First off I'm fairly aware of the fact that benchmarks are not accurate representations of the day to day real life usefulness of the handset.
That said, I used both linpack and quadrant standard edition for the first time tonight while testing another kernel with my current rom (which is cm7, ggingerbread-6).
At the conclusion of my testing it was very obvious that one kernel completely outclassed the other in a benchmarking situation, however something else became apparent that leads to this post.
If I follow and believe everyone else's benchmark scores, even those posted an hour earlier in the same kernel thread, then I might have the slowest Evo on planet earth.
I see other users of the same rom and kernal posting scores which are never below 1500 in quadrant, I saw one instance of 1300 but nonetheless, even overclocking to 1075 I can barely break 1100 and usually fall just below that. Sadly enough on the "slower" of the 2 kernals I was barely surpassing 900.
Now on the linpack side of things I don't have any comparative scores to judge against, but ill post what I received anyhow for information's sake. On the "faster" of the two kernels (the one that came prebuilt into the rom) I was getting between 33-34, on the new kernel I was testing I was getting between 19 and 22, these are all "mflops" of course, whatever that may be.
Someone give me some information or advice here! Do I just happen to have a slow evolution, or are others either exaggerating or using some trick/mod/tweak I'm royalty unaware of??
Thanks in advance!
some people brag, some people cheat, most have low scores, few have high, there isn't a very good baseline and the benchmark programs dont scale very well at all, I have run 1800 scores and I have run 600 scores, guess what. both roms were smooth and you wouldn't have been able to tell a difference, what does that mean? do we believe the benchmark programs? are they spitting a random number at us? who knows! dont believe them, be satisfied with how your evo is running and if it's not running very well then try a different kernel or rom, keep trying new ones until your satisfied, only then will some benchmark program output not mean a thing
Most of my Quadrant benchmarks with aftermarket ROMS+kernels have been in the 1100-1400 range, using VaelPak and various kernels to get most of the better scores there. The highest I've had was CM7RC1 with the SnapTurbo kernel, got an 1821. It was unusable, though.
I've come to the conclusion that the benchmarks aren't as important as battery life, especially with the Evo.
Biggest reason for the huge difference in numbers? Different versions of the app. The dev changed how it rates phones.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Thanks!
Explained. I knew they were totally not concurrent with the outward performance and usability of the device, and for what its worth while I've only ever flashed a total of 3 roms, this one is perfect for me and I seem to be one of the rare few with no problems whatsoever, everything works exactly as I would expect it to. So yes, l never feared my device was suddenly slower now that I knew the all knowing superultrabenchmark number.
Related
Has anyone looked in to this to see if it is something that we could possibly port over/modify to work on our phones and benefit from?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=749495
I did a search and didn't see any topics started on this so I figured it was worth asking.
It increased the quadrant scores tremendously for the Galaxy S.
Non applicable.
Galaxy class phones have serious lag problems due to installation of apps on slow sd.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
If someone wants to compile a new kernel with the "fix" implemented, sure. You would need a class 6 sdcard to see any benefit from it though. The EVO guys are doing it and seeing numbers over 2000. There's no reason it wouldn't work. Though, you probably wouldnt notice any practical difference in the phone in regular use. I'm assuming the quadrant increase is due to the read write speeds being much higher using a card that fast, thus increasing the I/O score on quadrant.
What people don't seem to realize is that quadrant score is an average of the different tests, and not just a blanket score to use for comparisons...on the galaxy s it does fix the lag problem they have. Watch one do a quadrant test. The I/O test takes over a minute. A nice aide effect of the fix is that it inflates quadrant scores. The incredible is far from laggy, so you'd basically be doing it just to see a higher quadrant score.
You'd also have to figure out a way to use the Amon-RA recovery instead of clockwork, as only it can partition the sdcard in the correct way to implement this...
