Hey everyone,
I've been playing around a little with different Kernels for Runnymede AIO 2.2 in order to get good performance and battery life and I thought I share my results with you. Furthermore, it would be great if you guys could share your thoughts on which kernel gave you the best battery life/performance/feel/benchmark results. So feel free to participate and I'll collect useful results in the first post
I have tested 3 different kernels so far:
- Gingercakes 0.9 bfs no2way HAVS
- Gingercakes 0.8 bfs no2way HAVS
- Snq 2.6.35.8-1111118-bravo no2way
Performance has been tested with three different benchmarks, four benchmarks tests each in order to get average results. Other settings and hardware can be checked in my signature or below under testing environment. I only use bfs kernels because cfs doesn't really make sense for our Desire. And from my experience HAVS kernels give you better battery life on average while maintaining good performance. However, I'll test some svs kernels in the future, too. I also only use no2way because they don't cause issues with various ROM's and i don't need 2way recording anyway...
If you have other ideas or methods for testing, please let me know and share your results.
My results so far:
Best
2nd
3rd
Quadrant Benchmark Results:
1. Snq average score: 1760
2. Gingercakes 0.9 average score: 1608
3. Gingercakes 0.8 average score: 1595
AnTuTu Benchmark Results (without SD test):
1. Snq average score: 2340
2. Gingercakes 0.8 average score: 2328
3. Gingercakes 0.9 average score:2319
CF Bench:
1. Snq average score: 2249
2. Gingercakes 0.9 average score: 2143
3. Gingercakes 0.8 average score: 2111
Overall Score:
I will add all individual scores together and divide it by 3 (for the number of tests) in order to get the overall score
Snq: 2116,33
Gingercakes 0.9: 2023,33
Gingercakes 0.8: 2011,33
Conclusion:
First of all, all three worked fine and caused no major trouble
Based on benchmarks, Snq is the way to go. Blazing fast and most important noticeably faster than the gingercakes kernels. A lil downside is that despite being blazing fast most of the time, it lags sometimes, especially after a fresh boot although this settles over time and then the Snq is simply amazing I am running it right now and i am really satisfied with the result.
As expected, the two gingercakes-kernels have been quite close to each other in terms of benchmark results, the 0.9 version being a lil faster but imo less smooth. I have to say that the 0.8 version seemed to harmonize a lil better with the Runnymede AIO 2.2 ROM in terms of stability. Speed has been almost the same but it "felt better". Less lag and no stability issues at all. The 0.9 version, which is included in the ROM (however a different kernel type) was also smooth and quite stable but somewhat off compared to its lil brother.
So if you want maximum speed, go with Snq and see how it works for you in terms of stability. If you want to use gingercakes (for whatever reason), flash the 0.8 version, although it seems slower based on the results. Alternatively try all of them and report back what your impressions are (You can find all three kernels attached to this thread to download)
Outlook:
I will do some more testing for battery life (which will be a major point in the next thread update) and maybe some other kernels, like i.e. svs versions. But i am happy to hear your experiences with different kernels and this amazing ROM! Feel free to share, comment and participate
Disclaimer:
I don't guarantee that these results will be the same on all other Desires running Runnymede AIO 2.2. A lot is dependent on the overall configuration etc. Even these results are not what I expect to see from my Desire in the near future as I am still working on the perfect setup. However, it might be useful for people looking for some data on kernels wondering which one to flash. There's always room for improvement... and error
All kernels have been used for several hours, sometimes several days, in the following testing environment:
Runnymede AIO 2.2 Honey HD Theme
Daemon Controller (Wake state: 245-998 smartassV2 governor; Sleep: 128-245 smartassv2 gov.)
SanDisk 16GB SD (noclass/class 2...not sure; i didn't use my Patriot Class10 mentioned in my signature for testing)
For further details see my signature or ask
Update: 24.11.2011
Mahlzahn said:
The 0.9 Gingercakes SVS isn't much of a difference to the HAVS 0.9 so I won't post any real updates. It is smooth and stable and has decent battery life but not much of a difference to the other GC kernels...
AIO 2.3 has been released with snq as standard kernel. I am flashing it right now and will give you updates soon...pretty hard to stay up to date with Sebastiaan15's updating pace ^^ Awesome developer, awesome ROM!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
[SOLVED]PullDown USB disconnect
all results are good.. and benchmark does't quite explains the performance...
Apart from these....you see that the snq kernel is best.. now it has also got USB fixed...so
the one and only snq..
For those who are experiencing pulldown menu USB disconnect problems here is the solution..
Flash snq kernel..(Wip cache before and After Falshing)
Reboot the phone
COnnect phone USB with PC
Check pulldown..it will disconnect..
Now.. reflash snq kernel(Wip cache before and After Falshing..again)
reboot..
Now connect..
Don't pull the pulldown menu for 30 seconds..
(these seconds are to make it stable enviourment)
Now u can pull the menu..
it won't disconnect.. u'll get a stable USB connection..
