Related
After racking my brain recently thinking that possibly my evo was somehow screwed up internally, I found the culprit.
Here's what happened....
I got bored and curious so I flashed a CM7 nightly to assure myself I have been missing nothing. Did the usual battery of testing after I update all my apps. Pathetically slow. I was left wondering how people could be bragging of 1600+ quadrant scores on aosp roms while I was barely getting over 1000. On VP I was accustomed to getting high 1400's. It seemed smooth enough but I wanted my VP back. I did a fresh install after a few wipes, same routine, updated apps and found I was getting 951 on the quadrant score, topping out at maybe 1100. That is 400 points below what I was getting before using the same kernel etc!
This has gone on for days now, been reading xda, even bugged a developer to see if he had insight. Thought I was onto something earlier when people reported problems with DarkTremors a2sd since I had upgraded to latest beta 4. So I wiped no less than 7 times, even once in the bootloader. Installed VaelPak2.3a and my scores were back! Thought I solved it but nope. Installed VaelPak3.1 found my scores back to normal. Did update 2, scores still normal. Upgraded apps. Scores dropped 300+ points.
Pulled the Quadrant from the VaelPak rom, and guess what? My scores are back to normal! So, am I the only one who has upgraded Quadrant and seen a difference in scores?
[quadrant version 1.1.5 is the good working version, 1.1.7 currently in the Market is causing the low scores]
Damn you're right, I was getting 1800+ before and now with 1.1.7 it's down to 1500+. Not quite the drop you were getting but it's still a significant difference.
Is it possible that newer Quadrant is supposed to give lower scores now on same hardware because it takes into account better hardware/newer phones? Idk, just posing the question
The most recent quadrant update apparently shows lower score results. Same thing happened with Linpack awhile back, they say it's more accurate now :/
same here, dropped by almost 200.
I can't say for sure whether they wanted the drop to "be more accurate" since the change log for 1.1.7 only claims gingerbread compatibility fixes. If you notice, the comparison chart levels have not changed along with the result ranges. A standard EVO is still something like 1200 or 1250 like it has always been. So, I do not see these numbers being more accurate if I am scoring significantly less than a stock unrooted phone.
I guess what I am saying is that if a benchmark decides to adjust their rating scale, the comparison scale should follow suit.
Don't you hate it when you spend time trying to fix something and here it not you at all? Like the the sound goes out on the TV. Then you spend the next 10 min. reseting receivers your TV and every device in your house. Just to find you its the cable company. Man I hate that.. let the bashing of cable companies begin...
Also:
I used to run those kinds of tests on my video cards on my pc all the time. Then they started making them for better cards and my scores kept going lower and lower. Eventually I got board with it because I knew I had a good card. It was just their POS software was making it look bad. Haven't ran that app since. Hope that doesn't happen to quadrant.
no wonder, and i cant get 1.1.7 to work on my g1. can anyone kindly share me 1.1.5's apk?
googled for it but couldnt find any
thanks!
First off I'm fairly aware of the fact that benchmarks are not accurate representations of the day to day real life usefulness of the handset.
That said, I used both linpack and quadrant standard edition for the first time tonight while testing another kernel with my current rom (which is cm7, ggingerbread-6).
At the conclusion of my testing it was very obvious that one kernel completely outclassed the other in a benchmarking situation, however something else became apparent that leads to this post.
If I follow and believe everyone else's benchmark scores, even those posted an hour earlier in the same kernel thread, then I might have the slowest Evo on planet earth.
I see other users of the same rom and kernal posting scores which are never below 1500 in quadrant, I saw one instance of 1300 but nonetheless, even overclocking to 1075 I can barely break 1100 and usually fall just below that. Sadly enough on the "slower" of the 2 kernals I was barely surpassing 900.
Now on the linpack side of things I don't have any comparative scores to judge against, but ill post what I received anyhow for information's sake. On the "faster" of the two kernels (the one that came prebuilt into the rom) I was getting between 33-34, on the new kernel I was testing I was getting between 19 and 22, these are all "mflops" of course, whatever that may be.
Someone give me some information or advice here! Do I just happen to have a slow evolution, or are others either exaggerating or using some trick/mod/tweak I'm royalty unaware of??
