Develop Bugs

[Q] Best kernel for CM6?

After realizing that I made a mistake by ditching my EVO for the Epic; I returned to the EVO and installed CM6. What a difference! Everything is great so far except for battery life (even using profiles on setCPU) so I was wondering what kernel would provide speed, reliability and battery savings. I'm currently running CM6 kernel and I'm getting around 1250 on quadrant (around the same results of the nexus one with froyo) so I'm happy with the speed so far but I would love some more battery life (I'm getting less than 8 hours with moderate use).
Thanks

What I learn is try a kernel for a day or two. Try another.. you will find one. Not saying do this but this is what I'm doing. Just like finding a rom.. always come back to cm6
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

yes and please, search around the forums before posting, you *MIGHT* get flamed a bit for it. but im using king's kernel #9...but im not on CM6. idk what im on hahaha i dont remember

{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

Geez, my bad. For some reason I thought I was in the general section.
Can a mod move this thread to the general section? Thanks

Before this gets moved.. all hardware is different. On paper its the same, but what we have learned is that phones respond differently to the software thrown at them. As others suggested, try them out. Snap as well as Kings are excellent kernels. Just find there threads and I can't stress enough to read the op. Most of the questions you have can be found there, as it can be a little cumbersome with all the different versions for some. But yeah, make sure to give it a run for a few days before you decide its not working for you. Your phone needs to get used to it, so basing it off a charge after a few cycles is always a good idea.

miguelrodas said:
After realizing that I made a mistake by ditching my EVO for the Epic; I returned to the EVO and installed CM6. What a difference! Everything is great so far except for battery life (even using profiles on setCPU) so I was wondering what kernel would provide speed, reliability and battery savings. I'm currently running CM6 kernel and I'm getting around 1250 on quadrant (around the same results of the nexus one with froyo) so I'm happy with the speed so far but I would love some more battery life (I'm getting less than 8 hours with moderate use).
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Run Snap v7.5 for an increase in speed and battery life.

King's Kernel all the way, and I've tried all the damn Snap kernels.
Mostly, you should be managing your wifi/3g/screen off cpu settings.

omnirage said:
King's Kernel all the way, and I've tried all the damn Snap kernels.
Mostly, you should be managing your wifi/3g/screen off cpu settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been using King's #1 kernel after trying (and having issues with) a myriad of Snap kernels. I really like King's and am waiting for #2.

My benchmark results LOWER than a Evo 2.2? WTF

A couple of week ago I did a benchmark test, it came back 944, well below an Evo 2.2. A couple of days ago I rooted my phone, still on stock SENSE rom and I ran the test again, these are my results,
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
How the hell is this possible? Lol. I'm below a Evo 2.2 yet, my Evo is on 2.2. Can someone explain?

Does your phone perform fine otherwise?
Benchmarks are for the kids but it does seem a little low
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

The benchmarks don't mean anything, just gloating. If you overclock it you'll get better scores.

I hate benchmarks I think they are inaccurate, plus evos react different with every different rom you flash. If my evo is not sluggish then its fast. Maybe its time to try another rom. Find one that has all or most of the bloat ware taken out they seem to be faster.
Good luck.
sent from my !πf€©£€d Evo 4g using XDA APP

Like stated earlier, those scores really don't mean much. If it bugs you, and you want to see a higher score, make sure a bunch of stuff is not running in the background before you run the quadrant test.

Use osmonitor or seepu+ from the market to see if anything is using your cpu, you probably have an app that is hogging it. It's possible that's a sign of malware too since the exploit they use will eat up your resources.

I posted about this a few days ago and got similar answers. I can't make mine go higher than 1150 (using Koni's Elite Series II, MS79723's SBC #15 v7 kernel. Did it on a fresh restart).
I have no idea what they're basing these tests on, but it sure as hell isn't our Evos lol.
Fear not though. Our UI runs on CPU and not on the GPU, so unless you play video games your benchmark actually doesn't matter at all. One thing the Evo is known for apart from other, newer phones is we're still running the Adreno 200 GPU while others have newer chip sets.
If you want faster scores here's some tips:
Get SetCPU and overclock your processor
Use xHausx's suggestion about checking to make sure your processor isn't being used.
Get an AOSP rom (like MIUI, CM6 or CM7). Without Sense, the phone runs faster and it'll show.
Get a kernel that performs better. Best bet is Netarchy for Sense. I don't know the kernels from AOSP.
I'm sure there's a few speed hacks/scripts/mods you can find too, but unless your Evo is actually the Evo 3D and not our Evo, then your benchmarks are gonna come up short.

