I eventually ran a benchmark on my CarbonROM install on my Sprint Galaxy Nexus, clocked at a max of 1.6
But, I saw that my device compared to others is just super super low, I don't have the numbers on me as I don't have my phone, but if you're one of those people who have a high benchmark score, what's your setup?
I know it's said that benchmarks aren't important, but they at least have to mean something with performance.
So, what are you running?
Try flashing franco.Kernel. Makes a huge difference!
Before franco: 2204
After franco: 2932 (Quadrant Standard)
ROM: PACman ROM, 1.2 GHz
Seriously, there should be a thread stickied for the bench freaks, all in the same place. *sigh*
Sent from my Nexus
bk201doesntexist said:
Seriously, there should be a thread stickied for the bench freaks, all in the same place. *sigh*
Sent from my Nexus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is one. Just needs sticky-ing.
Beauenheim said:
I know it's said that benchmarks aren't important, but they at least have to mean something with performance.
So, what are you running?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See, the thing is, benchmarks really do mean nothing. Benchmarks don't affect how well your device performs. If it runs fast, it runs fast-- you don't need the benchmark to know that.
Sent from my Mahjong Nexus
Beauenheim said:
I know it's said that benchmarks aren't important, but they at least have to mean something with performance.
So, what are you running?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. Because being able to crunch 110,000,000 triangles vs 90,000,000 has real world implications.
Yay! It's been a while since we've had a thread to remind us how useless benchmarks are and offer us all an opportunity to debate about it, yet again.:good:
I make my words what Chainfire said, but globaly.
If you trust benchmark results, you'll know that running naked in the garden for 5mins will affects performance by 20%
Neat, alright.
So absolutely nothing?
That really doesn't make any sense to me. Those 90,000,000 triangles being processed will at least show me how well it will do in a game, to a degree, right?
Not in any way you could actually notice. That was also an extreme hyperbole as far as differences go. To be totally honest, the only real value of benchmarks is stress testing an OC but even then there are better ways.
063_XOBX said:
Not in any way you could actually notice. That was also an extreme hyperbole as far as differences go. To be totally honest, the only real value of benchmarks is stress testing an OC but even then there are better ways.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well alright, thanks for your insight. I've been in the android game for awhile but I don't know a lot of these things.
Related
Now me and 4 of my friends have EVOs and I rooted all of them. Some of this EVOs are hardware verson 003 and one of them is 002. 2 are novatec and 3 are epson. We are all running fresh 3.1.0.2 with netarchy-toastmod-4.1.8 bfs, mine has 4.1.9 BETA, but my one friend is running CM6 RC2 because he loves it. Now all of these EVOs can overclock to 1.27 GHz but when we do it they freeze and crash. My one friend can go up to 1.22 just fine but the rest of us are stuck at 1.19. I want to know why this happens. If our phones cant take that much why have it. What's the point we have 5 EVOs here none can handle it. Im I doing something wrong is the a joke WTF!!
All the phones are different. Most can't oc past 1152 without causing reboots, mine included. Other than ridiculous benchmark numbers, I don't think you'll notice a huge difference in performance.
Sent from my FROYO'D EVO using xda app
dglowe343 said:
All the phones are different. Most can't oc past 1152 without causing reboots, mine included. Other than ridiculous benchmark numbers, I don't think you'll notice a huge difference in performance.
Sent from my FROYO'D EVO using xda app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont really care about performance I just wanted to know why this happens and dont get me started on benchmark numbers its just and ****ing number who cares as long as the phone is running fast and sable and has good battery life then its fine some people go out of there way to make there benchmark the highest like CM-snap ver.7.0 kernel.
andre104623 said:
I dont really care about performance I just wanted to know why this happens and dont get me started on benchmark numbers its just and ****ing number who cares as long as the phone is running fast and sable and has good battery life then its fine some people go out of there way to make there benchmark the highest like CM-snap ver.7.0 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simple answer, not all chips are made the same. They are made to minimum standards. Your chip is rated to 1 ghz, and thats what the chip company delivered.
Some chips can handle more, but thats just luck.