Thanks in advance!
some people brag, some people cheat, most have low scores, few have high, there isn't a very good baseline and the benchmark programs dont scale very well at all, I have run 1800 scores and I have run 600 scores, guess what. both roms were smooth and you wouldn't have been able to tell a difference, what does that mean? do we believe the benchmark programs? are they spitting a random number at us? who knows! dont believe them, be satisfied with how your evo is running and if it's not running very well then try a different kernel or rom, keep trying new ones until your satisfied, only then will some benchmark program output not mean a thing
Most of my Quadrant benchmarks with aftermarket ROMS+kernels have been in the 1100-1400 range, using VaelPak and various kernels to get most of the better scores there. The highest I've had was CM7RC1 with the SnapTurbo kernel, got an 1821. It was unusable, though.
I've come to the conclusion that the benchmarks aren't as important as battery life, especially with the Evo.
Biggest reason for the huge difference in numbers? Different versions of the app. The dev changed how it rates phones.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Thanks!
Explained. I knew they were totally not concurrent with the outward performance and usability of the device, and for what its worth while I've only ever flashed a total of 3 roms, this one is perfect for me and I seem to be one of the rare few with no problems whatsoever, everything works exactly as I would expect it to. So yes, l never feared my device was suddenly slower now that I knew the all knowing superultrabenchmark number.
Didn't see a thread for this in here anymore so I thought I'd post. I know synthetic benchmarks don't mean a lot but I'm curious of what other people are scoring since mine seems to be lower than others tested.
My phone is a Telus SGH-T989D with a rooted stock rom with SetCPU running the system at 1.5 and have the V6 Tweak setup.
I find it interesting others have scored over 4000.
I was going to ask this same question. I tried smart bench on stock rom and the score was always between 2500 and 3400 when i see results of over 4000... I now have the Bombaridier v1.3 Rom and still get the same low results?
Is this normal score or could our phones have some cpu problems? Im thinking on going to T-Mobile and exchange the phone since it also has the camera pink spot problem and minor screen lines and spots on low brightness in dark colors...
finally had some time to sit down and enjoy my phone
Why are we getting our clock cleaned by so many other SGII models?
I don't know if this is a contributing factor, but they're using 2.3.3
We're using 2.3.5
To further this pattern, from what I understand, ICS is causing qudrant scores in the low 2000's and below on good phones..
The more advanced the OS version, the more it taxes the phone.. Just an observation.
I understand that it's fun to see your phone on top, but aren't these "benchmark" tests pretty irrelevant to performance and satisfaction? Is your phone laggy? Do you have any problems or is everything buttery smooth and running well? If it is then I wouldn't worry about arbitrary test results to be honest. You can run benchmarks over and over and get a different score every time. You can cheat on them. In the end just find a ROM/Kernel with the settings and features you like and enjoy it!
Yes that's true but every upgrade in OS uses more resources, so you're bound to see more lag on ICS than our current ROM
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I guess not that many people use this one.
I've recently upgraded to the ARHD 5.0.0 Rom and my Quadrant score has dropped from an average of 4800 down to an average of 3800.
I realise quadrant is not the most reliable benchmark for realworld performance but that seems like a pretty big drop.
Anyone else know what could have happened?
Thanks.
What has happened is that it's meaningless Quadrant score has dropped. I'd just ignore it altogether.
Solaris81 said:
I've recently upgraded to the ARHD 5.0.0 Rom and my Quadrant score has dropped from an average of 4800 down to an average of 3800.
I realise quadrant is not the most reliable benchmark for realworld performance but that seems like a pretty big drop.
Anyone else know what could have happened?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People are reporting lower AnTuTu scores after 1.29 so if the ROM you're using is 1.29 based what you're observing could be a result of the update. Since Nvidia's code and drivers are proprietary the devs use it pretty much as-is.
Read this...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=25601709&postcount=626
And this...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1632354
As Nvidia plays around with low-level code and drivers to address battery life and fix the graphics issues they'll be tweaking the behaviour of the CPU. There were some pretty odd changes to the CPU code in the Prime while Nvidia was tackling its launch issues.