I'd actually love to see people try more things with the kernels, the ones we have are nice, but pretty basic. The EVO guys also have one that actively adjusts the cpu voltage based on speed and temperature, it's supposed to really increase the battery life. I guess that's probably due to the EVO not having the same supply shortages, and the fact they gave out a ton of them free to developers at the google conference, lol.
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!
Didn't see a thread for this in here anymore so I thought I'd post. I know synthetic benchmarks don't mean a lot but I'm curious of what other people are scoring since mine seems to be lower than others tested.
My phone is a Telus SGH-T989D with a rooted stock rom with SetCPU running the system at 1.5 and have the V6 Tweak setup.
I find it interesting others have scored over 4000.
I was going to ask this same question. I tried smart bench on stock rom and the score was always between 2500 and 3400 when i see results of over 4000... I now have the Bombaridier v1.3 Rom and still get the same low results?
Is this normal score or could our phones have some cpu problems? Im thinking on going to T-Mobile and exchange the phone since it also has the camera pink spot problem and minor screen lines and spots on low brightness in dark colors...
finally had some time to sit down and enjoy my phone
Why are we getting our clock cleaned by so many other SGII models?
I don't know if this is a contributing factor, but they're using 2.3.3
We're using 2.3.5
To further this pattern, from what I understand, ICS is causing qudrant scores in the low 2000's and below on good phones..
The more advanced the OS version, the more it taxes the phone.. Just an observation.
I understand that it's fun to see your phone on top, but aren't these "benchmark" tests pretty irrelevant to performance and satisfaction? Is your phone laggy? Do you have any problems or is everything buttery smooth and running well? If it is then I wouldn't worry about arbitrary test results to be honest. You can run benchmarks over and over and get a different score every time. You can cheat on them. In the end just find a ROM/Kernel with the settings and features you like and enjoy it!
Yes that's true but every upgrade in OS uses more resources, so you're bound to see more lag on ICS than our current ROM
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I guess not that many people use this one.
On the stock kernal with the ViperX rom.
I got 12500.
Now with faux kernal I get like 9000.
Why?
I have a MUCH lower CPU score in benchmarks...
Geez you already asked this, why another identical thread? Benchmark means nothing, case closed.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
yeah what is everyones obsession with benchmarks its just a number..
Benchmarks just a number? Tell that to people who drive race cars.
0-60 in 3 seconds is still better performance than 0-60 in 3.5 seconds. If both cars have the same engine, same gearing and weigh the same, then something else must determine why one is slower than the other.
Same way with our phones. Benchmark tests, especially AnTuTu, do offer insights into the performance of our machines. So, instead of giving the snarky answer that 'benchmarks don't matter', just say you have no idea or don't post at all.
yes maybe numbers are more applicable to cars. but this is a mobile phone forum not a car forum.....
the benchmarks mean sod all. the actual experience of using the phone is what matters.
benchmarks can vary from the slightest differences in environment, so yeah it is just a number, and will change for almost anything..
lawrence750 said:
yes maybe numbers are more applicable to cars. but this is a mobile phone forum not a car forum.....
the benchmarks mean sod all. the actual experience of using the phone is what matters.
benchmarks can vary from the slightest differences in environment. they mean absolutely sod all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? A Mobile Phone Forum? How did I miss that part??
Sure experience matters, but to a lot of people, so do numbers. And 3000 points would make a difference, both numerically and perceptually.
I think this thread should be closed and open a new one talking about 10b5.
Enviado desde mi HTC One X usando Tapatalk 2
Baldilocks said:
Sure experience matters, but to a lot of people, so do numbers. And 3000 points would make a difference, both numerically and perceptually.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well seeing as the benchmarks can change literally from one minute to the next, and the fact they aren't that consistent, that essentially proves that the numbers don't mean as much as everyone makes out.
And therefore instead of basing how good your phone is operating on benchmark scores, just judge it on the actual performance of flicking through screens, loading apps , playing games etc etc - if there isn't a problem there, which i bet in the OPs case, there isn't any general performance issues, just a lower score. if there isn't any actual performance issues, then what the hell is the problem?