Happy Falshing
Benchmark test
So, good morning to all,
Just ran a very quick test with the following parameters:
HTC Desire PVT-1 S-OFF
Stock HBOOT, Recovery: CWM 5.0.2.0
Runnymede AIO 2.2, snq- kernel (no2way)
Daemon Controller Wake: 245000-998400, Sleep: 384000-537600 (both smartassV2)
SD Card: 16GB, Class6 (it is said that for phone's Class 6 is max, higher Classes are for cameras, etc.)
The results with AnTuTu:
- w/out SD: avarege 2348
- with SD: 2550 (write speed 3,8, read speed 16,9 MB/s)
I'm using this ROM for a few days now. Very stable and smooth. Haven't experienced those many problems posted in the ROM's thread. It's OFF Topic, but someone should know: MMS is not working for me. Any suggestions?
By the way, the way I flahed it (the last time): 1. Full wipe in recovery (3 times, just to be sure), 2. flash ROM, 3. flash kernel, 4. flash Add-Ons (custom black, remove NoLED), 5. reboot, 6. enjoy.
I do not have any problems with Tweaks (bootanim, fonts, everything works fine).
Sorry for the OFFs, I cannot post at the ROM's thread atm.
Cheers
PS: I removed a few apps and added some apps to the zip before flashing (just to try) and it worked perfectly.
Good idea for a thread, I would say it will help the kernel developers fine tune things. I just flashed the snq kernel and will post my opinion after a bit of testing. Just impressions not benchmarks or anything
Mahlzan, are you using the stock daemon controller settings?
With AiO V2.1 I was getting about 1600 on quadrant with the gingercakes kernal, using AiO V2.2 it has dropped to 1000, I have flashed the new snq kernal and it has risen to 1100.
Nowhere near your 1750.
Also what SD card are you using? I have an 8GB class 6 Sandisk.
EDIT: Just seen your settings at the end of your post.
The average score for gingercakes 0.9 with Quadrant is 1608. The 1750 is for the snq. One thing though, I've been using a SanDisk 16GB SD for testing (no class, class 2...not sure) and not the Patriot Class10.
I just edited my signature after i bought the new Patriot SD but haven't put it in my device yet I'll post new results with the new SD within the next days...
Another thing: I just recognized that the winning snq is a svs kernel. So it might be interesting to compare the gingercakes svs version, too. I'll upload it as attachment to the first post. Happy testing
Quadrant: 1702
AnTuTu: 2493
CF-Bench: 2278
Benchmarks means ****, just sayin.
Then feel free to suggest other methods of testing and comparing
Quadrant is the language of ingnorants. It does not reflect the smoothness in every day operation at all.
You have a subjective feeling of smoothness, for which I can tell all compared are very fast. You have a battery life performed in same conditions, which would be extremely hard to measure outside of the lab. Third is a stability, which is easy coz it is a binary choice.
You have done something, kudos. But all three are as close to GB kernel perfection(so to speak) as we are probably going to get.
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
I agree that end of the day a benchmark result means nothing if the rom in everyday use is laggy, but they are the only way of measuring a roms speed.
In theory 2 Desire's both running the same rom with the same kernal should have comparable speeds.
I agree that benchmarks have their limitations and thats why I included subjective impressions in my conclusion, too. Like the "feel" aspect of different kernels etc.
Plus, I have to say that the benchmark results so far reflect my testing impressions when it comes to speed. However, as i also said, they don't tell you the smoothness (Snq sometimes a bit laggy but overall faster than the others etc.). And finally, all 3 kernels are great but the tiny differences make our Desire experience so interesting. And testing whilst searching for the best possible config is fun ^^
Its good to see some comparisons.
As mentioned earlier I am getting lower quadrant results than you, I am not entirely convinced that the A2SDX script is installing properly, as with a 1GB Ext4 partition I am only seeing about 600MB of available space on the phone.
When I next update the rom, I may try installing the script seperately, not during the initial flash.
Well whatever the benchmarks say, Runny AIO 2.2 + snq-111118-no2wcr wins! Super fast and stable.
Flashed snq-111118-no2wcr. The battery drain still persits. Does anybody have some decent solution to this?
The Rom runs smooth and fast with snq, no doubt.
00Scott00 said:
Well whatever the benchmarks say, Runny AIO 2.2 + snq-111118-no2wcr wins! Super fast and stable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thta's what the benchmarks say btw
cycostallion said:
Flashed snq-111118-no2wcr. The battery drain still persits. Does anybody have some decent solution to this?
The Rom runs smooth and fast with snq, no doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on how you define battery drain For me, with screen off/Sleep i have like 4-7mA and lost like 6% over night. In Standby my battery would last like an estimated 3 days.
I am on battery now for 17h already and still have 70% and i also surfed the web, used and installed apps etc. whilst standby state (because of the night) is the biggest part.
I also payed a little Tetris now, watched the news as video, used some other apps like battery monitor etc. and lost like 5% in 15 minutes with currents between 74mA and 300mA.
However, it is kinda normal that a powerhungry thing like Runnymede with Sense 3.5 uses a lil more than other ROM's.
Btw. I use Juice Defender and Daemon Controller to optimize battery life.
Battery drain (?)
