So, i thought it would really good if we could compare our devices and help each other get more performance out of them. The aim of this thread is to see from ground up what tweaks and changes actually help improve the performance of our devices. Below i will list some methods of benchmarking i've looked up, and we all can contribute by testing our devices with the benchmark methods and help others reach the same results in the process by listing the ROM / tweaks you have used.
I'll post the first benchmark myself to help us compare to it. Ill also explain a bit more in my second post so you might have to wait for me to finish things. For accurate results close all background applications and alarms before performing these tests.
Benchmarking Methods:
1)D3D Demo:
This is from the 3D Driver Tools provided by the 3D Driver development team, all i've done is separated them into seperate CAB's. You can find them in the attachments. Wait for the first example to see the format for displaying your benchmarks.
2)Lights 3D:
Same as above, but since this one doesnt display the FPS like D3D Demo we rate the smoothness of it from 1-10 or one of the developer can supply us with a modified one to display the FPS. *hinthint*
3)Text 3D:
Same as above.
4)Triangle GL:
Same as above.
5)Video Decompression Benchmarking:
Alright so i found this on one of the forums i go to but can't remember where so i don't take credit for it. What we will do here is test the CPU for its decompression speed using the same video in different encoding. The Video is part of the Movie Iron Man. To test this we will use Core Player and its probably a good idea to use the same version so lets use the latest v1.32. All you have to do is play the 4 files (1 by 1) provided in attachments on your device in CorePlayer and goto Menu > Tools > Benchmark and let it play. Then note down the 'Average Speed' and move on to the next video.
6)SPB Benchmark v1.6:
Now i know not everyone can use every benchmark method here because these tools are not free. So just test whatever you can. SPB Benchmark basically tests everything from Read / Write Speed to applications usage to Battery and Network and CPU stress. Let just try to test whatever you think can benefit the community. I will although start by testing The 'Main' Group and the 'Storage Card' Group. The result are recorded and can be sync to your PC so you can easily copy paste it here. I will explain a bit more in the next post.
7)PocketPC Mark v1.03:
This one is also somewhat similar to the above as it tests basically most of the hardware on stress levels, i will tell you how in the next post.
8)GLBenchmark v1.0:
This is the only one i found if you have the other versions you can PM me and i'll add them here (1.1 or 2.0).
Thats all the methods i could find if you have any more let me know, and any suggestions or comments don't hesitate to comment here. Wait for my second post to start comparing.
Regards,
Lord Meshadieme
I can't seem to attach the video benchmark files, so i'll upload them. Below are the links:
Video 1
Video 2
Video 3
Video 4
Ok, sorry for the delay its hard for me during the weekdays to do anything because of university and job. So below is the format and guidelines for posting your benchmarks.
Benchmark 1:
Device: HTC Polaris (Touch Cruise)
CPU: Qualcomm MSM7200 @ 400Mhz
Memory: 256MB ROM, 128MB RAM, 4GB Sanyo MSD
ROM:RUU_Polaris_HTC_Asia_WWE_3.18.457.0_radio_sign_25.85.30.07_1.59.42.15
Notes:So i decided to post the first benchmark using the default HTC ROM without any tweaks to compare the actual improvements from it.
Tweaks:None
Benchmarks:
1)D3D Demo:
Average FPS: 3.0 FPS @ 5 Mins
This tools displays the FPS on the top left part of the screen so to to benchmark just run the tools for a period of time i used 5 minutes, and note down as many speeds as you can and try to average it out. I did this mostly in my head since the value didn't fluctuate to high or low.
2)Lights 3D:
FPS Smoothness Rating: 1/10
Unfortunately this tool doesn't display the FPS, so we rate the smoothness of the FPS from a scale of 1 to 10. It gave alot of errors due to the missing driver but it did work but barely got even 1 FPS if i am assuming correctly.
3)Text 3D:
Clearness Rating: 0/10 (N/A)
Same as above but this time without drivers it doesn't display 3D at all so i can't rate it all though my second bench will include the drivers we can compare from there.
4)Triangle GL:
FPS: (N/A)
Same as above but this time without drivers it doesn't play at all so i can't rate it all though my second bench will include the drivers we can compare from there.
