Anyone has run a benchmark and noticed that the processor is locked at 1.33? I ran Geek Benchmark and says phone is running x86 and locked at 1.33. I have the 4gb/32gb with the 2.33ghz processor.
lordpipa said:
Anyone has run a benchmark and noticed that the processor is locked at 1.33? I ran Geek Benchmark and says phone is running x86 and locked at 1.33. I have the 4gb/32gb with the 2.33ghz processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same issue here. Still amazing score
Okay, the phone can actually run and runs out of the box at 2.33 GHz.
It seems that there is an inconsistency between the CPU model name in the database & its actual frequency. So more like a typo error in the database.
Check the following screen I took from Antutu:
Later edit: I was thinking of something else when I wrote the reply Antutu just reads the CPU info, and the issue is there, not in a database. So ignore my picture's annotations as well
What you're referring to is burst speed. The CPU can hit 2.3 Ghz in that sense, but will only do so in bursts.
Related
Hey all,
Noob here, i noticed under "current frequencies" in the Quadrant Benchmark that it jumps between 400 and 800mhz but ive never seen it at 1000mhz. Is this normal or should i bring it to the sprint store to get it checked out?
Thanks!
Quadrant probably doesn't need the whole 1000 mhz to complete its tasks. You should instal set cpu and set it to performance mode and then try it
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
hmm im currently running stock, i need to be rooted inorder to use setCPU right?
Joeway124 said:
hmm im currently running stock, i need to be rooted inorder to use setCPU right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's right.
News flash: Quadrant sucks and is woefully inaccurate, use SmartBench 2010 or GLBenchmark.
Yes quadrant sucks. About your question... It shows the frequency that it's running at that time. It's not made yo run at 1000 all the time for battery purposes. When u start quadrant, since it's an intensive on your CPU, I'm sure it scales to 1000. Mine didn't used to show 1000 either until I starting using CPU tuner.
yeh, i know watcha guys mean, thanks!
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.
Hey,
I have an unlocked version of HTC 10. I live in Turkey and it has the latest software, same as Europe. Android 7.0. The problem is, I used CPU-Z, Trepn profiler and did benchmarks with geekbench 4, antutu. All of them happens only with 1.6 ghz smaller cores. Bigger and more powerful cores never get activated. I have never encountered a slowdown associated with this but that makes me uncomfortable. I've had seen the bigger cores active just a few times. I thought it can be something about thermal throttling but that is not the case. Device is nearly always cool. I can provide more info about device and software, if you ask.
Thanks for your help and sorry for my bad English.
Edit: I'm not rooted and never unlocked the bootloader. Fully stock.
I know, I'm sorry, benchmarks, who needs them? The reason I'm testing is because I bought this phone used and I want to make sure that it's not broken in some way. I have a friend who is flipping HTC 10's and he's been doing benchmarks on each one that comes across his desk, and it seems like they're quite a bit different than mine.
On the stock rom my Antutu score has ranged from 108,000 to 152,000. Each time there's up to a 20,000 point difference. In my experience, your benchmark scores shouldn't change much unless you change something, so why the 45K range in scores? Not only that, but in Lineage 14.1 my scores drop significantly, down to 72,000, with the highest at 98,000.
I performed a RUU today and my scores are still flexing between 108 and 118K.
GeekBench 4 is a similar issue, my multicore performance has ranged from 1700 to 4100, and my single core from 1100 to 1700.
On a regular basis my Droid turbo (from 2014, running Lineage 14.1) is beating my HTC One in both tests. Do I have a bad phone, or is this normal behavior for the Sprint 10?
My buddy gets about 4000/1700 in geekbench and about 118K in Antutu, and his scores don't seem to change very much. He's running Lineage 14.1.
thunder2132 said:
I know, I'm sorry, benchmarks, who needs them? The reason I'm testing is because I bought this phone used and I want to make sure that it's not broken in some way. I have a friend who is flipping HTC 10's and he's been doing benchmarks on each one that comes across his desk, and it seems like they're quite a bit different than mine.
On the stock rom my Antutu score has ranged from 108,000 to 152,000. Each time there's up to a 20,000 point difference. In my experience, your benchmark scores shouldn't change much unless you change something, so why the 45K range in scores? Not only that, but in Lineage 14.1 my scores drop significantly, down to 72,000, with the highest at 98,000.
I performed a RUU today and my scores are still flexing between 108 and 118K.
GeekBench 4 is a similar issue, my multicore performance has ranged from 1700 to 4100, and my single core from 1100 to 1700.
On a regular basis my Droid turbo (from 2014, running Lineage 14.1) is beating my HTC One in both tests. Do I have a bad phone, or is this normal behavior for the Sprint 10?
My buddy gets about 4000/1700 in geekbench and about 118K in Antutu, and his scores don't seem to change very much. He's running Lineage 14.1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps it's thermal throttling?
Nougat update improved things on that front. Are you on Marshmallow? Also you can try going into developer option and setting High Performance mode and then doing your test to see if you get improved scores.
Tarima said:
Perhaps it's thermal throttling?
Nougat update improved things on that front. Are you on Marshmallow? Also you can try going into developer option and setting High Performance mode and then doing your test to see if you get improved scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're probably right on the thermal throttling side of things. I'm on Lineage 14.1 now, and if I run a benchmark after the phone has been idle for a while it's in the 138K range where it's supposed to be. Overclocked on stock is where I'm getting closer to 145K. I think I was doing too many tests, and when they were bad, I'd flash to another ROM (while charging) which didn't help with the thermal side of things.
Thermal throttling also would explain why if you do one test, then immediately repeat it the phone will score worse, which happens every time I try it.
I'm not on MM, I did a RUU to the latest version of N and then unlocked from there.
Guys I am switching Rom for best battery life and performance .
viperos latest build antutu around 110000
Jaguar rom little bit more
same with other rom like crdorid citric aex etc
i did test with stock and custom kernel also but same result I tried jaguar heliox
even geekbench are very low single core is 17hundred and multi-score is around 2900
Help me asap
Single core geekbench at 1700 is not low, and high benchmark score doesnt do anything rather than bragging on the internet, in that case, just stole another result that is high already
but other showing more
pipyakas said:
Single core geekbench at 1700 is not low, and high benchmark score doesnt do anything rather than bragging on the internet, in that case, just stole another result that is high already
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i also have lemax2 which have 4gb ram and 32gb internal and snapdragon 820. And in lemax 2 i got 1700 single core and 4000 multicore.
amit gaikwad said:
i also have lemax2 which have 4gb ram and 32gb internal and snapdragon 820. And in lemax 2 i got 1700 single core and 4000 multicore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so what? it mostly due to overhead in the software and thermal config that the cpu cannot run all cores at max speed for the entire time benchmarking. if you want high benchmark score then dont use this phone apparently
If you still insisted on getting highest benchmark score, get jaguar kernel, put everything to best performance and highest thermal limit, then throw the phone into a fridge. Maybe it would get better