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
Related
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
Hi geeks,
checkout this wiki for general information around the new Exynos dual core
http://www.arndaleboard.org/wiki/index.php/Resources
Of course this file might be of special interest...
BTW:
This document is marked as confidential but it's public available.
So Mike, if this is against rules... tell me!
Best regards,
scholbert
Antutu benchmark of Nexus 10
http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2960
Quite impressive because antutu depends much on the number of cores and clockrate rather than architechture (1.5 Ghz Snapdragon S3 got ~6600 while 1.4 Ghz Exynos 4210 on GNote had only ~6300)
And the NAND flash is pretty good too, 16.6MB/s write and >50 MB/s read (in fact my Note 2 has 200 point in SD card read with the mark >50 MB/s too, but this one is 10% faster)
I would love to see one of those fancy graphics comparing the Nexus10 performance with "the others".
We know that it's better but how much better?
And if you want more specs, here's two other benchmarks:
SunSpider:
{
"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"
}
GLBenchmark:
If anyone is interested in the Antutu scores across the Nexus 4, 7 and 10 devices I've cut'n'paste them together from the Antutu site linked above...
These results are as recorded by Antutu himself at these links...
Nexus 10 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2960
Nexus 7 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=1282
Nexus 4 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2940
The 3D and 2D scores on the Nexus 10 keeps up with the other two devices which seems quite impressive considering the higher resolution.
Keitaro said:
If anyone is interested in the Antutu scores across the Nexus 4, 7 and 10 devices I've cut'n'paste them together from the Antutu site linked above...
These results are as recorded by Antutu himself at these links...
Nexus 10 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2960
Nexus 7 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=1282
Nexus 4 - http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2940
The 3D and 2D scores on the Nexus 10 keeps up with the other two devices which seems quite impressive considering the higher resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Odd, why is the CPU on the Nexus 10 slower than the others? I thought that the A15 was supposed to be the fastest thing on the market right now, which would go nicely with the fastest GPU (Mali 604 or whatever it is).
Also, Scumbag Antutu forces the tablet into portrait. I would love it if Google could somehow force apps to run in landscape, apps should never be in portrait on a 16:10 tablet this big unless I deem it so by orienting it in portrait.
via Tapatalk
Kookas said:
Odd, why is the CPU on the Nexus 10 slower than the others? I thought that the A15 was supposed to be the fastest thing on the market right now, which would go nicely with the fastest GPU (Mali 604 or whatever it is).
Also, Scumbag Antutu forces the tablet into portrait. I would love it if Google could somehow force apps to run in landscape, apps should never be in portrait on a 16:10 tablet this big unless I deem it so by orienting it in portrait.
via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Need to keep in mind that the N10 is running at a MUCH larger resolution, that most likely has something to do with it. Had the processor been on the same device as the 4 and 7 you would see a substantial difference.
tkoreaper said:
Need to keep in mind that the N10 is running at a MUCH larger resolution, that most likely has something to do with it. Had the processor been on the same device as the 4 and 7 you would see a substantial difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But I wouldn't expect the load of that higher res to go to the CPU, just the GPU (so 2D and 3D scores). Does the CPU get involved in video processing in SoCs?
via Tapatalk
Does the Nexus label mean that all drivers for this device will be open source? As in, none of the BS that the devs for the i777 are experiencing with Samsung completely unwilling to release specs for the Exynos/Mali combo in that device?
EDIT: Answered my own question. The AOSP site itself tells you to go get the blobs for specific devices if you want to build. So no. Ah well, my concern would be fully functional OS updates, and the Nexus label DOES solve that - at least for a couple of years after release.
These I/O results look promising. A lot better then the transformer prime I had.
While it's nice to see numbers and you should always take them with a grain of salt (for obvious reasons). I for one am just going to wait till I have my Nexus 10 in my hands and see how she flies. I have no doubts that it will run todays apps with no issues and last you easily for a year +. I for one am drooling over the display (esp if non-pentile). Just hope Samsung did something to address the possiblity of pixel fatigue and ghosting/image retention.