5)Video Decompression Benchmarking:
Video 1 Average Speed: 222.09%
Video 2 Average Speed: 114.72%
Video 3 Average Speed: 166.7%
Video 4 Average Speed: 60.54%
So basically just run the four video's in CorePlayer 1.23 one by one and goto Menu > Tools > Benchmarking.. and Note down the 'Average Speed:' from each video's results.
6)SPB Benchmark v1.6:
SPB Benchmark Index: 551.77
CPU Index: 1231.79
File System Index: 258.38
Graphic Index: 4918.45
Active Sync Index: 6410.58
We start by testing the 'Main', 'Storage Card', 'Active Sync' Benchmark modes You may compare battery if you like but the test requires you to complete a battery cycle and has minimum affect from tweaks and optimizations to my knowledge. Pocket Word is not compatible with this version or something so its better to not test for it. This test uses Pocket Internet Explorer so we have to disable Opera as the default browser, to do that just open Opera and deselect it as the default browser in settings. The test results can viewed on your computer so you can open it on your PC and use the SPB Benchmark Manager tool, goto Visualize results, copy paste the details from the first table showing the index scores like displayed above.
7)Pocket PCMark v1.03:
CPU Dhrystone: 1.20.94 MIPS
CPU Whetstone: 5.34 MWIPS
Memory: 374.76 Points
Memory Latency: 86.03 Points
File System: 492.95 Points
Storage Cards: 135.08 Points
Graphics: 87.19 Points
So for PCmarks select each test one by one and note down the results of 'Current Device:' as above. There is a problem with clicking the icons for the test it doesn't work normally but on some clicks it works, i can't seem to point out why if you do let me know but it takes awhile to get all of them clicked. When they are click the screen hangs without any notification that the test is running sometimes, so just wait until its done (Pressing Next in the result screen helps you start the next test easier). The Graphic Test gave some kind of crash is any ppc guru aware of the application gwes.exe? it crashed twice.
8)GLBenchmark v1.0:
We'll this test cannot be run under this case because of the 3D Driver problem. So wait for the Second Benchmark for the rest. Basically what you do is test the benchmark upload to a username, and check the website for the results.
Updated 19/5
Benchmark 2:
Device: HTC Polaris (Touch Cruise)
CPU: Qualcomm MSM7200 @ 400Mhz
Memory: 256MB ROM, 128MB RAM, 4GB Sanyo MSD
ROM:RUU_Polaris_HTC_Asia_WWE_3.18.457.0_radio_sign_25.85.30.07_1.59.42.15
Notes:So now the second benchmark will be with the 3D Drivers installed thanks to our developers. Please Note some of the benchmark tools from the 3D Driver don't exit properly so make sure close them before trying another benchmark. I actually suggest soft resetting after using them they seem to slow down my Device.
Tweaks:3D Driver Added.
Benchmarks:
1)D3D Demo:
Average FPS: ?? FPS
FPS Smoothness Rating: 7/10 (Somewhat slower when touch screen is pressed)
The FPS didn't display on the top left part of the screen anymore so i rated it on a scale of 1 to 10, i suspect one of the developers can help fix this eventually same for the other tools.
2)Lights 3D:
FPS Smoothness Rating: 5/10
3)Text 3D:
Clearness Rating: 1/10
Although it works but the 3D text is not at all clear.
4)Triangle GL:
FPS: 311 FPS @ 2 mins (N/A)
The Second Screen (tap the triangle after a some minutes to get to the next screen) it will tell you the FPS to note down for this.
5)Video Decompression Benchmarking:
Video 1 Average Speed: 221.35%
Video 2 Average Speed: 117.86%
Video 3 Average Speed: 167.3%
Video 4 Average Speed: 60.04%
Whats interesting here, the 3D drivers seem to have little to no effect on the frame rate but did seem to have visual effect on the decoding progress, i noticed a lot of lag in the videos although the frame rate was okay it seemed to be skipping frames (mainly in the 2nd, and audio is out of sync in the 1st, 4th and 3rd). Maybe some the of developers can look into this and improve upon the drivers. This is exactly why i made this topic to help find ways to test the device and tweaks to find out what causes it to tick.
6)SPB Benchmark v1.6:
SPB Benchmark Index: 553.42
CPU Index: 1249.32
File System Index: 258.38
Graphic Index: 4796.72
Active Sync Index: 6410.58
Somewhat also awkward the Graphic index dropped, and the CPU index rose, could help if the developers research the Graphic tests performed in this software and use it. Note that i only tested the Graphics and Image related tests.