As long as it feels fast to you I wouldn't worry about it.

my benchmark is lower, but my phone is still super smooth and you wouldnt tell the difference from scrolling or using an app. opening an app takes a lil longer
@245mhz

My phone lags, especially playing games. I'm also using Launcher Pro Plus, does that have anything to do with it? How can I get rid of this Sprint bloatware?

titanium backup will uninstall bloatware, our you can flash a custom rom with no bloatware included

What performance did you expect running a gps on 1 bar?
top kill

My non overlocked EVO running Tiamat 3.1.3 and CM7 hits around 1400 in quadrant. I'm happy with that.

ROMs that are best on battery usage - these are my findings

{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
http://shayessays.com/2012/03/08/te...st-popular-roms-for-the-samsung-galaxy-nexus/
please leave a comment if you have anything to say!

Why not test all of them?

Nice...thanks. I take it you have the Verizon one? I prefer foxhound for battery.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

Some thoughts:
Given that the "Android OS" report in battery usage was apparently subject to a major, but simple, calculation bug until 4.0.4, I have doubts about its validity as a measure in this kind of test. Are all of these ROMs using the 4.0.3 code as base, or are some backporting pieces of 4.0.4? Furthermore, how would you know if any devs sticking to the 4.0.3 source haven't gone in and fixed the bug themselves once it became known? If I had to guess just by looking at this, Gummynex, Liquid, and Revolution have this bug patched, the others do not. The similarity within and between these two groups is just too striking.
Even putting that aside, I'm not sure I see the sense in measuring anything but total drain, assuming your methodology filters out any variance due to usage habits (screen on, apps running, signal strength). If the phone is left to sleep and nothing else is running, shouldn't all the drain show the nature of that ROM?
Also, perhaps you can elaborate more on why not keeping the time constant seemed like an okay concession, because when the total drain only varies by 1 or 2% over 6-7 hours, I'm not sure how almost a full hour's difference across tests can be considered insignificant.
For example, compare AOKP vs Redemption in your results, redemption ends up looking marginally better. AOKP reads 4% over 7 hours, or ~.57% per hour. Without actually crunching all the numbers, 20 minutes of variance looks like enough to be significantly signficant if all we get for sigfigs is 1% increments.
With all that in mind, my general impression is that most of these roms are roughly the same for battery. I don't know if there is a feasible option to either get a full mAh reading, or to have program log the exact time a certain % level is reached, but both would give much more valuable data, I think.
Also, one of my first thoughts after looking at this was what kernels are these roms all using? It would be nice to see it included; are the devs using the stock AOSP kernels, stock with a few of their own patches, bundling their favorite custom kernel, or even developing their ROM with a specific kernel in mind? I know that liquid is bundled with leankernel, for example. It begs questions: Is there a good kernel complimenting a well designed ROM? A great kernel making up for a crappy ROM? An extraordinary ROM that shines despite a buggy kernel? (All example for conjecture). Hard to say without kernel as a constant across tests.
To summarize, my main critiques of your methodology are:
-Don't see the merits of using Android OS drain vs the total drain.
-Would like to see a standard time used in tests, or if possible, measure the exact time required for x% of drain, or mAh remaining after x hours.
-Would like to see a larger test range to establish statistical significance.
-Would like to see kernel as a constant, since anyone can flash their own custom kernel, and packaging one in a ROM may be a good move, but doesn't say much about the rom itself.
Those are my thoughts on the methodology and the results presented, but I would also like to express that it's very refreshing to see someone actually going to lengths to compile thought-out data on battery life, instead of the dreaded "wow great battery life awesome ROM" posts that litter the ROM threads.
Edit: As far as a more precise reading goes, if you run better battery stats, Menu->More->History->Menu->View Serie gives quick access to a log that I think would be helpful here. I'm not sure what triggers the program to write to this log, but it's pretty well populated regardless. So you could decide you want to drain the battery to x%, and just read off the first time the log shows that level.

Graphics anomaly question for the *real* devs

AnTuTu results, especially 2D graphics, are coming back with huge and consistent (multiple tests) variances between devices. 3D is off but not as widely. Since the phones being tested were all built within weeks of each other and running the same (stock) s/w, what could be causing such deviations in performance? 2D graphics scores swing from 147 to 286 which is almost a 50% variance. Hardware? Drivers? And could there be any correlation between this and the display flickering and other graphics issues?
And if we can limit the arm chair quarterbacking from those that aren't deep in to the code that would be great. There's enough layperson speculation in the general section.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

I made similar experiences in different networks, especially with the stock rom. When i´m in wifi the results differ from them in bad network. If i have played a game before it shows other results, as when my One X didn´t use the graphic drivers...Try it. At this time - with ARHD Rom - i have most around 11500 and 11900 in AnTuTu, only one time 10600.
Benchmarks are more a game than really good guides... if your phone runs smooth, don´t worry about the results.

.
Thread moved to Q&A due to it being a question. Would advise you to read forum rules and post in correct section.
Failure to comply with forum rules will result in an infraction and/or ban depending on severity of rule break.

