Develop Bugs

Question about neo core

Hoping someone here can give me an answer. I installed the new update, and when I check gears and fps2d, it shows about 53 fps. If I run neo core, it only shows 28, anyone have any thoughts?
Sent from my Htc Evo

Really? No one has any ideas about this? I figured some of the developers here might have something to say.
Sent from my Htc Evo

First you answered a question I was going to ask, lol thank you. I was going to ask if with the new OTA is neocore still only showing 30 or less fps, but you answered with your question.
Ok I dont have a definitive answer, I am not that smart with these things. However, from reading these forums I believe my theory to be true. The reason you are able to get 50+ fps with FPS2D is because the screens refresh rate is actually double that of the stock screen. So essentualy you are really not getting 50+ FPS but it appears as though you are. Its a trick, a good one. Neocore must test the FPS in a diffrent way, a better more accurate way. So your phone cant really do 50+ frames persecond but to me and you it looks like it is and thats actually good enough for games and what not. The side effect of the double refresh rate is a shorter screen life. With that said who keeps these smart phones for 10 years anyway. Hopefully someone comes through and explains how Neocore test its FPS as apposed to FPS2D. Its almost as if FPS2D is testing what the screen is doing and Neocore is testing what the GPU is doing.
With that said dont go crying foul this trick methoed is good enough and gets the job done. Thanks dev's for creating a good enough work around. And thanks HTC for finaly making it available to the larger audience.

Neocore and nena mark measure 3d fps. Fps2d and gears measure 2d fps.
Sent from my SUPERSONIC

I don't know why some people say it's a trick. Just look at your screen. Is it not noticeably smother? That's because you ARE getting a higher framerate.
Neocore and nena mark measure 3d fps. Fps2d and gears measure 2d fps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. BIG difference.

_MetalHead_ said:
I don't know why some people say it's a trick. Just look at your screen. Is it not noticeably smother? That's because you ARE getting a higher framerate.
This. BIG difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah its noticably diffrent its faster, its twice as fast. But from what I read you arnt gettings twice as many FPS you are actually getting a screen refresh rate that is doubled. So instead of getting twice as many frames you are gettings the same amount of frames just refreshed faster. That sounds like a trick to me .
I mean no disrespect to the dev's and I like the 50+fps I am getting in 2D. I am simply just trying to help understand whats going on.

[Q] Kaiser 3D Drivers For Android - SOLVED - CAN BE CLOSED

I was wondering, the 3D performance is a lot better on the kaiser when using the video drivers (of course).
But is there any way to get the 3D driver to work in android?
Since i don't think it's possible to just install the driver on WM and then run Android because it fully shuts down WM i was wondering wether there's a way to get that nice smooth performance on Android as well.
Or is there any app that makes the kaiser a bit faster (graphics wise)?
Thanks a lot!!!
Answer:
3D Drivers are implemented (if that's the correct word (I'm from Belgium so)) in Android.

syntax1993 said:
I was wondering, the 3D performance is a lot better on the kaiser when using the video drivers (of course).
But is there any way to get the 3D driver to work in android?
Since i don't think it's possible to just install the driver on WM and then run Android because it fully shuts down WM i was wondering wether there's a way to get that nice smooth performance on Android as well.
Or is there any app that makes the kaiser a bit faster (graphics wise)?
Thanks a lot!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aren't they allready implemented using opengl????

If your running android you already have the drivers, they are in the kernel. I think we need to make a big sticky of that somewhere, third time ive seen it asked this week.

aceoyame said:
If your running android you already have the drivers, they are in the kernel. I think we need to make a big sticky of that somewhere, third time ive seen it asked this week.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I second that

syntax1993 said:
Or is there any app that makes the kaiser a bit faster (graphics wise)?
Thanks a lot!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As has already been said, HW3d is implemented into the kernel which utilises the qcom chip in our kaiser's, but the hardware graphics acceleration although better then nothing is pretty crap compared to the new phones coming along so you can't expect miracles, just be glad it has any at all and android can actually use it unlike window mobile!

scooter1556 said:
As has already been said, HW3d is implemented into the kernel which utilises the qcom chip in our kaiser's, but the hardware graphics acceleration although better then nothing is pretty crap compared to the new phones coming along so you can't expect miracles, just be glad it has any at all and android can actually use it unlike window mobile!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would not call 32 frames per second in NEOCORE, with your build, prertty crap.
Well, can not be compared to new phones, but you must admit that this is more than enough to run 3D games(we can play RagingTunder2!).