7)Pocket PCMark v1.03:
CPU Dhrystone: 1.20.94 MIPS
CPU Whetstone: 5.34 MWIPS
Memory: 374.76 Points
Memory Latency: 86.03 Points
File System: 492.95 Points
Storage Cards: 135.08 Points
Graphics: 87.34 Points
Not much of a Significant difference which would probably fluctuate anyway. Note that i only tested the Graphics Test.
8)GLBenchmark v1.0:
3D Rendering Quality: Bilinear Filter : 95% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Perspective Correction : 100% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Sub Pixel Precision : 95% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Trilinear Filter : 89% (Fail)
3D Rendering Quality: Z-buffer Precision : 99.1% (Success)
CPU Performance: Float : 546
CPU Performance: Integer : 5792
Fill Rate: Multi-Textured, 2x2 : 16097 kTexels/s
Fill Rate: Multi-textured, 4x2 : 18248 kTexels/s
Fill Rate: Single-textured, 4x1 : 26757 kTexels/s
GLBenchmark HD ES 1.0 : 1372 Frames
GLBenchmark HD ES 1.1 : Failed / Not supported
GLBenchmark Pro ES 1.0 : 77 Frames
GLBenchmark Pro ES 1.1 : Failed / Not supported
Lights: Ambient x 1 : 102160 Triangles/s
Lights: Omni x 1 : 41885 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 1 : 103181 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 2 : 2385436 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 4 : 2363982 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 8 : 2262844 Triangles/s
Lights: Spot x 1 : 42907 Triangles/s
Swapbuffer speed : 2027
Texture Filter: LINEAR : 2391565 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR : 2309837 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST : 2395652 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST : 2251606 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST_MIPMAP_LINEAR : 2391565 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST_MIPMAP_NEAREST : 2396673 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 1024x1024 : 2398716 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 128x128 : 2390544 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 256x256 : 2397695 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 512x512 : 2400760 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 64x64 : 2376241 Triangles/s
Triangles: Flat Shaded + Color : 2415062 Triangles/s
Triangles: Smooth Shaded + Color : 2414040 Triangles/s
Triangles: Textured : 2389522 Triangles/s
Triangles: Textured + Color : 2384414 Triangles/s
So just goto 'Your Results' after logging in and copy paste the main results. I feel their can be alot more improvements in the drivers, lets hope our developers can do it for us.
Thats it for now.
Regards,
Lord Meshadieme
how to get the scores to compare the benchmarks?
Updated, sry for the delay.
Updated with the 2nd Benchmark, I believe we can start comparing different ROMs and what they are better for so its time for the community to pitch in! Is this worthy of a sticky? Moderator.
The idea is interresting.
Also comparing Energy use of different ROMs might be interresting.
Battery usage would also be a good comparison, i know of only 2 apps that give something like that, Pocket Battery Analyzer and one of the above mentioned SPB Benchmark has a battery selection but it will work once the battery has completely discharged once, plus the fact that a single comparison can become invalid because battery wear levels vary based on the usage of it.
Benchmark 3:
Device: HTC Polaris (Touch Cruise)
CPU: Qualcomm MSM7200 @ 400Mhz
Memory: 256MB ROM
ROM: M-Anime 2.0, Radio 1.59.42.23
Notes: Installed HTC-CA drivers after flashing ROM, required to take full advantage of drivers, plus Gfboost installed and working.
Benchmarks:
1)D3D Demo:
Average FPS: NA
FPS Smoothness Rating: 10/10 (1/3 slower when touch screen is pressed, still smooth, read touch.dll thread)
It doesn't display FPS, if you have problems closing the program, use attached tooglestart.exe before running D3Ddemo to hide taskbar and show X.
2)Lights 3D:
FPS Smoothness Rating: 10/10
3)Text 3D:
Clearness Rating: 0/10
It runs but the 3D text is not readable at all.
4)Triangle GL:
244 FPS @ 2 mins
smoothness 10/10
5)Video Decompression Benchmarking:
Video 1 Average Speed: 242.95%
Video 2 Average Speed: 103.29%
Video 3 Average Speed: 152.65%
Video 4 Average Speed: not tested/broken link.
I didn't test it with Qtv mode as it already uses accelerated mode more, it may break Gfxboost; I tested it using directdraw.