Kookas said:
Odd, why is the CPU on the Nexus 10 slower than the others? I thought that the A15 was supposed to be the fastest thing on the market right now, which would go nicely with the fastest GPU (Mali 604 or whatever it is).
Also, Scumbag Antutu forces the tablet into portrait. I would love it if Google could somehow force apps to run in landscape, apps should never be in portrait on a 16:10 tablet this big unless I deem it so by orienting it in portrait.
via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because it's ANTUTU benchmark. As I said in #2, Antutu always prefer number of cores and frequency of cores rather than the architechture.
That's why the Crapdragon S3 1.5 GHz having higher score than 1.4 GHz Exynos 4210 in GNote.
hung2900 said:
Because it's ANTUTU benchmark. As I said in #2, Antutu always prefer number of cores and frequency of cores rather than the architechture.
That's why the Crapdragon S3 1.5 GHz having higher score than 1.4 GHz Exynos 4210 in GNote.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about. The snapdragon is a better architecture with less cores. You have it backwards.
Edit: thought you meant snapdragon s4.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Here are the benchmarks from Anand's review of Chromebook:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/samsung-chromebook-xe303-review-testing-arms-cortex-a15/6
I am almost sure that the N10 will be better optimized compared to Chromebook purely because of the resources dedicated for Android. Also shows that Samsung is still Google's preferred partner in terms of hardware.
zetsumeikuro said:
While it's nice to see numbers and you should always take them with a grain of salt (for obvious reasons). I for one am just going to wait till I have my Nexus 10 in my hands and see how she flies. I have no doubts that it will run todays apps with no issues and last you easily for a year +. I for one am drooling over the display (esp if non-pentile). Just hope Samsung did something to address the possiblity of pixel fatigue and ghosting/image retention.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not an AMOLED display, it's a Super PLS (LCD), isn't it?
blackhand1001 said:
What are you talking about. The snapdragon is a better architecture with less cores. You have it backwards.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do a research man! You can searxh how sh.t crapdragon s3 msm 8660 compared to exynos 4210 in the same galaxy note (US variant vs int variant)
philos64 said:
And if you want more specs, here's two other benchmarks:
SunSpider:
GLBenchmark:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sun spider score is bad vs the chrome book must be the resolution which is high for even high end PCs.
The epic screen was always going to eat most of the resources, the question is: whatever benchmark the final (and in future surely improved) SW version produces, is it enough for smooth operation? That answer will most likely be yes. Chromebook shows huge HW potential, but it's also more optimized at this moment, patience my lads.
The hardware has the potential
Hi Guys,
Came across this while researching Exynos 5250. Looks like the hardware is very capable to handle the WQXGA resolution with memory bandwidth and power to spare. This white paper also mentions the support for 1080p 60fps wireless display. So I hope Miracast will be reality as well, just Google needs to step up and utilize the hardware to its full potential. Its an interesting read none the less..
Sorry, can not post links yet.. replace _ with . and then try.
www_samsung_com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/data/ Enjoy_the_Ultimate_WQXGA_Solution_with_Exynos_5_Dual_WP.pdf
---------- Post added at 04:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 AM ----------
oneguy7 said:
Hi Guys,
Came across this while researching Exynos 5250. Looks like the hardware is very capable to handle the WQXGA resolution with memory bandwidth and power to spare. This white paper also mentions the support for 1080p 60fps wireless display. So I hope Miracast will be reality as well, just Google needs to step up and utilize the hardware to its full potential. Its an interesting read none the less..
Sorry, can not post links yet.. replace _ with . and then try.
www_samsung_com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/data/ Enjoy_the_Ultimate_WQXGA_Solution_with_Exynos_5_Dual_WP.pdf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the link does not work, google exynos 5 dual white paper.
I ran Quadrant and compared the results with those of my old Epic 4g.
Epic 4g Graphics (3d) score is 1666. N10 Graphics (3d) score is 2087. See below.
Epic 4g, rooted, FC09 MTD deodexed, Shadow kernel io/cpu=deadline/ondemand
Nexus 10, not rooted
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
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.