Millence said:
I would not call 32 frames per second in NEOCORE, with your build, prertty crap.
Well, can not be compared to new phones, but you must admit that this is more than enough to run 3D games(we can play RagingTunder2!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it is quite impressive for an old timer, but obviously it can't keep up with the new hardware on the market and therefore the applications/games that are targeted at these devices. It's also a shame it isn't man enough for new video codecs although installing arcMedia which uses FFMpeg as it's backend improves things a little and gives support for more formats.

Thank you for answering, i had no idea it was integrated into the kernel.
I've heard that the kaiser had a quite good video chip but that's probably compared to the other phones at that time .
Well my phone is running Quake2 at about 10FPS (a bit higher (about 15-20) when looking into corners etc.) and i was hoping for a bit higher rate but it seems it isn't very easy to gain that on android.
Thanks a lot again for this quick answer, i haven't found any post on the forum wich answered my question so...
Syntax1993

Haven't looked well enough then it seems.
I'm sorry.

awhile back I looked at the performance of our integrated 3d and it is about on par with a rage 128 from what I remember... which is pretty bad lol not to mention that on android we have to run through java and we have a pretty weak fpu. I mean in linpack with my barebones rls 3 and overclocked to 572 mhz I get 3.8 mflop/s which is pretty bad lol. That was with JIT working properly even.

aceoyame said:
awhile back I looked at the performance of our integrated 3d and it is about on par with a rage 128 from what I remember... which is pretty bad lol not to mention that on android we have to run through java and we have a pretty weak fpu. I mean in linpack with my barebones rls 3 and overclocked to 572 mhz I get 3.8 mflop/s which is pretty bad lol. That was with JIT working properly even.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have u had any problems clocking that high? I'm a bit scared to clock higher than 450Mhz because i don't want to brick my phone tbh.
Would be cool to clock that high.
*Afraid to clock that high LOL*

syntax1993 said:
Have u had any problems clocking that high? I'm a bit scared to clock higher than 450Mhz because i don't want to brick my phone tbh.
Would be cool to clock that high.
*Afraid to clock that high LOL*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And there's the batt consumption issue... even if it can be reached ull need a really really long lasting extended batt, I got a Seidio Inocell 1600mAh, in a donut with .25 kernel and oced to 470, my batt last me like 10-12 hours if I use moderate wifi, bt or gps and keeping my data to 2g only.... If I try to keep my wifi or gps turned on all time and use 3g probably it wouldnt last more than 4-6 hours.

albertorodast2007 said:
And there's the batt consumption issue... even if it can be reached ull need a really really long lasting extended batt, I got a Seidio Inocell 1600mAh, in a donut with .25 kernel and oced to 470, my batt last me like 10-12 hours if I use moderate wifi, bt or gps and keeping my data to 2g only.... If I try to keep my wifi or gps turned on all time and use 3g probably it wouldnt last more than 4-6 hours.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well since the data here costs a lot of money (i don't know what it's like where you live) i rarely use it.
GPS is off and wifi is only on when at home or for a short period of time.
BT is also rarely used and off when not used.
I'm using a 2880Mah battery so the clocking won't be that much of a problem and i can recharge it every night so.
Aren't there high costs for 2G and 3G? it's waay to expensive to have it turned on all day.
Would i get any problems when clocking to around 500Mhz or smthng like that?

syntax1993 said:
Well since the data here costs a lot of money (i don't know what it's like where you live) i rarely use it.
GPS is off and wifi is only on when at home or for a short period of time.
BT is also rarely used and off when not used.
I'm using a 2880Mah battery so the clocking won't be that much of a problem and i can recharge it every night so.
Aren't there high costs for 2G and 3G? it's waay to expensive to have it turned on all day.
Would i get any problems when clocking to around 500Mhz or smthng like that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If ur using a data plan its relatively cheaper... i've oced my lil htc tilt to 520mhz, specialy when trying heavy apps and never had an issue (well never had issues more than the normal ones LOL ) you'll feel it gets a bit "warm" in the backside (maybe due to the higher batt consumption) and speed increase isnt that much beyond a certain point but maybe ull be luckier than me! (this is something common in evert oc! my cousin and i both have an evga gtx 275 i can get ir run almost 100 mhz higher than stock and if my cousin even tries to touch the values his pc hangs up!!) Taking abuot that... The only thing i've never tried was to oc the gpu (i've seen that option in atools) dunno if its doable in our kaisers and if there's a real increase/decrease in performance... if you give it a try maybe you could publish ur results...