I use Sleep MyPhone and am in Airplane Mode from 22:00 to 05:00 where I usually lose 1-2%. I amanged to be on battery for almost 24hs with quite heavy usage (games, surfing, music, reading). At the same time the ROM is fast and stable. No FCs whatsoever. Using snq- kernel.
cycostallion said:
Flashed snq-111118-no2wcr. The battery drain still persits. Does anybody have some decent solution to this?
The Rom runs smooth and fast with snq, no doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 super smooth for sure but had batt drain too. The snq kernel that worked good for me was 110918-lsmod1. Have found for me the smoothest with no freezes and good batt life is gingercakes 0.8f cfs havs.
Sent from my HTC Desire Runnymede AiO
mps711 said:
Mahlzan, are you using the stock daemon controller settings?
With AiO V2.1 I was getting about 1600 on quadrant with the gingercakes kernal, using AiO V2.2 it has dropped to 1000, I have flashed the new snq kernal and it has risen to 1100.
Nowhere near your 1750.
Also what SD card are you using? I have an 8GB class 6 Sandisk.
EDIT: Just seen your settings at the end of your post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here, first time i flashed AIO v2.2 with snq kernel i got 1600 - 1700 on quadrant.
After a full wipe and reflash i get only 1100 points.
Same results for gingercakes kernel.
Just ran Quadrant again, just to confirm:
1st run: 1647
2nd: 1647 again
3rd: 1698
Related
So I've just started trying kernels. I decide to start with the popular Kingklix kernels. So I backup up my Cyanogen 6.0.2 and flashed his BFS #2
The kernel was very very snappy, but the benchmarks were really low (in the 600's) they seemed to lag at the "testing I/O" portion. But I didn't care because the phone felt as fast as the Captivate.
I charged it full, and went out for the night. The phone was dormant in my pocket for most of the time, maybe 10 texts sent... the phone died in 3 hours. This made me done with the kernel, as much as I liked it I need my battery.
So, I reverted back to stock and installed his CFS #1 kernel, I cleared Dalvik (I did this before and after the kernel flash like I did with the BFS version) and booted.I cleared the battery stats since the phone was off now and I might as well bump charge. This previous charge stayed forever! I got 1d 4h and 40m on this setup before getting 14% and the phone saying to plugin
The CFS isn't as snappy as the BFS version and I'd love the speed of the BFS one but I need more then three hours of battery... so I have a few questions.
1. Can you flash kernels ontop of eachother? or do you have to restore to stock in between flashes (much like themes on AOSP roms)
2. Are the low benchmark scores normal for Kk's BFS #2 kernel?
3. Is clearing battery stats part of the procedure? and is that what made the difference between the two kernels? or is BFS just poor on battery life?
Clearing battery stats really isnt needed, kernels can be flashed on top of each other, and king BFS 2 was really buggy, use 1 Cfs, it may not be as high in quadrant, but quadtant doesnt mean anything. Cfs is more stable, and the code for the cfs is 2.6.32.21 whereas bfs is all buggy and is 2.6.32.51.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
I knew quadrant didn't mean anything when I saw BFS and it's low scores but amazing performance. I hope he patches it up, the alternate scheduler really makes a noticable difference.
Hi all,
I've got Leedroid and would like to know how the hell people get the 3000+ scores on quadrant ?
I've used most of the roms with a lot of the kernels but the most i get is around 2500 - 2600 , i've heard that the kernel by Kamma is a good one but i'm at a loss as to which one i should use.
So if anyone could point out which one i could use for .
1. Stability.
2. Battery saving.
3. Benchmarking (without smoking my device of course)
Any answers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
dladz said:
Hi all,
I've got Leedroid and would like to know how the hell people get the 3000+ scores on quadrant ?
I've used most of the roms with a lot of the kernels but the most i get is around 2500 - 2600 , i've heard that the kernel by Kamma is a good one but i'm at a loss as to which one i should use.
So if anyone could point out which one i could use for .
1. Stability.
2. Battery saving.
3. Benchmarking (without smoking my device of course)
Any answers would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the first thing you need to understand is quadrant is ****, it is not an acurate indication of the speed of your device, a few devs have made kernels that trick quadrant into giving it massive scores, but in reality there kernels are not the best that being said, you wont find a better kernel for stability or speed than leedroids one, it is flawless you can download it here
http://www.multiupload.com/U2ECLTRT7V
AndroHero said:
that being said, you wont find a better kernel for stability or speed than leedroids one, it is flawless you can download it here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you noticed much difference between 2.0.5 and 2.0.6 kernels? The LeeDroid thread is getting very lengthy to read through these days to catch up on new updates lol!
RobSimmo said:
Have you noticed much difference between 2.0.5 and 2.0.6 kernels? The LeeDroid thread is getting very lengthy to read through these days to catch up on new updates lol!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah the new one is based on the latest kernel source, with the 1.75 libs,
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk
Tbh I use leedroids newest one an its really good, quadrant gets 2500 +
The device is smooth as silk, bit then again it always was.
I didn't know that quadrant was pants, I thought it was a good benchmarking tool.
Confirm that the newest kernel of Lee is the best!but in a few days he prepare a new awesome BFS kernel...