BarryH_GEG said:
AnTuTu results, especially 2D graphics, are coming back with huge and consistent (multiple tests) variances between devices. 3D is off but not as widely. Since the phones being tested were all built within weeks of each other and running the same (stock) s/w, what could be causing such deviations in performance? 2D graphics scores swing from 147 to 286 which is almost a 50% variance. Hardware? Drivers? And could there be any correlation between this and the display flickering and other graphics issues?
And if we can limit the arm chair quarterbacking from those that aren't deep in to the code that would be great. There's enough layperson speculation in the general section.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure this has to do with the crappy gfx drivers. The same thing that cause the camera to have issues and the notification bar. While I had the international one x, the phone benched really well while those problems weren't happening, but as soon as I was able to reproduce them and ran the tests again, score was reduced by a lot.
I could reboot the phone and the problems would go away, only to come back after some use.

designgears said:
Pretty sure this has to do with the crappy gfx drivers. The same thing that cause the camera to have issues and the notification bar. While I had the international one x, the phone benched really well while those problems weren't happening, but as soon as I was able to reproduce them and ran the tests again, score was reduced by a lot.
I could reboot the phone and the problems would go away, only to come back after some use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey designgears, everyone with a low result gets a normal result just like you referenced after rebooting. So it seems the graphics crap is drivers. There's rumors of an end-of-month update to fix them and HTC's supposedly issuing a statement in the UK shortly. I hope they nail Nvidia, this is the second device to have Teg3 related issues at launch.

BarryH_GEG said:
Hey designgears, everyone with a low result gets a normal result just like you referenced after rebooting. So it seems the graphics crap is drivers. There's rumors of an end-of-month update to fix them and HTC's supposedly issuing a statement in the UK shortly. I hope they nail Nvidia, this is the second device to have Teg3 related issues at launch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ya, last time I buy a Tegra product... lol

Question P6 vs P7 Surprising Geekbench Results

My wife has a P7 Pro and I've got a P6 Pro. I decided to run a Geekbench test on them and was shocked to see the P6 Pro scored about 5% higher than the 7 Pro. Anyone have an idea what would cause that? Is there such thing as an underperforming CPU?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

PuffDaddy_d said:
My wife has a P7 Pro and I've got a P6 Pro. I decided to run a Geekbench test on them and was shocked to see the P6 Pro scored about 5% higher than the 7 Pro. Anyone have an idea what would cause that? Is there such thing as an underperforming CPU?
View attachment 5936341
View attachment 5936343
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well there's a ton of variables that could affect those scores but yes, it's VERY possible to underclock a CPU, just as you can overclock it. I'm not saying that happened, but simply answering the question, as I have no idea the differences between them. OS can definitely affect this score just as much as CPU. So, what operating system (ROM) are both using, and kernels, ROOT magisk, ETC.? There's so many things that can cause this to happen that we will need a LOT more information to even begin to figure this out.

What I see here is your Pixel 6 performing better than average, I've seen scores from 2800 to 3200, but not higher, higher than that are rare, my highest score is 970/2843, can you tell which rom(beta, stable...), kernel, mods or modules and so are you using? Did you disable any app too?
Try using 3D Mark Wild Life Extreme or so to test 3D performance, or try antutu so you can have more info, thanks!

Thanks for the quick replies. I certainly understand that benchmark values can change from device to device or even day to day on the same device. I just never thought SoC's from 2 different generations would yield results showing the older device with higher performance.
Both phones are fully stock, not rooted or modified in any way with the latest Android 13 stable build. I only made this comparison because my wife's P7 Pro was having trouble taking more than 2 or 3 pictures in a row without temporarily locking out the camera shutter until the system resources cleared up. My P6 Pro in the same conditions had no trouble firing off 5 or 6 shots in a row without said issue.

PuffDaddy_d said:
Thanks for the quick replies. I certainly understand that benchmark values can change from device to device or even day to day on the same device. I just never thought SoC's from 2 different generations would yield results showing the older device with higher performance.
Both phones are fully stock, not rooted or modified in any way with the latest Android 13 stable build. I only made this comparison because my wife's P7 Pro was having trouble taking more than 2 or 3 pictures in a row without temporarily locking out the camera shutter until the system resources cleared up. My P6 Pro in the same conditions had no trouble firing off 5 or 6 shots in a row without said issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your Pixel is a 1% one, her Pixel has an issue probably, factory resetting one day should fix it, I'll avoid restoring a backup of settings and so to make sure it works as it should.
Make sure to clean caches and checking background apps, try also better battery stats to check what's eating up resources, it is probably an easy fix, but finding it will need some work, thanks for sharing

Well, If you spend time to read previous news and you will know it's normally because both chips are made by the same technology from Samsung. And the chip used by your P6P may be luckily packaged from the best performance of specific position of the wafers(Center dies or near center dies ...) ... So it's within the reasonable variation.