As this is a 2D test, 3D drivers won't help much by itself, here Gfboost show it's muscles, read my post on Polaris 3D Driver Development Project thread, all three test do render without skipping frames, video/audio slighty desynced in 2nd and 3rd test.
I don't get the idea of testing video or bitrates that are not adapted for PocketPC devices, they won't usually work fine as demostrated in 2nd and 3rd test, people should convert it before use, I use 320x240 H264 at 250kbps and stereo LE-AAC at 48kbps in mp4 container (Coreplayer still doesn't support HE-ACC), that's enough quality for the device.
6)SPB Benchmark v1.6:
SPB Benchmark Index: Insufficient tests done
CPU Index: 1552.28
File System Index: Not done
Graphic Index: 4159.65
Active Sync Index: Not done
7)Pocket PCMark v1.03:
CPU Dhrystone: 118.43 MIPS
CPU Whetstone: not tested
Memory: not tested
Memory Latency: not tested
File System: not tested
Storage Cards: not tested
Graphics: System hangs, test won't complete.
Sad, because it seems to be a pure 2D test and I should get higher scores.
8)GLBenchmark v1.0:
3D Rendering Quality: Bilinear Filter : 95% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Perspective Correction : 100% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Sub Pixel Precision : 95% (Success)
3D Rendering Quality: Trilinear Filter : 89% (Fail)
3D Rendering Quality: Z-buffer Precision : 99.1% (Success)
CPU Performance: Float : 546
CPU Performance: Integer : 5792
Fill Rate: Multi-Textured, 2x2 : 16097 kTexels/s
Fill Rate: Multi-textured, 4x2 : 18248 kTexels/s
Fill Rate: Single-textured, 4x1 : 26757 kTexels/s
GLBenchmark HD ES 1.0 : 1372 Frames
GLBenchmark HD ES 1.1 : Failed / Not supported
GLBenchmark Pro ES 1.0 : 77 Frames
GLBenchmark Pro ES 1.1 : Failed / Not supported
Lights: Ambient x 1 : 102160 Triangles/s
Lights: Omni x 1 : 41885 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 1 : 103181 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 2 : 2385436 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 4 : 2363982 Triangles/s
Lights: Parallel x 8 : 2262844 Triangles/s
Lights: Spot x 1 : 42907 Triangles/s
Swapbuffer speed : 2027
Texture Filter: LINEAR : 2391565 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR : 2309837 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: LINEAR_MIPMAP_NEAREST : 2395652 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST : 2251606 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST_MIPMAP_LINEAR : 2391565 Triangles/s
Texture Filter: NEAREST_MIPMAP_NEAREST : 2396673 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 1024x1024 : 2398716 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 128x128 : 2390544 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 256x256 : 2397695 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 512x512 : 2400760 Triangles/s
Texture Size: 64x64 : 2376241 Triangles/s
Triangles: Flat Shaded + Color : 2415062 Triangles/s
Triangles: Smooth Shaded + Color : 2414040 Triangles/s
Triangles: Textured : 2389522 Triangles/s
Triangles: Textured + Color : 2384414 Triangles/s
As this is a pure 3D test no surprise I get similar results as Lord Meshadieme.
Battery usage testing is highly subjective, there are no two people that use the phone the same way and even if they do, there are other external factors that affect battery life like signal strength, etc, I don't think is a good idea to go ahead with it.
Video 4 Link Updated
Related
Hey Guys!
Here's a really noob one. After installing SKTools the other day, went to the information section and, with reference to the CPU, these were the results:
Code:
[Processor]
Processor info:
Processor core: SC32442A-400MHz
Core revision: 0
Processor name:
Processor revision: 0
Catalog number :
Vendor: SAMSUNG
Instruction set: 0
Clock speed: 300
Now, this "Clock speed: 300" gives me troubles...
Any thoughts on this?
try checking cpuspeed with "Pocket Hack Master".
"battery status" shows it too.
Hi,
I have run benchmark test on my HD, using spbBenchmark, result as below. Is it "acceptable"? I found that the file system benchmark index is far lower than other devices. What could cause the poor performance, hardware? Anyway to tune it?