Mmm badly ****ed scheduler. My favourite.
If you want good quadrant, buy the paid app which gives higher scores than the free one. Do the I/O hack which core and lee droids use. Use Leedroid kernel at max freq, performance governor, and finally run it in airplane mode.
Follow all those steps and you will get around the 3000 score.
You should state if you use quadrant standard or advance when posting results as they do differ. Otherwise it's like comparing oranges to mandarins. They are both orange but one is always bigger.
Sent from my super slick Android device.
dr.m0x said:
Mmm badly ****ed scheduler. My favourite.
If you want good quadrant, buy the paid app which gives higher scores than the free one. Do the I/O hack which core and lee droids use. Use Leedroid kernel at max freq, performance governor, and finally run it in airplane mode.
Follow all those steps and you will get around the 3000 score.
You should state if you use quadrant standard or advance when posting results as they do differ. Otherwise it's like comparing oranges to mandarins. They are both orange but one is always bigger.
Sent from my super slick Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea it's just the standard version of quadrant, I thought that it would do the job.
Also i don't want to trick it or actually buy an app just so it can give me higher scores, that's not actually helping at all, i'll try the airplane mode to see if that helps, my phone is rapid anyway so it's only for my own satisfaction and to see how high i could get the score to go to.
So guys, i definitely need a sense rom because of the look ( especially the music player, 3.0 lockscreen like in insertcoin and apps) and the fast writing speed of my sd card...
i tried leedroid, rc hd mix, maybe a froyo rom would be better? Or recoment a different kernel?
currently i use insertcoin ( newest stable release), but the battery is so bad i can hardly get a day out with normal use... wifi gps off brioghtness low...
can u tell me a good rom? would appreciate it
I find al GB ROMS have poor battery life then I changed the kernel to MANU's and it was much much better. Maybe try a different kernel?
can u recommend me a kernel?
Yeah this one is really good for me but is different experience for every user...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=883598
Gingerbread-HAVS-AXI-CFS
Thx dude, i'll try this.
But i gotta 2 questions:
Can i return to my standart kernel (insertcoin eg) and how can i do this?
Is this kernel also compatible with insertcoin? (sense- based)
With Gingerbread I think the Reflex S is pretty OK for the battery or else it is possible to undervolt further.
Maybe you just need to calibrate your battery, if you change your ROM a lot. I use BatteryCalibration from Market and it seem to do the job.
Do i have to do a full wipe?
Battery calibration does not work for me D the percentage drop fast to 99% percent again and so on
Yeah, I would do a full wipe. Especially if you are moving between different ROM's.
So far, the AuraxTsense 8.4 (Android 2.2) was my favorite in terms of battery usage - but since moving to 2.3.3 based ROM's, my battery drops faster when using the phone, but lasts longer when in standby.
what would u recomment then? returning to froyo or stay with gingerbread?
Well, if Battery Life is your primary concern, you would probably get the best results with a Froyo ROM, since the kernels are further in development.
However, in terms of features etc. I think the Gingerbread is better. I personally like the Sense 3.0 improvements etc. So I am just crossing my fingers that battery life will gradually improve further
My experience is, that Gingerbread ROMs in general are battery hungry. As for sense ROMs i can say that LeeDroid suits me best regarding battery life. At the moment im on oxygen and get a day out of it with normal use.
Best results with battery life i had with LeeDroid Froyo ROM (v2.4 i think). Smartass governor and screen off - 245mhz max/min sometimes got me 2 days without charging.
Maybe this helps you finding a solution.
By the way, you can also improve your battery life by turning off the various Auto Sync features, for example Sense Sync, Facebook, Weather etc...
So i've flashed reflex s now, hoping the battery will do better tahn insertcoin.
If not, i will probably change to leedroid froyo- are there any important disadvantages for froyo roms? like speed or something?
i've tried many sense roms and never got a good battery life
now using MIUI rom .. its GUI is close to sense and good battery life
24h and i still have 40% off battery on InsertCoin 1.0.8 CM7,wifi is always on,data is enable,set brightness to auto. Try charge your desire to 100% turn it off,connect charger again and wait till green led is up,than turn on your phone to fastboot menu (power and volume down) and clean battery stats,reeboot.Also You can use battery calibration app from market
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
Hi
I use manu 2.0 cfs kernel and it is batterie efficient, most of time 48h before recharging.
Franck
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
franckleroy said:
Hi
I use manu 2.0 cfs kernel and it is batterie efficient, most of time 48h before recharging.
Franck
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thx c: which rom do ya use?
At first, the recommended manu kernel won't be working with sense roms, because it's an aosp kernel (so made for aosp roms).
Second, using setcpu and setting a screen off profile for it really improves standby battery power. I set it mine to:
128 - 442 mhz ondemand governor
Third, the display is the biggest and fastest battery drainer, no matter which rom you are using.
k-c-0 said:
My experience is, that Gingerbread ROMs in general are battery hungry. As for sense ROMs i can say that LeeDroid suits me best regarding battery life. At the moment im on oxygen and get a day out of it with normal use.
