What is everybody getting for Quadrant scores? My best was was a 1617. I usually average in the high 1500's between 1575-1590.
This is a HUGE improvement coming from my Eris where I would average ~400!
wow thats really high. my average is the mid 1400s
Related
HI, I just used the Linpack benchmarking app and my MFLOPS score ranges from 6.8 to 7.5, This seems very low compared to other devices, Can you guys comfirm waht you are getting?
Results are
MFLOPS = 6.265
Time = 0.86
Norm Res 3.36
Precision : 2.22.446049250313E-16
it will be better with froyo
Well,with froyo it will reach 40+ MFlops,but when other devices get froyo they will get higher scores again...We just need to face it,our Snapdragons come second.However,the way I see it,if we exclude games,the differences are purely theoretical!The Desire is really damn fast as it is!
My results are as follows:
Mflops 6.87
time 0.79
norm res 3.36
precision 2.22044604925031E-16
But have seen it drop once to 5.28
It's normal with 2.1+Sense.
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.
Hi!
i just got my dhd, and i am a bit confused about the bench scores.
firstly, i'm tunning rcmix3d runny 3.3, with defoult kernel. what confuses me is that i get a normal result in quadrant (around 1900), i only get around 9-ish in linpack, where i should get around 40 if i understand correctly. phone feels quite smooth...
could somebody please explane what i dont get here
t0mas_ said:
Hi!
i just got my dhd, and i am a bit confused about the bench scores.
firstly, i'm tunning rcmix3d runny 3.3, with defoult kernel. what confuses me is that i get a normal result in quadrant (around 1900), i only get around 9-ish in linpack, where i should get around 40 if i understand correctly. phone feels quite smooth...
could somebody please explane what i dont get here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even I am getting the same results.
Changing cpu speed using setCPU has no effect on Linpack.
Maybe its something to do with Linpack i suppose.
Most benchmarks have absolutely nothing to do with phone performance. Especially quadrant and Linpack.
Linpack tests CPU Speed, which is pretty pointless since there are few tasks that actually require CPU (everything should still feel smooth @ 768 MHz).
And quadrant (Especially standard) gets quite alot of its points from IO on the Desire HD, which is actually pretty pointless. The 3D Performance is around the same on every ROM.
I would suggest getting a 3D benchmark like Nenamark/etc if you actually want to test performance, since 3D gaming is the only thing that would actually require it.
thanks for info, i figured that everything works quite fast so why bother with some benchmarks
but since i like to understend stuff, i feel better now
Hey guys I hear a lot of negative stuff about how smooth the GN isn't and how the hardware is not that good but I must say that after 6 months of SGS2 use with many awesome roms like Checkrom etc and overclocking to 1600Mhz running a lot of benchmark tests I have to say that my experience with the GN has been awesome. Its smooth, fast and pretty.
But I saved all my Antutu, Nenamark and Quadrant scores and i have done a series of scores with the GN trying different roms and kernels and I say that the results, even only clocked to 1350Mhz were on average above my old SGS2. We should consider how much more effort is required to use the resolution of the screen to produce 6800 scores on Antutu and 3000+ scores on Quadrant.
This phone is really the next logical step and I actually get it why Google went down this path.
robt772000 said:
Hey guys I hear a lot of negative stuff about how smooth the GN isn't and how the hardware is not that good but I must say that after 6 months of SGS2 use with many awesome roms like Checkrom etc and overclocking to 1600Mhz running a lot of benchmark tests I have to say that my experience with the GN has been awesome. Its smooth, fast and pretty.
But I saved all my Antutu, Nenamark and Quadrant scores and i have done a series of scores with the GN trying different roms and kernels and I say that the results, even only clocked to 1350Mhz were on average above my old SGS2. We should consider how much more effort is required to use the resolution of the screen to produce 6800 scores on Antutu and 3000+ scores on Quadrant.
This phone is really the next logical step and I actually get it why Google went down this path.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice to see a positive post for once.
Sweet as mate
I started a benchmark scores thread in general.
If you dont mind, can you post your ROM + Kernel and any OC/UV settings u applied.
Also, have u used CF-Bench and what was your score?
Cheers. Its big ie oc to 1350Mhz with Franco kernal.
Ive tried KYRILLOSv3 which works no problem but the Antu Benchmark gave me a rating of 6039 which was 5% slower than KYRILLOSv2 has anyone else noticed this.
I got an improvment of about 100 compared to v2. However, don't trust only benchmarks. Its more important how it feels to you. And for me its feeling smoother
you too believe in antutu.
antutu test just for fun
hafidzduddin said:
you too believe in antutu.
antutu test just for fun
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not a matter of believing antutu but people produce these tools to compare devices on an un-biased way and the score is lower.