albertorodast2007 said:
If ur using a data plan its relatively cheaper... i've oced my lil htc tilt to 520mhz, specialy when trying heavy apps and never had an issue (well never had issues more than the normal ones LOL ) you'll feel it gets a bit "warm" in the backside (maybe due to the higher batt consumption) and speed increase isnt that much beyond a certain point but maybe ull be luckier than me! (this is something common in evert oc! my cousin and i both have an evga gtx 275 i can get ir run almost 100 mhz higher than stock and if my cousin even tries to touch the values his pc hangs up!!) Taking abuot that... The only thing i've never tried was to oc the gpu (i've seen that option in atools) dunno if its doable in our kaisers and if there's a real increase/decrease in performance... if you give it a try maybe you could publish ur results...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll try clocking CPU to about 500Mhz or a bit more
Going to use it tomorrow because it's about 9pm ATM.
GPU would be nice if it was possible to overclock it.
I'll post it tomorrow, could be that i can't see any result compared to a lower frequency.
Thx for ur help btw!

I've noticed a small diffrence when trying quake2 atm.
The diffrence isn't very great but i will try clocking it a bit higher tomorrow
Yooooo

As i've said before many times there is no risk in overclocking past 528 because we are not touching the voltage going to the cpu when we are overclocking it, just the crystal that controls the frequency it is running at. There is a slight heat increase and loss of battery consequentially because of that extra heat but that is it. I am speaking from experience overclocking a 2.4 ghz celeron E2200 to 4.25 ghz on air cooling with no disatrous results and used it as such every day. Basically I overclocked it with a pinmod for voltage and FSB increases and then I overclocked it further with the motherboard and supplied even more voltage. For the heatsink I used an OEM socket 775 heatsink and had no problems at all, it typically ran about 48 Celsius. If an overclock that high and potentially harmful won't kill the cpu then certainly one of a much smaller % is not going to harm a little kaiser.
FYI I took the voltage on that Celeron to 1.7 volts to get it that high. Stock is 1.1 if I recall

aceoyame said:
As i've said before many times there is no risk in overclocking past 528 because we are not touching the voltage going to the cpu when we are overclocking it, just the crystal that controls the frequency it is running at. There is a slight heat increase and loss of battery consequentially because of that extra heat but that is it. I am speaking from experience overclocking a 2.4 ghz celeron E2200 to 4.25 ghz on air cooling with no disatrous results and used it as such every day. Basically I overclocked it with a pinmod for voltage and FSB increases and then I overclocked it further with the motherboard and supplied even more voltage. For the heatsink I used an OEM socket 775 heatsink and had no problems at all, it typically ran about 48 Celsius. If an overclock that high and potentially harmful won't kill the cpu then certainly one of a much smaller % is not going to harm a little kaiser.
FYI I took the voltage on that Celeron to 1.7 volts to get it that high. Stock is 1.1 if I recall
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awsome I could only reach 2.9 gigs on a intel q9400 on an asrock g31m-s (its a really crappy n cheap mobo!) The q9400 runs stock @ 2.66 maybe u can help me with that too lol!! Kiddin...
Sent from my HTC Kaiser using XDA App

albertorodast2007 said:
Awsome I could only reach 2.9 gigs on a intel q9400 on an asrock g31m-s (its a really crappy n cheap mobo!) The q9400 runs stock @ 2.66 maybe u can help me with that too lol!! Kiddin...
Sent from my HTC Kaiser using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See BSEL pin mod for socket 775 as it isnt a gigabyte board that should send your OC soaring through the roof since it doesnt use CPUID for configuring its clock speed on boot.

Millence said:
I would not call 32 frames per second in NEOCORE, with your build, prertty crap.
Well, can not be compared to new phones, but you must admit that this is more than enough to run 3D games(we can play RagingTunder2!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just tried Raging Thunder 2. Wow - I had no idea games like this could run well on our old machines - except without an accelerometer I can't see how to steer and accelerate at the same time .
Are there any other nice looking action/racing gaems out there that give decent frame rates?