Best results with battery life i had with LeeDroid Froyo ROM (v2.4 i think). Smartass governor and screen off - 245mhz max/min sometimes got me 2 days without charging.
Maybe this helps you finding a solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you use smartass governor, you do not have to set an extra profile for screen off. This governor automatically uses the min cpu frequency when the screen is off.
smartass governor – is based on the concept of the interactive governor.
I have always agreed that in theory the way interactive works – by taking over the idle loop – is very attractive. I have never managed to tweak it so it would behave decently in real life. Smartass is a complete rewrite of the code plus more. I think its a success. Performance is on par with the “old” minmax and I think smartass is a bit more responsive. Battery life is hard to quantify precisely but it does spend much more time at the lower frequencies.
Smartass will also cap the max frequency when sleeping to 352Mhz (or if your min frequency is higher than 352 – why?! – it will cap it to your min frequency). Lets take for example the 528/176 kernel, it will sleep at 352/176. No need for sleep profiles any more!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.ziggy471.com/2010/11/07/smartass-governor-info/
I am having the same problem with GB roms no matter how many times you calibrate the battery there is no improvement .
Hello all.
I'm trying to get the most of my defy.
Currently using cyanogenmod 7, over clocked to 1.2ghz.
I have now started using the v6 supercharger script as hoping its not placebo but seems to be working a lot better. Used option 9.
Does anyone else use the v6 script and what option did you go for?
Also do you have any other tweeks for making the defy smoother or faster?
Have uploaded a screenshot of my benchmark.
V6 original thread - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=991276
I'm using the latest V6 RC 3.2, with option 6 (ledded) (now I'm testing option 7), and option 13 (bulitproof launcher). I installed nitro lag nullifier. I also use kak script, and 3G turbocharge script. Overall it has big improvement, my defy is much faster and more responsive. I have only a little lag in scrolling the launcher when I use live wallpaper, btw I'm using blur launcher, and MS2Ginger 2.1 rom, overclocked to 1.2 Ghz. My scores are around 2700 - 2800.
Thanks a few things to look up.
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
I'm just using CM7 with ADW launcher, the score varies from 2500 to 2940...after 4 times of benching.
Also OCed to 1.2ghz
What is V6?
nameite said:
I'm just using CM7 with ADW launcher, the score varies from 2500 to 2940...after 4 times of benching.
Also OCed to 1.2ghz
What is V6?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
copied from the v6 post
What's it do?
It makes your phone FAST... super snappy with better multitasking!
It rearranges and fixes the OOM Groupings and Priorites and lowmemorykiller values.
So basically, it's a COMPLETE MEMORY MANAGEMENT FIX!
It's the ONLY one of it's kind
NO LAUNCHER REDRAWS, faster than ever, multitasking is better... why?
Because it works with the lowmemorykiller and letting it work the way it's meant to work.
Also, because of the rearrangement, it works the same on all roms!
The problem with using minfree tweakers like AMM or AKMO is that it doesn't work the same on all roms.
Secondary apps may be in slot 3 on some roms but in slot 5 in others!
That's why you hear people comment "I tried AKMO but it didn't do anything..."
Most likely it didn't do anything because the apps weren't sitting where they were expected to be.
So fasten your seat belts and enjoy the ride!
Super Charge... Makes it impossible to kill other apps & dats the downfall
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Try also thunderbolt's script... much better than super charger v6 to me & doesn't interfere with cm7 killing app function, of long press on back button
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Anyone still using this script or the thunderbolt script on Cm.7.1.0-11-defy?
I'm trying to figure out if people see a noticeable improvement before taking the leap myself. Better synthetic scores don't really matter to me.
I may be interested too, what are the downsides of these, and is there a way of undoing it?
Sent from my 1Ghz CM7 + CM9 Defy
crakeron said:
I may be interested too, what are the downsides of these, and is there a way of undoing it?
Sent from my 1Ghz CM7 + CM9 Defy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
YEs, there is an option on the V6 to Undo the changes.
plz tell me how to install
plz tell me how to install
zorofroozo said:
Anyone still using this script or the thunderbolt script on Cm.7.1.0-11-defy?
I'm trying to figure out if people see a noticeable improvement before taking the leap myself. Better synthetic scores don't really matter to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't use it for a long time. But used it on a recent nightly and forgot how much it changed the phone.
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
I've been using it to, and the phone does feel smoother. The nitro lagg nullier makes the difference on my defy.
(I used it in conjunction with the multitasking setting if i'm not mistaken)
It's buttery smooth on Option 6 - "Balanced."
Minimal modded to my defy seeing it was my everyday phone. Now that I have the defy+ I'm going hands in the the defy been reading and reading now I would like input from other users.
So.....
What modes are best for the defy?
Make it faster, responsive with no lags or glitches.
I'm on cm 7.2 froyo kernel thinking bout upgrading to gb kernel. Any suggestions?
kidrobot52 said:
Minimal modded to my defy seeing it was my everyday phone. Now that I have the defy+ I'm going hands in the the defy been reading and reading now I would like input from other users.
So.....
What modes are best for the defy?
Make it faster, responsive with no lags or glitches.