You have to do quadrant in stock rom.
On 1.26 and 1.28 stock rom it's easily around 4,600 to 4,800. Should be around the same for stock 1.29. I'll see it when I get the Asia ota.
I've tried most roms around and some of their versions are low and some after their update becomes on par with stock in terms of quadrant. It's due to the fact that they are doing heavy tweaking on the rom thus affecting performance a bit (whether for better or worse) . Good thing is they can easily rectify the problem on their next releases.
Although benchmark is not a clear indication of real world performance but it's always nice to get high scores nonetheless. Lol.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
I just want to know if anyome can explain why when running antutu benchmarks I cant even get scores equal to the score the app says I should be getting for this phone let alone better ones. Infact I often get much worse scores not even close to what it says I should be getting. Even more so Im running custom rom with overclocked kernel and its just sad. When u look to see what your device other are gettibg score wise there is like a major difference. I get like 10,000 to like 14,000. Iv tried using set cpu to make it run better with no success. And I tried using the app that came with the kernel to make it better by changing some settings and still nothing. It seems like nothibg I do can even get me scores that the phone should get as an average let alone better ones even when overclocked and such.
Sent from my Note II
Funny you should post this...
I was angonizing over my scores a month or so ago, and was not getting scores even close to what I expected.
The tests made me so mad I gave up and went stock...LOL
Benchmarks are affected by soooooo many variables within the OS, they are often considered eye wash for speed related results.
The rom you run, the kernel, modem, background processing, data, wifi....blah blah blah....LOL
You see where I'm going with this ??
Stock TW based builds always run the best for me, and give the best scores...(remember, they dont mean much really).....really
If your device runs well, gets good battery life, and you are happy with the choice in roms you have made, then dont worry about antutu, or anything else.
Raw scores are called raw for a reason, as they are base estimates of a perceived result.
True testing of a device must be done under a set of rules only a factory can measure.....IMHO, and unless the devices being tested are paired "EXACTLY" the same, then the comparisons are flawed anyway......at least thats how i see it.....g
I understand that and I know how it affects but its more of a I do notice when my phone is quick or not and the scores usually reflect that. When I had my optimus g with it running alot more crap I was gettibg betyer scores and it wasnt overclocked and all that it was just stock. So I really believe that it should be running better than its showing leaving me to believe that there is somethibg wrong with the kernel or something. I have done this with quite a few devices and there usualky a noticeable difference from stock to overclocked scores. But with this phone seems like it dosent show on this phone.
Sent from my Note II
Very possible. ..
Most reports for this quad core tell us that overclocking takes the device a bit backward in speed and performance.
I overclocked for a few weeks, and saw no appreciable performance gains.
The end result for me was a stock variant rom and a stock kernel.
I then gained transition speeds with launcher changes.
Nova launcher, with the transition speeds set to maximum is quite impressive. And graphical transitions were running best at stock speeds.
I might get flamed for this, but I would honestly say that with minor UI adjustment, and stock kernels, this device needs very little if any real change at all to achieve the best performance.
Mileage will vary, but I'm staying rooted stock with a custom launcher.
Everything else seems to drag this device down. ..g
My real main issie is with gaming on the decice I notice glitching and slowness quite often and I just feel jipped. It is quad core 2gb of ram why is it so ****. I had the optimus g and it was amazing I only went to this phone for the screen size.
Sent from my Note II
theshamrockking said:
My real main issie is with gaming on the decice I notice glitching and slowness quite often and I just feel jipped. It is quad core 2gb of ram why is it so ****. I had the optimus g and it was amazing I only went to this phone for the screen size.
Sent from my Note II
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's been said that our note 2 is a bit lacking with the current GPU...although, a GPU overclock may help you the most, while leaving the CPU alone.
I've not tried any GPU modifications, unless the Roms I've used included them without my knowledge....g
I did try and overclock the gpu and I get vaired results I havent tried playing any of my graphically intense games yet so im not sure but I believe it may have slightly helped. Its too bad I had thought that the mali chip was better than the 330 thats in most high end phones now.
