Related
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.
just a quick question
Depends on what the phone is doing. Stock can go to 1200mhz if required. By the same token, if the phone only needs 200mhz for a given task, then that's what it will use.
In what context are you asking the question ?
No basically i was checking antutu benchmark and the maximum it said was 800mhz.
was i just looking at the wrong info or is it the max its clocked at? cpu it says is 200 - 800
Default Clock speed for the Galaxy S2 is 200mhz to 1200mhz (1.2Ghz)
In Antutu, if you click on the 'i' on the bottom of the screen and scroll to System Info, it should show CPU Frequency as 200.00 - 1200.00 MHz, unless you have it underclocked.
Also, from what i understand, Antutu aswel as other apps always show the S2 cpu as ARM Cortex-A7 processor, when in actual fact its an ARM Cortex-A9 processor
Have you set a profile in an app that can set the CPU min/max (Voltage Control, Set CPU, etc, etc) ? I use 200-800 as a default profile.
So far as benchmarks/info they provide are concerned, I wouldn't know given I personally think benchmarks are a complete waste of time (and have never run one on my phone).
Essentially, on stock, your CPU should have a 200-1200mhz range, and the CPU speed at a given point in time will vary depending on what the phone is doing as I said in my previous post.
Oh I see thanks to both of you
Does anyone know an app or a website with the the Mali T-604's full specifications. Like gpu clockspeed, V-RAM, GFLOPS, anything else. Thank you in advanced. (I already know it's quad-core, and I read that it's 423Mhz, and 512Mb of V-RAM, but I need confirmation lol).
Sent from my shooter using xda app-developers app
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-plus-gpu-compute/mali-t604.php Shows a bit of features but nothing like clock speed or GFLOPS.
Judging from: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=39719050#post39719050 It would seem the GPU can clock at 100Mhz, 160MHz, 266MHz, 400MHz, 450MHz, and 533MHz (not sure if this is custom behavior or stock).
and custom kernels have shown we EASILY (like on stock volts easy) can overclock from 533MHz up to 720MHz. This GPU can become a real powerhouse as it gets clocked higher, and I am thinking that if we wanted to overvolt it enough we could probably even have it running at 1GHz.
As for vram, it doesnt have any. VRAM is shared with system RAM and it uses something like 1GB of system memory in reserve for the GPU on this tablet. People theorize that it dedicates so much because of our huge resolution, and that lesser devices would not need to hoard as much of the memory.
EniGmA1987 said:
...and I am thinking that if we wanted to overvolt it enough we could probably even have it running at 1GHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'd be insane lol... my desktop GPU (Radeon HD 7850) is factory OC'd and isn't even 1GHz
espionage724 said:
That'd be insane lol... my desktop GPU (Radeon HD 7850) is factory OC'd and isn't even 1GHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya, but you cant compare MHz between architectures very easily. Your desktop card has WAY more power than this tablet grade GPU. Makes me wish I could get my hands on a Mali T-628 though, with the same OC we have now on that thing I could see it blowing away anything else on the market or coming out soon.
Unfortunately Ktoonsez said it looks like our frequency table is maxed out on the GPU, so I dont know if we will be able to OC higher despite if the GPU is capable of it or not.
Gpu clockspeed isn't always THAT important just look at the GTX Titan, it's only 700-800Mhz yet it's the world's fastest gpu.
Sent from my shooter using xda app-developers app
Afroninja said:
Gpu clockspeed isn't always THAT important just look at the GTX Titan, it's only 700-800Mhz yet it's the world's fastest gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At the risk of turning this into a Desktop GPU thread; I believe AMD"s 7990 takes the spot at world's fastest GPU currently. Almost certain it slaughters the Titan at compute, and pretty sure it beats Titan in most gaming benchmarks. In terms of frame latency though, AMD might be lacking in that department, but not for long :good:
I do agree though clock speed isn't that important in most cases. Almost got a Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition card just because of the 1GHz core clock, but the 7850 I got still outperforms it (to be fair though, it's only 50Mhz lower than 1GHz).
Regardless, with the Nexus 10's resolution, pretty sure we need a nice balance of memory frequency and GPU clock speed. GPU can be as fast as it wants, but it won't help much if the memory bandwidth is being choked :/
Afroninja said:
Gpu clockspeed isn't always THAT important just look at the GTX Titan, it's only 700-800Mhz yet it's the world's fastest gpu.
Sent from my shooter using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats why I said the T-628 could be the fastest if we can OC it the same. Our current GPU has "four cores" and at 720MHz GPU speed we can push 2560x1440 pixels at 58 frames per second average on the Unreal 3 engine. The T-628 is the same as what we have but twice as many cores, so twice as many computing resources. Sure there are other things coming out that are pretty fast, but think of what 2x the power of our current GPU could do At this point though espionage724 would be right, we would probably see memory bottleneck so we would need to step up from DDR-1600 to DDR-2133. Still, testing I have done shows we are just barely starting to hit a memory bottleneck with our GPU @ 720MHz, and if we OC the memory up to DDR-1728 we have lots of extra bandwidth to spare. So changing the memory up to 2133 would alleviate any sort of bottleneck that would ever show up in that area even with twice as many GPU cores.