As far as why do people strive for the high numbers, thats personal preference. Not everyone here cares about 30+ hours of battery life. Some just like the bragging rights.
Unfortunantly, all EVO's are not created equal. You can have the same hardware and version numbers on 2 devices, but one may be able to OC that high, and one may not. This is also why not everyone can run the superbattery kernel from the Baked Snack rom. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it.
and c'mon, watch the language. There are rules around here, you know?
fachadick said:
and c'mon, watch the language. There are rules around here, you know?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I thought we are all adults one swear now and again wont kill anyone
andre104623 said:
I dont really care about performance I just wanted to know why this happens and dont get me started on benchmark numbers its just and ****ing number who cares as long as the phone is running fast and sable and has good battery life then its fine some people go out of there way to make there benchmark the highest like CM-snap ver.7.0 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
actually, cm snap 7.0 and 7.1 are extremely stable, have great battery life and have excellent benchmarks as well. i dont have a single problem with cm snap kernels and i run at 1228mhz when fully charged.
andre104623 said:
I dont really care about performance I just wanted to know why this happens and dont get me started on benchmark numbers its just and ****ing number who cares as long as the phone is running fast and sable and has good battery life then its fine some people go out of there way to make there benchmark the highest like CM-snap ver.7.0 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's not going out of the way... it's making the phone as fast as possible. why do anything if you aren't gonna push the limit? how are you gonna develop if you don't push the limit?
Any idea? Most reviews i saw for the GNex shows it getting 1700-2000+.
Meaningless or not, i wanna know why it's so much less.
Wtf
just4747 said:
Any idea? Most reviews i saw for the GNex shows it getting 1700-2000+.
Meaningless or not, i wanna know why it's so much less.
Wtf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I checked it right when I got the phone for the hell of it and got around the same number. The only thing I care about is if it will lag with daily use. If it doesn't I don't care if it has half a core and 1 byte of ram.
Quadrant scores are meaningless and don't give any indication of how the phone performs in real world use.
My old Galaxy S2 scored 4000+ in quadrant but does it feel 3 times faster than my Nexus definitely no!
Again, I don't care about what the test actually means but why are our scores so much lower on the same device compared to the reviews show? What is different and why? It leads me to believe that something is wrong.
I freaked too, but I think its bs. If you install System Monitor you can watch both CPU cores in action. Also, other bench tests clearly show that you're getting dual core performance. I think Quadrant will need an update.
just4747 said:
Again, I don't care about what the test actually means but why are our scores so much lower on the same device compared to the reviews show? What is different and why? It leads me to believe that something is wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get around 1400+ as well in quadrant and I don't think there is anything wrong as when I first got my GS2 my scores where lower than what was seen online from reviewers as well.
Don't forget they probably had a phone with no extra apps on it or just the bare minimum which could also affect the scores.
daleski75 said:
I get around 1400+ as well in quadrant and I don't think there is anything wrong as when I first got my GS2 my scores where lower than what was seen online from reviewers as well.
Don't forget they probably had a phone with no extra apps on it or just the bare minimum which could also affect the scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got a 1700 reading from quadrant. I don't know if quadrant takes advantage of the dualcore cpu?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Herman76 said:
I got a 1700 reading from quadrant. I don't know if quadrant takes advantage of the dualcore cpu?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it doesn't and it needs a desperate update anyway to fully support ICS.
Someone correct me if I am wrong about quadrant standard not seeing both cores?
It's the higher resolution mainly.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
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
when I install a google edition or cyanogenmod rom or any rom thats not touchwiz I am getting lower scores just wondering why?
Lower's better. And all the TW junk in the background is taken out, leaving room for more processes, so of course it scores better.
Sent from my GT-I9505G using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Tak23 said:
when I install a google edition or cyanogenmod rom or any rom thats not touchwiz I am getting lower scores just wondering why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But does it feel faster? Because that's what really matters...
lordcheeto03 said:
But does it feel faster? Because that's what really matters...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This plus eleventy bagillion.
Benchmarks are totally arbitrary and meaningless.
TouchWiz ROMs scores great on benchmark tests because TW is specifically designed to perform well on such tests by putting the whole device into overdrive when the test is run. It doesn't mean that your day to day usage is better.
