated to 6.0, then installed my apps.
It seemd a bit sluggish when handling graphics, which made me test it with 3dmark. I ran SlingShot ES3.1 and got quite poor results in the graphics section. Physics were fine (CPU related, I guess). Screenshot below. The graphics score was 323 (in one review, which I cant link) and the reference score in app is 283. Mine is 71. I had nothing running background and the phone was recently restarted. What could be the reason?
Edit. Power plan is also set to "performance".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kirin processors aren't powerful enough for heavy games or single core demanding tasks
PalakMi said:
Kirin processors aren't powerful enough for heavy games or single core demanding tasks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, it´s widely documented throughout the web. Even Mali GPU in latest Exynos are more powerful.
zinko_pt said:
True, it´s widely documented throughout the web. Even Mali GPU in latest Exynos are more powerful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly

Categories

Resources