I'm on cm 7.2 froyo kernel thinking bout upgrading to gb kernel. Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I will always suggest supercharger script and also kak script as it gives me great boost and reduces lag a lot.
Sent from my ICS Defy
As i have been chasing the holy grail in my Defy+ for the last weeks, i have been thru some settings and my own observation around the SuperCharger is that it totally screwed up atleast my already overclocked Defy+. I was running scores around 2400-2500 in Quadrant and after installing SC it really felt slow and a new test in Quadrant really proved what i have been feeling, the score was around 1800. Notice then that my first setting in SC was a fullblown 1000bhp setting (dont remember what the highest number is), so i thought i had shot myself in the foot and overloaded things, tuned it down to a 512bhp settings (somewhere in the middle) and did a new test, still was the same score in Quadrant. After some anger management i uninstalled it and ran a new Quadrant test, this time i scored 2200. I dont know if i managed to screw anything up in SC but thats my 2 cents of an observation.
Stock MIUI straight out of the archive gave me 26000 - 25000 on quadrant...
after installing all of my guff it naturally got lower scores, but - speed doesn't necessarily equate to smoothness...
I then went to linpack.apk which allows you to compare your scores against, well - your scores...
As I turned up the OC the ph got quicker - but not smoother (if you get my drift)...
So, on my personalized MIUI I pasted in Juwe11's ram script & Samsungs Loopysmoothness script... they helped with the smoothness I was after... (+enabling JIT in SetSvel - makes a diff)...
Now I'm running WajKIUI hybrid... battery seems to drain quicker, but it's silky smooth... speed is similar to MIUI OC'ed @ 1.2GHz...
King_Rat said:
Stock MIUI straight out of the archive gave me 26000 - 25000 on quadrant...
after installing all of my guff it naturally got lower scores, but - speed doesn't necessarily equate to smoothness...
I then went to linpack.apk which allows you to compare your scores against, well - your scores...
As I turned up the OC the ph got quicker - but not smoother (if you get my drift)...
So, on my personalized MIUI I pasted in Juwe11's ram script & Samsungs Loopysmoothness script... they helped with the smoothness I was after... (+enabling JIT in SetSvel - makes a diff)...
Now I'm running WajKIUI hybrid... battery seems to drain quicker, but it's silky smooth... speed is similar to MIUI OC'ed @ 1.2GHz...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That must be one hell of a Defy u got there if u managed to score around 25,000 points in
Quadrant
For some reason the defy phones in some way seems to score higher than the +, god knows why.
I tried to run a Sonic the hedgehog game with my best settings it ran really smooth and the handling seemed better than ever. But more smoothness never hurt as long as it doesnt decrease speed. I rather run like that and get a better battery
Do u know if those scripts work on the +?
FlashTec80 said:
That must be one hell of a Defy u got there if u managed to score around 25,000 points in
Quadrant
For some reason the defy phones in some way seems to score higher than the +, god knows why.
I tried to run a Sonic the hedgehog game with my best settings it ran really smooth and the handling seemed better than ever. But more smoothness never hurt as long as it doesnt decrease speed. I rather run like that and get a better battery
Do u know if those scripts work on the +?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which Sonic game ?
Sonic the Hedgehog 4 Episode 1 ?
Herpderp Defy.
Goal of this little project is to dispel myths and hearsay and trying to assess the elusive performance of custom kernels for our beloved SGS I9000.
So far this has proven quite challenging as there is no single good benchmark on Android (yet):
a lot of people have been misled by ridiculous Quadrant scores: ridiculous because, with some small tweaks which do not affect real performance in any way, shape or form, it is possible to boost the Quadrant score by factor 3x.
You're free to believe that your SGS I9000 which scores 3000+ on Quadrant is faster than a SGS II, but then please leave this thread and move on.
some kernels may seem smooth with some games, and get high scores on some synthetic benchmark, yet the UI appears "laggy" and stutters a lot in comparison to other kernels which score lower on the same benchmark
some popular benchmarks give results with unacceptably low reproducibility, i.e. if you run them multiple times without changing a thing on your system, you get scores varying by 50% of more, in a completely random fashion
most popular benchmarks do not measure or take into account multitasking and CPU contention with other applications, yet on a typical usage one has background tasks such as the media scanner or synchronization which kick in often and unpredictably
So this will be mostly a work in progress, i'm testing several benchmarks and several kernels in multiple combinations, trying to analyze which benchmarks offer certain criteria which make them useful, namely:
Reproducibility of results: running the same tests multiple times, should result in a very small variance of the final score
Performance separation: benchmarks which are too "synthetic" and show only a dependency on clock speed are not useful to discriminate "fast" kernels from "slow" kernels
Performance representation: we all know when a kernel "looks" or "feels" fast or smooth. If a benchmarks shows you that a "laggy" kernel scores higher than a fast and responsive one, it's likely that the benchmark is not well designed
I'll work more on this thread explaining my (current) choice of tests and what they're good for.
But for now i'll just post a link to the summary table, and give a brief recommendation concerning popular ICS kernels; recommendation which i'll explain in the coming days.