A well knowned tipster- Digital Chat Station declares that the new Tensor chip is all about octa-core.
However, Google usage a 2+2+4 core design. Means 2×2.8ghz power core and other 2×2.25ghz power core. Although there has a 4 cores of power consumption cores. Which is clocked at 1.8ghz.
Not only the CPU is strong but also Google will use here a Mali- G78 GPU, which is the best in class GPU that we're all see today.
Conclusion is, Google will optimised it at there best. For that it will provide the potential speed and features.
{
"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"
}
its just a commissioned chip via Samsung
its a relabeled Exynos, it will be utter trash.
strelokcyka said:
its just a commissioned chip via Samsung
its a relabeled Exynos, it will be utter trash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What else would it be? Or less.
It's no Snapdragon...
Now we all know it's actually a member of Exynos 1080/2100 family with some Google's custom components... Someone said that the Tensor's code nunber was "e9855", while Samsung's flagship Exynos 2100 wss "e9840".
If that's true, the Tensor could have 2 Cortex-X1 cores, and it would be a lot more powerful (at least for the CPU part) than Snapdragon 888(+) and Kirin 9000.
strelokcyka said:
its just a commissioned chip via Samsung
its a relabeled Exynos, it will be utter trash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exynos 2100 isn't really trash, though the previous few generations were
Missignal_Dev said:
Exynos 2100 isn't really trash, though the previous few generations were
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess it depends how well Gookill tunes it.
Recent test scores look real good at least on Samsung devices.
Exynos 2100 vs Snapdragon 888: Benchmarking the Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra versions
We have some performance numbers of our own to go over and examine. For quite some time now Samsung has been releasing two versions of most of its premium...
m.gsmarena.com
The best tester's for the new pixel chip will be the XDA members! Cheers
Missignal_Dev said:
Exynos 2100 isn't really trash, though the previous few generations were
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excessive battery heat, drain and short life going off of track record sure sounds like trash to me.
But hey if you want to buy bad chips, you do you.
strelokcyka said:
Excessive battery heat, drain and short life going off of track record sure sounds like trash to me.
But hey if you want to buy bad chips, you do you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That can happen with any chipset in a Samsung.
It's a common and usually correctable issue.
However, for instance, the 20 Ultras had random heat sinks in use, the copper vapor phase ones ran cool, the graphene pad ones ran hot.
Personally though I wouldn't buy a Google phone or one without a SD card slot.
Missignal_Dev said:
Now we all know it's actually a member of Exynos 1080/2100 family with some Google's custom components... Someone said that the Tensor's code nunber was "e9855", while Samsung's flagship Exynos 2100 wss "e9840".
If that's true, the Tensor could have 2 Cortex-X1 cores, and it would be a lot more powerful (at least for the CPU part) than Snapdragon 888(+) and Kirin 9000.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I expect google's new pixel phone.
strelokcyka said:
its just a commissioned chip via Samsung
its a relabeled Exynos, it will be utter trash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there any possibilities of google making an upgrade to that processor
ivigneshwaran said:
Is there any possibilities of google making an upgrade to that processor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unlikely especially given the ongoing chipset shortage which is only going to get worse.
Hold off for at least a year if you can. Firmware (R) and hardware issues dominate this year's releases... not a pretty picture.
blackhawk said:
Unlikely especially given the ongoing chipset shortage which is only going to get worse.
Hold off for at least a year if you can. Firmware (R) and hardware issues dominate this year's releases... not a pretty picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But we xda'ers like the challenge to fix everything that Google breaks!
galaxys said:
But we xda'ers like the challenge to fix everything that Google breaks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, well... then you are sure to be some of the happiest SOBs on the planet!
The codename is GS101/S5E9845, I saw on this page the specs and Antutu benchmarks for pixel 6.
Google Tensor - PhoneMore
Google Tensor specs, benchmark, performance, architecture, memory and all chipset specifications and technical features.
www.phonemore.com
The Pro version with 12GB RAM is much better, but Exynos 2100 is better than Tensor