[Q] Low Quadrant Scores recently? [SOLVED]

After racking my brain recently thinking that possibly my evo was somehow screwed up internally, I found the culprit.
Here's what happened....
I got bored and curious so I flashed a CM7 nightly to assure myself I have been missing nothing. Did the usual battery of testing after I update all my apps. Pathetically slow. I was left wondering how people could be bragging of 1600+ quadrant scores on aosp roms while I was barely getting over 1000. On VP I was accustomed to getting high 1400's. It seemed smooth enough but I wanted my VP back. I did a fresh install after a few wipes, same routine, updated apps and found I was getting 951 on the quadrant score, topping out at maybe 1100. That is 400 points below what I was getting before using the same kernel etc!
This has gone on for days now, been reading xda, even bugged a developer to see if he had insight. Thought I was onto something earlier when people reported problems with DarkTremors a2sd since I had upgraded to latest beta 4. So I wiped no less than 7 times, even once in the bootloader. Installed VaelPak2.3a and my scores were back! Thought I solved it but nope. Installed VaelPak3.1 found my scores back to normal. Did update 2, scores still normal. Upgraded apps. Scores dropped 300+ points.
Pulled the Quadrant from the VaelPak rom, and guess what? My scores are back to normal! So, am I the only one who has upgraded Quadrant and seen a difference in scores?
[quadrant version 1.1.5 is the good working version, 1.1.7 currently in the Market is causing the low scores]

Damn you're right, I was getting 1800+ before and now with 1.1.7 it's down to 1500+. Not quite the drop you were getting but it's still a significant difference.

Is it possible that newer Quadrant is supposed to give lower scores now on same hardware because it takes into account better hardware/newer phones? Idk, just posing the question

The most recent quadrant update apparently shows lower score results. Same thing happened with Linpack awhile back, they say it's more accurate now :/

same here, dropped by almost 200.

I can't say for sure whether they wanted the drop to "be more accurate" since the change log for 1.1.7 only claims gingerbread compatibility fixes. If you notice, the comparison chart levels have not changed along with the result ranges. A standard EVO is still something like 1200 or 1250 like it has always been. So, I do not see these numbers being more accurate if I am scoring significantly less than a stock unrooted phone.
I guess what I am saying is that if a benchmark decides to adjust their rating scale, the comparison scale should follow suit.

Don't you hate it when you spend time trying to fix something and here it not you at all? Like the the sound goes out on the TV. Then you spend the next 10 min. reseting receivers your TV and every device in your house. Just to find you its the cable company. Man I hate that.. let the bashing of cable companies begin...
Also:
I used to run those kinds of tests on my video cards on my pc all the time. Then they started making them for better cards and my scores kept going lower and lower. Eventually I got board with it because I knew I had a good card. It was just their POS software was making it look bad. Haven't ran that app since. Hope that doesn't happen to quadrant.

no wonder, and i cant get 1.1.7 to work on my g1. can anyone kindly share me 1.1.5's apk?
googled for it but couldnt find any
thanks!

[Q] The video processor really this bad?

I know the Evo is an older phone but it still hold it's own and is sometimes the standard in which a benchmark has been made. I ALSO know that the quadrant score is just a placebo and not really something you go by to define your phones abilities.
That being said, I noticed on the quad test in the video area I was getting single to LOW double digit frame-rates. I didn't try this with the stock but I get the same results on Warm and on CM7. I use the quad test just for my personal use and a small ruler just to see what might have changed from Rom to Rom. The CM7 Rom on nightly 30 is fantastic but the video score is pushing out a 1000 quad score BELOW the Evo 2.2 marker. It also did the same when I tried out 26(maybe 25) so I know this is phone related somehow.
I'm not worried about speeding up the phone because it's snappy, I was more curious as to what the deal is with the video processing. Is this standard or fixable?

As you already stated Quadrant is a bit of a placebo. The bigger problem is that it is highly inaccurate with Gingergread. CM7 will get around 1000 because of this alone. This is not because of the graphics. Flash back to CM6 and rerun it, I was hitting 1700s with early Savage kernel (pre-zen-merger), the graphics scores aren't much better: the planets maxes around 45-50fps but the others rarely crack 20.

Another interesting thing I found. Run it twice. 2nd will always be higher. Might be a true score. Not sure why this is. I'm on CM7 but I did this on other ROMs.

You'll get higher scores on anything but CM7, but honestly the scores don't measure your performance.

I agree they don't and again I am not saying "why are my scores low". I am actually watching the video test and seeing FPS 9-18. I could care less what the end result is, I'll put my phone up to anyones phone in the same ballpark and I know it will blow away or hold it's own.
Is there another standalone more accurate video test?
I am coming from a Vibrant which was sick and I don't expect the same picture but 9FPS is not good for any phone.