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
blackbeast8 said:
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
justmpm said:
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every app I tried, including SetCPU and CpuSpy, shows 1,2 GHz as max frequency. As you can see on screenshots, Antutu benchmark shows in system info 1,8 GHz (1741 MHz actually), but in test it uses 1,2 GHz. TBH, the only place I saw 1,8 GHz was in Antutu, not anywhere else.
I contacted the seller, and he is trying to convince me that the phone has CPU Booster and that frequency is really 1,8 GHz. I now sent him screenshots in order to convince him that he is wrong...
I researched that cpu, mt5689 and its max freq is 1,2. mt5689T is 1,5 GHz, but this one is without T.
Kernel version is 3.4.5, from 19th June this year
Baseband version: MOLY.WR8.W1248.MD.WG.MP.V6.P4, 2013/05/04
Android version is 4.2.3
I found some info about ROM: 06_v89_hydy_dangdang_gemi
h ttp://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3662/kocl.png
h ttp://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4357/o0ph.png
If that anything means to you...
I am not trying to overclock my phone, I just want to be able to use what I've payed for. I could have bought 1,2 GHz, but I payed for this one and I want to use it, that's the poing...
Unfortunately, only after I bought it, I found all this. I didn't inform myself enough, before purchasing...
Thanks anyway
The seller is still trying to convince me that the max cpu freq is 1,8 GHz, with cpu booster, but I still cannot see or use it in any app, except that Antutu benchmark sees the 1,8 GHz as max, but still uses 1,2 GHz.
Chipset and cpu is rated to 1,2 GHz, as I saw on mt6589 reviews, so I think that I am fooled...
Good morning, my name is Jorge Martinez, I am another ezio buyer i95, I arrived with several flaws, the most serious the gps it is impossible to make it work, even after following many online tutorials.
The on / off button sometimes gets caught and resets.
The headphone connection is not good and sounds bad.
Reviewed this to the salesman told me they would give me support, etc, etc, told me I was going to wait to send another new model, gave me all kinds of options, but ultimately it only to gain time.
Once you pass the time of the vote, and has forgotten all its commitments and ripped me off.
I recommend everyone to not deal with the seller, who has only good words but deceives.
I hope my mistake serve for one to be saved from falling into this trap, but also effectively tells you it's quad core 1.8, it's actually 1.2.
Greetings all, I hope this information will be useful.
Demonstrating GPS reception via Device-Z-Test app. My S3 on the left and Ezio I95 on the right.
The latter, bought through eBay, was successfully returned to the Hong Kong exporter.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4
Ezio i95 Stock rom
Any one had ezio i95 stok rom?
ezio 95
hi,
I have read that some of the specs get rewritten within the operating system to fool antutu.
However I am also after a copy of the stock rom. I have a enzio s89 that I have bricked before I made a rom copy. This ezio i95 uses the same processor and is about the same size Maybe it will work in mine.
Are you able to download MTK droid tools and make a copy of your stock rom please. That is always worth doing in any case.
hi all,
is there a way to undervolt and or OC the CPU and GPU?
I remember reading a article a month ago about a GPU OC, but somehow that's it. No way to download the mentioned app etc.
Is there anything for the Mi 10 / SD 865?
Snapdragons don't overclock because they're not underclocked.
shivadow said:
Snapdragons don't overclock because they're not underclocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this news oage, we still have some potential left in our SD865
Xiaomi Mi 10 Overclocking Has Improved Significantly
he game performance has also been improved in addition to the higher running scores of the overclocked Snapdragon 865 models.
www.igeekphone.com
here is even a XDA link to another phone without any links to the app itself...
Abandoned
abandoned.
forum.xda-developers.com
so there is a way to OC and UV the SD865
That isn't what it appears to be to me. It appears to be an ongoing project to oc/uv the snapdragon processor and gpu and so far all they've done is managed to change the ram clockspeed. The pros of undervolting the ram is less heat but the cons is bottlenecking under load because ram uses voltage in correlation to clockspeed. If you overvolt the ram it produces more heat, processes more data but stability goes out of the window completely. This is NOT CPU/GPU core clocking and won't have any effect on the cores whatsoever, only data throughput.
I'll stand by my word coming from HTC to Xiaomi, both snapdragon phones, you can't overclock a snapdragon because they're not underclocked. It has been that way for a long time. What they advertise the chip as capable of is what the chip is capable of as by design and will actually be that way in the field.