I also run storage card test, and it is better than other brand.
kkchan
Spb Benchmark index
553
CPU index
1877
File system index
245
Graphics index
1464
ActiveSync index
16135
Platform index
Write 1 MB file (KB/sec)
594
Read 1 MB file (MB/sec)
17.4
Copy 1 MB file (KB/sec)
826
Write 10 KB x 100 files (KB/sec)
96.5
Read 10 KB x 100 files (MB/sec)
0.751
Copy 10 KB x 100 files (KB/sec)
130
Directory list of 2000 files (thousands of files/sec)
7.84
Internal database read (records/sec)
1269
Graphics test: DDB BitBlt (frames/sec)
129
Graphics test: DIB BitBlt (frames/sec)
32.5
Graphics test: GAPI BitBlt (frames/sec)
167
Pocket Word document open (KB/sec)
error
Pocket Internet Explorer HTML load (KB/sec)
error
Pocket Internet Explorer JPEG load (KB/sec)
error
File Explorer large folder list (files/sec)
755
Compress 1 MB file using ZIP (KB/sec)
194
Decompress 1024x768 JPEG file (KB/sec)
643
Arkaball frames per second (frames/sec)
120
CPU test: Whetstones MFLOPS (Mop/sec)
0.102
CPU test: Whetstones MOPS (Mop/sec)
61.8
CPU test: Whetstones MWIPS (Mop/sec)
6.87
Memory test: copy 1 MB using memcpy (MB/sec)
114
ActiveSync: upload 1 MB file (KB/sec)
1786
ActiveSync: download 1 MB file (KB/sec)
1638
Beside, what could cause IE can MS Word test fail?
Thank you
Haven't done this benchmark myself, but your write speed seemed very low. Try tnyynt SD TuneUP.cab, give it a search (tuneup).
Hi,
I have installed this cab. Storage Card only benchmark show extreme fast performance. However, Main test File System show slow. I guess Main Test is testing ROM/RAM instead of storage card.
EDITED: I have kaspersky mobile security installed. Do you think it slow down my gadget? I ever try to stop it real-time protection and re-run the benchmark. It has 10-20% improvement, but still not as good as benchmark posted from other site.
So, what do u know about wm 7? share what u've read somewhere .
I've read which Microsoft is trying to realease its own mob they bought danger as a sample...
Also, I found some pics but I've no idea if is wm7 or what!!!...
Next unlocking system will be move your phone in the correct way . Crazy !.
So, here are the pics don't get to excited because nothing is confirmed .
Tell us what do u know
Full images and source HERE
WM7 Hardware Requirements
WM7 Chassis 1 Specification
Core requirements:
Processor: ARM v6+, L2 Cache, VFP, Open GL ES 2.0 graphics HW (QCOM 8k, Nvidia AP15/16* and TI 3430 all meet spec)
Memory: 256MB+ DRAM, 1G+ Flash (at least 512MB fast flash – 5MB/s unbuffered read @4K block size)
Display: WVGA (800×480) or FWVGA (854×480) 3.5” or greater diagonal
Touch: Multi-touch required
Battery: Sufficient to meet Days of Use LTK requirements.
Controls: Start, Back, Send and End are required (soft controls allowed as long as they are always present).
Peripherals:
Camera: 3MP+, flash optional, 2nd camera optional (VGA resolution sufficient)
GPS: aGPS required
Sensors required: Light Sensor, Compass (3 axis, 5 degrees, 100 Hz sample rate), Accelerometer (3 axis, 2mg resolution, 100 Hz sample rate)
USB: High speed required, 20 MB/s transfer rate.
BlueTooth: BT2.1 required, must run MSFT BT stack, CSR BlueCore6 or later recommended.
Wi-Fi: 802.11B/G required, must run MSFT Native Wi-Fi stack, Atheros 6002 or Broadcomm 4325 recommended.
Connectors: Micro USB and 3.5mm Audio required.
Options:
FM tuner: If tuner HW is present it will be detected and supported by the Media application.
Haptics
SD Card (Micro SD recommended)
DPAD, qwerty or 12/20 key keyboards all optional
Apparently
Looks like X1 is disqualified from WM7 based on these specs. I guess when WM7 hits, it'll be time for a new phone anyways...
WhyBe said:
Looks like X1 is disqualified from WM7 based on these specs. I guess when WM7 hits, it'll be time for a new phone anyways...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why, X1 got most of the specs? But I think you're right, when wm 7 hits the public we all will have a phone like that lol
definitely x1 is out this
comeradealexi said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think that roadmap is up to date since wm 6.5 final also haven't been released yet.