Hold on everyone. Small fluctuations in benchmark scores are nothing but a consistent drop of 25% is more meaningful, especially if all that changed was the kernel.
Why does everyone on here seem to just repeat what they read last week only with attitude added and regardless of factors such as severity.
To the OP... might be an idea to go back to stock and run several benchmarks to get a good overall picture. Note all the different scores for different tests (CPU, GPU, memory etc). Flash this kernel again and run several benchmarks. See which tests are affected and report your findings to Faux.
lawrence750 said:
well seeing as the benchmarks can change literally from one minute to the next, and the fact they aren't that consistent, that essentially proves that the numbers don't mean as much as everyone makes out.
And therefore instead of basing how good your phone is operating on benchmark scores, just judge it on the actual performance of flicking through screens, loading apps , playing games etc etc - if there isn't a problem there, which i bet in the OPs case, there isn't any general performance issues, just a lower score. if there isn't any actual performance issues, then what the hell is the problem?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Numbers shouldn't be inconsistent. My scores fall within 0.5-1% of each other every time I run them.
Certain ROMs can have a major impact on performance. Just like going to 4.0.4 and Sense 4.1 made a huge positive performance difference. Guess what, you could actually see that difference with 'useless' benchmark tests too.
Op,
Did you cry? Did your heart feel broken? I've heard benchmark scores are everything, they define smartphones these days.
ben-fisher-bro said:
On the stock kernal with the ViperX rom.
I got 12500.
Now with faux kernal I get like 9000.
Why?
I have a MUCH lower CPU score in benchmarks...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I found a fix for you! Just read this post here! http://forum.xda-developers.com/announcement.php?a=81
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
I started one for g4 plus now for g5 plus .
Cosmic os 2.1 unofficial
Elemental x kernel over clocked
What benchmark program are you using?
username8611 said:
What benchmark program are you using?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Antutu
PureNexus using ElementalX stock CPU speeds and GPU governor, CFQ, custom CPU governor settings
Lineage OMS with ElementalX kernel stock CPU speed and governor. ZEN with custom readahead.
This is kind of useless, benchmark comparison means nothing if it is not on the same device with same set of apps installed.
Sent from my LG G5 using XDA Labs
suhridkhan said:
This is kind of useless, benchmark comparison means nothing if it is not on the same device with same set of apps installed.
Sent from my LG G5 using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't make any sense. Devices are manufactured to a certain tolerance and winning the "silicon lottery" doesn't make a device faster, it makes it more overclockable. Device to device, stock for stock, the difference should be at most a few thousand points from each other. It should be pretty obvious to kill all background apps and processes before benchmarking so apps installed don't matter either. If Facebook is too important to kill for 10 minutes then that person shouldn't worry about benchmarking.
Device to device are obviously going to vary. But a varience of 10k+ points is a pretty good indicator of one set up running slightly better than the other and it's interesting to compare what is the most optimized settings. I can play with my CPU governor all day and get repeatable results +/- 500 - 1000 points. Both me and my wife had a Nexus 5 and with identical settings we both benchmarked very similar. To say it is a useless test is ignorant. If people look at this as a pissing match to see who's "better" then yeah, I see this being a dumb and useless thread. But I think most people who do this want to know what settings, ROM, and kernel are best optimized for performance.
Edit: https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Motorola-Moto-G5-Plus_id10398/benchmarks
63,191
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=345eKlssdH8
62,769
http://www.fonearena.com/blog/214719/moto-g5-plus-review.html
62,893
https://www.pcmag.com/review/352573/motorola-moto-g5-plus
63,845
http://www.guidingtech.com/65986/moto-g5-plus-vs-redmi-note-4/
62,896
5 different devices, all tested stock within right around 1,000 points of each other.
username8611 said:
That doesn't make any sense. Devices are manufactured to a certain tolerance and winning the "silicon lottery" doesn't make a device faster, it makes it more overclockable. Device to device, stock for stock, the difference should be at most a few thousand points from each other. It should be pretty obvious to kill all background apps and processes before benchmarking so apps installed don't matter either. If Facebook is too important to kill for 10 minutes then that person shouldn't worry about benchmarking.