Sent from my Note II
I dont dare say that mali is poor, but I am willing to say that it does get outshined on more than one occasion....g
Thats just too bad. Maybe the note 3 will run nicer. Although if they do indeed increase the screen size again I dont think I will be abke to handle it so for my sake I hope it stays similar in size. This phone is about as big as im going to want.
Sent from my Note II
theshamrockking said:
Thats just too bad. Maybe the note 3 will run nicer. Although if they do indeed increase the screen size again I dont think I will be abke to handle it so for my sake I hope it stays similar in size. This phone is about as big as im going to want.
Sent from my Note II
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed....
This device is more than big enough. And overall, I'm happy with it. The performance is adequate for most applications, and unless a user pushes it really hard, the phone just runs well.
Not superb, but well....IMHO....g
gregsarg said:
Agreed....
This device is more than big enough. And overall, I'm happy with it. The performance is adequate for most applications, and unless a user pushes it really hard, the phone just runs well.
Not superb, but well....IMHO....g
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I totally agree. I guess I only notice any thing because that optimus g blew me away. Considering I had previously had a htc vivid and a galaxy nexus as the best phones and so the optimus was amazing. This is more than adequate and I guess more so than the optimus as that had errors just trying to run some games. Like as if the game wasnt able to play well with the hardware. SoI more than like this phone.
Sent from my Note II
You should be trading your note for the optimal g. Benchmark scores are essentially useless and you shouldn't be bothering with them.
Seems like you would be happier with your old phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using xda app-developers app
theshamrockking said:
Oh I totally agree. I guess I only notice any thing because that optimus g blew me away. Considering I had previously had a htc vivid and a galaxy nexus as the best phones and so the optimus was amazing. This is more than adequate and I guess more so than the optimus as that had errors just trying to run some games. Like as if the game wasnt able to play well with the hardware. SoI more than like this phone.
Sent from my Note II
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you liked that g....just wait until the Optimus Pro hits...LOL
It's a bit cheaper built I think, but wow...It's a runner...(so they say)
check out it's specs on google....
The note3 will need to compete directly with it, and a few other choice pieces of hardware in the next 6 months if Sammy wants to stay on top.
The improvements from the note1 to this device are staggering, I can only imagine what a note3 will run like.....g
Oh yes iv read plenty about the g pro and it does sound nice iv thought about trying to trade the note for it. But I then remember the reasons I wanted the note instead. Its the dev comunity and the work that gets done. There was the boringist stuff going on over there. And plus it seems like the samsung devices hold value better and juat plane better ui than lg. Ao I like what I have juat miss some of the faster and smoother useI got out of the optimus.
Sent from my Note II
LittleRedDot said:
You should be trading your note for the optimal g. Benchmark scores are essentially useless and you shouldn't be bothering with them.
Seems like you would be happier with your old phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest benckmarks do matter but only if you really understand them and know how to use them. Im not just someone who sees **** score or awesome scores an decides anything. But the scores do matter. If u took a droid x and ran benchmarks and got **** scores and then ran this not you would see a difference. They matter just if you choose to see it. I know many many people who try and try to convince others that benchmarks dont matter when all a benckmark is is a test of the hardware and if u use the same program on different devices you will note the different qualitys in the scores. Showing you the pieces of hardware or software mostky hardware that is better or worse. Like with the mali vs the 330. Or the quad s4 vs I forget what is in this device. Or an amd vs a intel. They show what does what best. If you know what you are doing.
Sent from my Note II
I don't believe in benchmarks. I can run antutu and get xyz score, then run it again 10 seconds later and get abc score, then run it again 10 seconds late and lmn score, all to varying degrees. It's a gimmick.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
If the scores vary drastically its probably because of the background services and apps doing things. Sometimes there is less sometimes more. U either take that into account or you do it with a fresh phone with nothibg on it. Including no google account. Just sideload the app and then run the test and do it a few times they should be more similar.
Sent from my Note II
Regardless of scores. .. and considering the drastically different user habits, I do believe Samsung found excellent balance in both form and function with this device.
To add more power would kill battery. And drive the device size even larger.
I do feel they have a great balance here.
The note3 should become an absolute power phone if they build from this base....IMHO....g