Base ROM:
Slim ICS 2.8
(because is fast, smooth and has the least background stuff of all ICS ROMs which i tested)
Test Conditions:
Whenever possible, i tried to overclock the kernels to 1.2GHz which most / all phones should have no trouble achieving.
In case of Semaphore i had to use the bus / live overclock but it wasn't fully stable at 1.2GHz on my phone so i ran most of the tests at 1.14GHz.
Tested Kernels:
Stock Teamhacksung V17
Devil 1.1.6b BFS
Devil 1.1.6b CFS
Icy Glitch V14 b
Semaphore ICS 0.9.5b
Recommendation:
Devil 1.1.6b CFS, Icy Glitch V14b (with SmartassV2 and FIOPS), and Midnight ICS (with a tweaked Conservative) are trading blows for the fastest kernel.
At the time of testing, Midnight is slightly worse in terms of overclocking though, apparently due to different voltages, also it doesn't allow overclocking beyond 1.2GHz.
But what's interesting is that it achieves great performance while using a tweaked conservative governor.
Devil 1.1.6b BFS is good but obviously inferior to its CFS brother.
Semaphore has the lowest cache and memory latency in the multithreaded test, it also has impressive sd card read speed and in general appears super responsive, but it's a bit worse in 3D gaming and especially it lacks "true" overclocking, "live overclocking" changes the bus clock and is way more unstable, in fact on my phone i couldn't run it stable at 1.2GHz.
All kernels are significantly faster than the stock teamhacksung's kernel, so you have no excuses not to upgrade to one of the popular custom kernels!
ICS 4.0.4
Started testing Android ICS 4.0.4 kernels on Slim ICS 3.2.
All tested kernels are "huge mem" versions with 380+MB of available RAM, without breaking video playback or 720p recording.
Summary:
the stock kernel from Teamhacksung is now a very respectable performer, unless you plan to overclock probably you don't need to install one of the other kernels
Semaphore, Midnight and Devil are all very fast and smooth
Results table:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuBUEB4dGFSSdHIyN2VIeWU4QnhLOFpJejFPWDh5S1E
Res 1
One request for the kernel developers:
could you please post me what are your preferred / recommended settings in terms of Governor and I/O Scheduler?
Only one configuration per kernel please, as running these tests is rather time consuming.
Test Settings
So for anybody who wants to follow the same methodology as I used to test kernels, please pay attention that in some tests i didn't use stock settings, to try to improve the reproducibility of the results.
Before all test, i put the phone in flight mode, and disable all synch services.
Antutu: DB I/O and SD Write and Read have poor reproducibility. So i run these tests separately 5 times, and take the best scores.
RealPi: the number of iterations is increased by factor 10x i.e.: 100000 digits
MPAC: lots of customization here. Also be careful as it's not very stable and some settings will make it crash.
All tests: 8 threads (or 8 producer / consumer pairs)
CPU: 10000000 iterations, use case: integer (i'm considering to add logical too)
Memory: stock apart for nr of threads. Repeat the test 5 times and get best numbers
Cache: 40 iterations
Res 3
With this should be enough.
Judging from those results, CFS Devil looks really promising.
Semaphore live oc stability issues happen only on Slim ICS indeed. On ICSSGS I have perfect stability at 1.2 ghz. And performance is just great, paired with very good battery life.
GT-i9000 / ICSSGS 4.2 / Semaphore 0.9.0
A quick question: did you lock the max freq to eliminate the "governor" variable?
Because each kernel could have governor's tweaks that the other don't.
Based on what you posted here, the differences between Glitch and Devil is practically none.
I tested both and didn't feel any tangible difference, in the end, it comes down to the unique features of each kernel.
Overclocking bus vs adding an extra step aren't even slightly comparable. Maybe do tests not overclocked?
Also there is a new glitch build with 100% working bln.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
+1 for tests without overclock. Majority of us, users do not overclock. Maybe a seperate test for overclocking could be nice , but comparisons should be done with stock speeds imho.
Thanks for the time and effort. We needed this.
Overclocking bus Vs adding an extra step isn't an apple to apple comparison, I agree.
However my goal was to use each kernel in the best possible way, and if some kernels have the possibility to use higher multipliers / extra frequency steps, that is an advantage for the user, compared to the kernels who only offer live overclock.
Don't get me wrong, i love Semaphore and i've been using it for a long time.
And i have no doubt that some users can get it stable with live overclock to 1.2GHz.
But that is the ceiling, while with other kernels even my phone can reach stable overclocks of 1.5GHz, and that is something to consider.
I chose as the basis for my tests an overclock of 1.2GHz because it's something which practically everybody can use, without massive battery drain, overheat or shortening the life of the device.
I'll try to add measurements at stock speeds for those who don't like to overclock.
cba1986 said:
A quick question: did you lock the max freq to eliminate the "governor" variable?
Because each kernel could have governor's tweaks that the other don't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't want to take the governor variable out.
Because, as you said, each kernel could use (and often does) governor tweaks which make the kernel "special" or different from the others, and that has to be taken into account in evaluating them.
Because nobody will use the phone locked at the maximum frequency.
So for me the governor and its tweaks is part of the user experience of a certain kernel, and a distinctive factor.