Quadrant: Worse than you thought

As we all know quadrant is no reliable measure for speed. At least I knew this for a while now and it was repeated and quoted many times.
This article tells anybody with a functioning brain (that is used of course) that quadrant means pretty much nothing.
I can't help to run it from time to time anyway
So I sat on the to... in my room in front of my computer with my phone. I9000 with supersonic ROM and the remount script from adrenaline shot 7. I sat there and said to myself "how hight can you score in quadrant LOL"
I started quadrant up and ran the benchmark: 2309
Then I opened the task manager-> Exit all & Clear memory
Then via long press homebutton back to quadrant to run the benchmark again score: 2453
But since I am a programmer and can imagine all kinds of optimizations and caching I pressed the back button and just ran it again just after it finished
Score: 2675
How the hell could anyone call that a benchmark?^^
just to be sure could anyone confirm that behavior? And does anyone know of a mor reliable alternative? I'd like to collect that knowledge in this thread.
TL;DR: quadrant sucks, you know anything better or want to flame away: do it here
Those are not the actual numbers from my first experiment, I repeated the scenario just now and took the numbers from those runs.
Additional runs scored 2775, 2907 and 2820, that's just silly

I think this behaviour is well known and has to do with JIT optimizations or something like that

allotrios said:
I think this behaviour is well known and has to do with JIT optimizations or something like that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason is irrelevant. The fact it doesn't provide a reliable benchmark is.

no benchmark is precise if you don't use it as intended. Quadrant produces a reliable comparative benchmark when used as designed: run it five times, remove the lowest and highest scores and average the remaining 3 -- that is your benchmark. You may not like it, but that is how it is designed to be used.
Now if you want to be pedantic, you could reasonably test again, by running quadrant 5 times, removing the outliers and average your 3 remaining scores. Repeat 10 times and then tell me how your average scores do or do not vary: they will in fact be within a narrow range, your actual benchmark.
Alternatively, tell us which benchmark produces the same score each run, as that appears to be the sum total of your objection to quadrant.
There are other benchmarks, such as Caffiene Mark, AnTuTu and NenaMark, but they are all apps just as Quadrant is and all require several runs and averaging to produce a comparable benchmark.
Moreover, the primary use of any benchmark is to compare firmware (kernel and rom) builds on the same phone to see relative performance gain and drop.

A benchmark is supposed to give way of comparing the capabilities of a given device. This means that a device with a high average score implies a better device than a lower score.
But the Quadrant score does nothing of this sort! In a competition with a friend I achieved an average Quadrant score of about 4300, with a peak of 4462. According to Quadrant my device is a lot better than the OP! Which is just not true.
Quadrant is unreliable as a benchmark, no matter how it is "designed to be used".
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

whaave said:
But the Quadrant score does nothing of this sort! In a competition with a friend I achieved an average Quadrant score of about 4300, with a peak of 4462. According to Quadrant my device is a lot better than the OP! Which is just not true.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're doing it wrong.
lgsshedden said:
Moreover, the primary use of any benchmark is to compare firmware (kernel and rom) builds on the same phone to see relative performance gain and drop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Quadrant scores are useless. I've used custom roms with scores of 2500+ but they aren't as smooth as stock roms, which only have scores of 1600-1800.

Antutu is indeed quite reliable imho. My results never fluctuate more than +-5% on the same config. That's an acceptable range, considering I don't set cpu governor to performance before running my tests.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

upichie said:
You're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
w00t?
Quadrant does not reflect performance, and therefore can not be used as a comparison parameter.

It can't be much worse than I thought.
My phone with 2.1 and 'lag fix' scored 2200 and lagged so bad I wanted to throw it against a wall multiple times a day.
With stock 2.3 quadrant can be ~1000 but the phone runs much smoother.
Other than the obvious file systems I/O 'cheats' that resulted in the above, there is also the frame rate cap that makes the GPU tests useless as well.

if your trying to measure height with a scale , u wont get your answer .
The only benchmark tool that ever reflected how the phone felt in my hands , in real life usage is linpack .
changing OC / kernel is mainly the only thing that will affect linpack if your trying to use it to compare roms ill efer you to my first statement .
In order to have a good feel of a rom / set up on the phone , use some apps that will use lots of ressources , for example TW4 launcher , go in there scroll a lot open gallery (if you have many pics) scroll thru them and repeat ... Any benchmark tools will basically tell you the 'ability of your device ' ( comparing 2 different models like an inspire and an sgs2 for example will be accurate )

ZioGTS said:
Antutu is indeed quite reliable imho. My results never fluctuate more than +-5% on the same config. That's an acceptable range, considering I don't set cpu governor to performance before running my tests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I recently tried Passmark Mobile. Still a beta version, but I like it. Test results reflect real performance improvement and degradation pretty closely, particularly for what concerns I/O and memory speed.