If you want proof just take a browse around the later HTC phones and you won't see anything about core clocking, probably not ram volting either..
shivadow said:
That isn't what it appears to be to me. It appears to be an ongoing project to oc/uv the snapdragon processor and gpu and so far all they've done is managed to change the ram clockspeed. The pros of undervolting the ram is less heat but the cons is bottlenecking under load because ram uses voltage in correlation to clockspeed. If you overvolt the ram it produces more heat, processes more data but stability goes out of the window completely. This is NOT CPU/GPU core clocking and won't have any effect on the cores whatsoever, only data throughput.
I'll stand by my word coming from HTC to Xiaomi, both snapdragon phones, you can't overclock a snapdragon because they're not underclocked. It has been that way for a long time. What they advertise the chip as capable of is what the chip is capable of as by design and will actually be that way in the field.
If you want proof just take a browse around the later HTC phones and you won't see anything about core clocking, probably not ram volting either..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offense, but have you read any of the two links I posted?
They literally explain, that they changed/overclocked the GPU frequency to 865mhz
stock frequency should be 587mhz.
They did overclock the GPU.
They even proved it by showing some benchmarks.. and compared it to the SD888
And this is the first time I read, that SDs are not overclockable...
865mhz is the bus and ram frequency. The cores are in the ghz.
All that has been achieved is a higher throughput and that equates to more heat and more used power. This stuff is well researched.
I honestly dont get, where you getting the RAM OC thing.
They do not use ddr7 or ddr8 on a mobile SoC, because the tech isnt there yet...
If you search for the Andreno 650 GPU you will see its specs that it is clocked at 587mhz (and not the Ram).
They are of course adjusting the ram timings too, but the xda links tells the following:
"2. edit your settings in the 3 tables. (start with adding the extra step form 865+ to 865)
3. press "Save GPU Freq Table" after editing any page, before you move to another."
If you want to stay with your resolution on this topic, it is fine.
I just want to know where we can get the KonaBess app, because google only links me to chinese pages and somehow this topic isnt as popular as I thought.
Not 100% sure if this link is allowed.... https://github.com/xzr467706992/KonaBess/releases/tag/v0.12
Scroll down to assets and its in there.
shivadow said:
Not 100% sure if this link is allowed.... https://github.com/xzr467706992/KonaBess/releases/tag/v0.12
Scroll down to assets and its in there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks alot
I dont know why I couldnt find it with google
btw: I hope I really didnt offend you with any of the sentences.
RaZoR No1 said:
Thanks alot
I dont know why I couldnt find it with google
btw: I hope I really didnt offend you with any of the sentences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a heads up, not all snapdragons are created equally. That said, there is definitely performance left to gain via OC the adreno 650 gpu of the 865. I'm currently running a massive 930mhz on my adreno 650 and a very small cpu OC and with that, it blows the 865+ away in benchmarking and trades wins with a stock SD 888 with CPU and GPU bench scores. Any OC'ing you do I highly recommend doing a stress test before thinking you're stable.
1dopewrx05 said:
Just a heads up, not all snapdragons are created equally. That said, there is definitely performance left to gain via OC the adreno 650 gpu of the 865. I'm currently running a massive 930mhz on my adreno 650 and a very small cpu OC and with that, it blows the 865+ away in benchmarking and trades wins with a stock SD 888 with CPU and GPU bench scores. Any OC'ing you do I highly recommend doing a stress test before thinking you're stable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the heads up, I am already aware of the "silicon lottery".
I am amazed how much juice is still left in the SD865, that OCd it can even beat the 888 and is more consistent.
Do you use any App to monitor your temps and how did you OC your CPU? Afaik KonaBess only allows GPU oc?
1dopewrx05 said:
Just a heads up, not all snapdragons are created equally. That said, there is definitely performance left to gain via OC the adreno 650 gpu of the 865. I'm currently running a massive 930mhz on my adreno 650 and a very small cpu OC and with that, it blows the 865+ away in benchmarking and trades wins with a stock SD 888 with CPU and GPU bench scores. Any OC'ing you do I highly recommend doing a stress test before thinking you're stable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, I can't seem to find any tutorial online on how to overclock. Could you help me out ? I am gonna order a Black Shark 4 with the Snpadragon 870 soon, which is the best cherrypicked chip along the same chipset as the 865, which means that it's more likely to be a silicon lottery win... Can we get in touch on Discord ? My username is Meli #6318.
please guide me to modify the necessary things to overclock (kernel, file...)
anyway i still want to overclock it and gpu
1dopewrx05 said:
Just a heads up, not all snapdragons are created equally. That said, there is definitely performance left to gain via OC the adreno 650 gpu of the 865. I'm currently running a massive 930mhz on my adreno 650 and a very small cpu OC and with that, it blows the 865+ away in benchmarking and trades wins with a stock SD 888 with CPU and GPU bench scores. Any OC'ing you do I highly recommend doing a stress test before thinking you're stable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you oc the cpu ? and is it possible to oc the gpu of the sd870 which is also the adreno650 but I’ve heard that it’s locked by Qualcomm trust zone , is it just a problem with sd870 or even 888 and 8 gen 1 ? Thanks in advance