At the end, all kernels are coming from almost the same sources, so it's the little things which make the difference.
phzi said:
Also there is a new glitch build with 100% working bln.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's great!
This test i run is not the "be all end all", it was just a recommendation at the time of writing.
Pipperox said:
Overclocking bus Vs adding an extra step isn't an apple to apple comparison, I agree.
However my goal was to use each kernel in the best possible way, and if some kernels have the possibility to use higher multipliers / extra frequency steps, that is an advantage for the user, compared to the kernels who only offer live overclock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed but, then again, benchmarks should be done at original CPU clock IMHO.
Otherwise, results are distorted.
HiKsFiles said:
Agreed but, then again, benchmarks should be done at original CPU clock IMHO.
Otherwise, results are distorted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed. Especially since stock team hacksung seems to be clocked at 1GHz
what's the point of the comparison? Really?
As expected, there is no noticeable difference between all 1.2 GHz kernels.
It's not as if there was a real difference between them anyway.
zorxd said:
agreed. Especially since stock team hacksung seems to be clocked at 1GHz
what's the point of the comparison? Really?
As expected, there is no noticeable difference between all 1.2 GHz kernels.
It's not as if there was a real difference between them anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not quite true.
If you look closer, you'll see that Devil CFS has quite a distinct advantage over all others in 3D tests.
The point of the comparison between stock hacksung @1.0GHz and the others, who can overclock, is to show what kind of benefit you get from switching to kernels which are overclock friendly.
Especially considering that you can't assume that a 20% clock speed increase will bring a 20% performance speedup across the board.
At last, i'd say that you may have "expected" that the kernels tested at 1.2 GHz don't have such a difference in performance.
But expectations have to be verified.
I tried to answer the questions:
On Devil's kernel, is BFS really better than CFS?
The "popular belief" is that BFS is faster than CFS.
According to my tests, CFS results faster instead.
Another question may be, what kernel gives you the best gaming performance.
If you pay attention to the An3D Bench XL, you'll see that Semaphore 0.9.5b, even overclocked a 1.2GHz, is significantly slower than Devil.
If i recall correctly Semaphore Author claimed that some kernel developers overclock GPU, and he didn't. Idk anything about it, but i recall something about it.
Is it possible to overclock only GPU, without overclocking CPU??
zipgenius said:
so you should benchmark them without setting anything. Average users don't overclock and don't change governor or scheduler: they flash the new kernel and stop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely agree on benchmarking every kernel at the same frequency (stock 1Ghz max) but I think there are two different options for further benchmarking:
1) Benchmark kernels configured as similar as possible regarding CPU governor, IO scheduler, readahead -> comparable results for all kernels.
2) Benchmark kernels with default settings (only makes sense if all compared kernels are optimized for similar purpose like performance, does not make sense if a kernel does *not* focus on max. performance and uses e.g. Conservative CPU governor as default setting.
@Pipperox: Would it be possible to check my Mindnight-ICS dev version with your benchmark suite? I'd be really interested in the results as you use the same setup for all kernels (1.2Ghz would not be a problem, does not use LiveOC but old school 1/1.128/1.2Ghz OC).
Interesting thread... I never used devil's CFS version, always BFS. Will try CFS out now.
@Mialwe Where can we get your ics kernel?
mialwe said:
I completely agree on benchmarking every kernel at the same frequency (stock 1Ghz max) but I think there are two different options for further benchmarking:
1) Benchmark kernels configured as similar as possible regarding CPU governor, IO scheduler, readahead -> comparable results for all kernels.
2) Benchmark kernels with default settings (only makes sense if all compared kernels are optimized for similar purpose like performance, does not make sense if a kernel does *not* focus on max. performance and uses e.g. Conservative CPU governor as default setting.
@Pipperox: Would it be possible to check my Mindnight-ICS dev version with your benchmark suite? I'd be really interested in the results as you use the same setup for all kernels (1.2Ghz would not be a problem, does not use LiveOC but old school 1/1.128/1.2Ghz OC).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry guys, i understand your logic but i do not fully agree with it.
I'm not comparing overclocked kernels with heavy tweaking of voltages and special settings with which they only work.
I did the "poor man"'s overclock, setting to 1.2GHz using NSTools, a setting where 95% of phones should have no problem working.
I think that if some kernels offer you this possibility while others do not, it is fair to use this "advantage" that they have over the other kernels.
Because a lot of users will have the possibility to do the same as i do, without esoteric knowledge and with just a couple of clicks in the menus.
That being said, "due to popular demand" i will also try to retest those kernels at 1.0GHz as soon as i get a bit of time.
BUT in my recommendations, i will also consider the overclocking capabilities.
@mialwe: sure, i'll give a run to your kernel as well!
mialwe said:
@Pipperox: Would it be possible to check my Mindnight-ICS dev version with your benchmark suite? I'd be really interested in the results as you use the same setup for all kernels (1.2Ghz would not be a problem, does not use LiveOC but old school 1/1.128/1.2Ghz OC).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, sorry but i don't seem to find your ICS kernel anywhere.. can you provide a link?