Device to device are obviously going to vary. But a varience of 10k+ points is a pretty good indicator of one set up running slightly better than the other and it's interesting to compare what is the most optimized settings. I can play with my CPU governor all day and get repeatable results +/- 500 - 1000 points. Both me and my wife had a Nexus 5 and with identical settings we both benchmarked very similar. To say it is a useless test is ignorant. If people look at this as a pissing match to see who's "better" then yeah, I see this being a dumb and useless thread. But I think most people who do this want to know what settings, ROM, and kernel are best optimized for performance.
Edit: https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Motorola-Moto-G5-Plus_id10398/benchmarks
63,191
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=345eKlssdH8
62,769
http://www.fonearena.com/blog/214719/moto-g5-plus-review.html
62,893
https://www.pcmag.com/review/352573/motorola-moto-g5-plus
63,845
http://www.guidingtech.com/65986/moto-g5-plus-vs-redmi-note-4/
62,896
5 different devices, all tested stock within right around 1,000 points of each other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for taking the time to write a long response. But, I believe you may have just proved my point. I believe the test results of different roms should be well within 'around 1,000 points of each other'. Unless-
a. the rom is very poorly optimized - score would be lower.
b. the kernel is overclocked - score could be slightly higher.
c. user error (lots of background apps).
suhridkhan said:
Thank you for taking the time to write a long response. But, I believe you may have just proved my point. I believe the test results of different roms should be well within 'around 1,000 points of each other'. Unless-
a. the rom is very poorly optimized - score would be lower.
b. the kernel is overclocked - score could be slightly higher.
c. user error (lots of background apps).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't know how else to explain this to you. OP got a lower score than me, yet is overclocked. So it stands to reason that either "a. the rom is very poorly optimized - score would be lower" or "b. the kernel is overclocked - score could be slightly higher" or "c. user error (lots of background apps)" is the reason for it. But wait, the performance should be slightly higher for an overclock except that it isn't. That's the whole reason to benchmark. Another possibility is that since I've heard ElementalX is currently having overclock issues, it may be reverting to its nominal frequency, which I believe is 1.4Ghz. How would this person have known that if not for comparing benchmarks? According to you, they can't compare to stock benchmarks because it's a different set of apps installed and a different ROM and in fact can't compare it to anyone because it's a different device, albeit the same model.
Benchmarks show performance differences, regardless of whether or not they are large enough to even notice on a day to day basis. It shows technical differences and if you think technical differences mean jack squat, then why are you even commenting in this thread? It's the same theory when you throw a car on a dyno. You're going to notice small differences between each run, but when you have two of the same model cars with the same engine, and one consistently puts out 30HP more than the other, there's probably a reason for it.
To reiterate what I said in my first reply, for people who want to compare optimization between different ROMs, kernels, and technical settings such as CPU governors and schedulers, benchmarking is not useless. Not in this method of testing and not across identical devices with different software. The baseline or "stock vs stock" comparison shows that the benchmark is measuring with an adequate amount of accuracy and that multiple devices in stock form are performing equally before being modified. Just because it doesn't mean anything to you doesn't mean that it means nothing at all.
I did some research and things like backround apps running in airplane mode scripts like lightning blade. all these things make a difference. I was running kernel over clocked in interactive mode with lightning script. If I set to performance my score was significantly higher I was hoping this would give users a better way to set up and optimize their device not to compare roms running same device. Yes at first I thought about that then realized it wouldn't make a lot of sense. Im hoping some of u guys will hop on board and help test kernel roms and other mods so maybe we can get the best out of our device thanks guys.