Tak23 said:
when I install a google edition or cyanogenmod rom or any rom thats not touchwiz I am getting lower scores just wondering why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a very subjective statement. "Lower is better" really depends on the apo being used. Some, eg. Quadrant, a higher score is better. Linpack is the same way.
As said before, benchmark apps don't tell you the real performance of a device. Though they can give you a baseline or at least a general idea of different aspects. I wouldn't jump on the "benchmarks are useless" bandwagon as they do serve a purpose.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
KCRic said:
That's a very subjective statement. "Lower is better" really depends on the apo being used. Some, eg. Quadrant, a higher score is better. Linpack is the same way.
As said before, benchmark apps don't tell you the real performance of a device. Though they can give you a baseline or at least a general idea of different aspects. I wouldn't jump on the "benchmarks are useless" bandwagon as they do serve a purpose.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well they are useless when ROMs are set up specifically to perform well on benchmark tests. That gives aboslutely no real world value.
The only time there is any validity to a banchmark comparison is when you are trying to compare 2 things that are set up almost exactly the same with only a single differing variable.
Like if you want to see if a phone is bad, you'd need to run a benchmark on the target phone and another on a different phone of the same model with the exact same settings. Or if you want to see in a mod if the cause of reduced performance, you would need to run a benchmark without the mod, then immediately after the mod, and repeat it several times to ensure you get repeatable results. Etc etc etc...
You can't just abandoned the scientific method and compare a benchmark of a TouchWiz rom with a benchmark of an AOSP rom with god only knows how many differences in the set up (kernel, clock speed, gpu settings, voltage, etc etc etc) and have it be a valid means of determining which is the better rom in any way. You can't even set it up properly so that all the settings match and the only difference is the ROM because there is so much incompatibility betweent the two that factors into it. Especially when the TouchWiz rom is set up with methods of inflating it's scores on benchmark tests and the AOSP ROM isn't.
I agree. Scientific method comes first in determining the performance of a ROM. Actually I would say real world and use experience is the best method. Given today's Hugh end phones, our for example, getting the most out of a benchmark or anything else serves little purpose. I can disable 2, even 3 core and still have a smooth experience with most daily a activities. Even underclocking the CPU & GPU still retains all the speed and usability.
I think most tech literate people use benchmarks just to see what the phone can do. Also, as a quick though fairly inaccurate method of determining if you're ROM and it's mods/scripts are efficient.
To answer the OP's question though - since AOSP is HW accelerated, has been for a while now, it should be "faster" and yield better benchmarks. Less running in the background. The most things are integrated as opposed to added on to the base ROM and code. That's a very generic and butchered explanation.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using xda app-developers app
Anyone post some benchmarks! I personally don't hold a lot of stock in benchmarks but am curious about what other folks are getting... To me, this seems rather low but I'd like to see some others to compare...
jbarcus81 said:
Anyone post some benchmarks! I personally don't hold a lot of stock in benchmarks but am curious about what other folks are getting... To me, this seems rather low but I'd like to see some others to compare...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not much better here, but like you said I don't hold much stock in benchmarks. Especially something like geekbench..
KonoeKyon said:
Not much better here, but like you said I don't hold much stock in benchmarks. Especially something like geekbench..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless it's total bias from the application. Should we not be rolling with the results? Shouldn't they be higher? Fastest chip available currently... Other specs... Just seems low...
jbarcus81 said:
Unless it's total bias from the application. Should we not be rolling with the results? Shouldn't they be higher? Fastest chip available currently... Other specs... Just seems low...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too much can influence the results of benchmarks, like a random background app using up CPU cycles. Geekbench also isn't that reliable IMO anyway, they test difference cpus differently which make it look like the iPhones are as fast as laptops with core i7 processors which couldn't be farther from the truth.
I have the essential phone and the 2xl and this is what I got
Interesting stuff... And the comment made about Geekbench and Apple products is so true.. their benchmarks look so fake at times...
Yeah.. Unless Apple has the fastest chips on the planet.. these scores are a bit, what's the word?
Single core score for iOS and Android.. Top 3 results..