The most important of this "roadmap" is the "All dates are subject to change".
Is this Office for mobiles, down/right corner??
Such small icons?
doministry said:
Is this Office for mobiles, down/right corner??
Such small icons?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like the picture is photoshopped. Doesn't look genuine.
Make your Glyph cache 4194304 ( With CAB )
If you want your youtube or video better
Install PPCAdvancedSet2: (( I find CAB file ))
PPCAdvancedSet2.cab
Note:
The glyph cache is the pipeline through which graphics render. Increasing the cache results in faster graphics. >> meschle
You don't need a cab to do this... Just go into the registry to HKLM\SYSTEM\GDI\GLYPHCACHE\limit and change it without any program to install !
Why should you change it to 4 MB ?
I recommend the value 131072 (DWORD decimal), this is 128 KByte or 65536 (64 KByte).
THERE IS NO PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT IF YOU MAKE IT BIGGER.
Test it for yourself! Use VSBenchmark2007 or TestOpenGL to benchmark your GPU.
Please post your Benchmark results!
I doubt it will improve the performance that is benchmark-able to milliseconds or KB/s units. But I do believe that for instance, if you had Opera running with multiple tabs opened and occupying lots of memory (check GWES.EXE RAM occupation), it still maintain their snappiness. That's what larger GLYPH cache should give.
Maybe Opera is not a good example... but close I hope...
I agree with "maesus".
WVGA screen have more perfomance improvements if you make GLYPHCACHE bigger. VSBenchmark2007 results is same because amount of bench data is always same.
Does any one know if the HD2 can save information into the EXIF data? And if so, how to enable it?
I had thought that EXIF was the standard that ALL cameras now used, even cr***y ones in mobile phones now that they are into megapixels.
I have found a registry entry HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\HTC\Camera\Captparam\ExifInfo which shows merely the make, model and the next file name. BUT those are not even put into the EXIF which appears only to be used for GPS if you have the tweak installed that lets you take a photo as a GPS photo.
There is also HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\HTC\FootCam\Captparam\ExifInfo which has only the make in it. THis looks like a future option, maybe for a second camera?
Finally HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\HTC\HTCAlbum:gizmo_no_exif_thumb which only applies to Album.
There seems to be no way to do this and for me it is a very important thing, as I save and sort my pictures using the EXIF date taken. File dates are too risky as they sometimes get changed by copying or editing the file. I can stamp the photo with the date and time, so it is on the actual photo but that is pretty ugly.
When I took a file using GPS this is all there is in the EXIF
ExifOffset - 38
ExifVersion - 0210
InteroperabilityOffset - 68
GPS information: -
GPSLatitudeRef - N
GPSLatitude - 54 36 3.60
GPSLongitudeRef - W
GPSLongitude - 1 13 27.98
My LEO adds this information automaticaly - I did no changes in settings. Just in BsB Tweaks switched on "Hidden Camera Modes" and "Camera Superfine" - but I don't this that it is related with EXIF...
File: - \\\WinCE Device\Storage Card\My Documents\My POI\100MEDIA\GPS_IMAG0001.jpg
Make - HTC
Model - HTC_HD2
Orientation -
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - 6_26_19203026_00
DateTime - 2009:12:30 16:03:52
YCbCrPositioning - Centered
ExifOffset - 208
ExposureTime - 1/8.6 seconds
FNumber - 3.20
ExifVersion - 0220
DateTimeOriginal - 2009:12:30 16:03:52
DateTimeDigitized - 2009:12:30 16:03:52
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
MaxApertureValue - F 3.03
LightSource - Other
Flash - Not fired, auto mode
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 1552
ExifImageHeight - 2592
InteroperabilityOffset - 530
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
SceneCaptureType - Standard
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Normal
SubjectDistanceRange - Macro
GPS information: -
GPSVersionID - 2.2.0.0
GPSLatitudeRef - N
GPSLatitude - "xxx" 2 17.20
GPSLongitudeRef - E
GPSLongitude - "xxx" 28 37.11
GPSAltitudeRef - Sea level
GPSAltitude - 382 m
GPSTimeStamp - 15 3 52
Thumbnail: -
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 898
JpegIFByteCount - 15554