Database Users

Pocket Hack Master & running the Universal @ 624 Mhz

Pocket Hack Master runs the Jasjar version of the HTC Universal @ 624 Mhz with no apparent problems. It passes the stress test at this setting and runs video at this setting. I've noticed that when running video, Pocket Hack Master's processor use utility doesn't completely max out when the processor speed is set @ 624 Mhx and that (as others have noted) running video slower than 624 Mhz results in noticeable frame rate slowness.
Since it's only rated to run @ 520 Mhz, I'm wondering if running it @ 624 Mhz will shorten the processor life or cause more serious problems. The only definitive way to know would be to run long-term on the Universal @ 624 Mhz.
Can anything think of a way besides running a long-term test to determine if damage is being done to the Uni's processor by running it @ 624 Mhz?

I too am interested in this. What do people advise running at, at most?

PS: On my Xda Exec it fails the 624 test each time, only 520 works.

I also have the same problem - it fails the 620mhz test

mine freezes @ 624, ocasionally. Not very usable, and quite annoying. I do see the difference in performance, but it crashes too often to be true :roll:
Tried Latest XCPUSCALAR my screen goes mad, and crazy, also unusable. UNFORTUNATELY :evil:

Hmm weird, my XDA Exec runs just fine a 624 MHz in Pocket Hack Master wonder why some people are having problems...

Yeah mine has been fine @624 for two days no glitches at all mines a T-Mobile MDA Pro

mine is now approaching 3 weeks at this speed and its fine !!! TBH the CPU will be running a little warmer, because you are asking more of it !! but its not as if you are putting extra voltage into it or anything so the chances of it blowing or miniscule !! if it gets unhappy it will just lock up. any here are the settings I used in PHM
I left all the timings of every thing as normal but pushed the multiplier up 1 more to 624 MHZ if I try 2 more (728 MHZ) it crashes before it even begins the burn in stability test :shock: suffice to say all the timings are identical to a genuine intel 624 MHZ CPU
Using Anton Tomov's pocket hackmaster version 2005
L = 16
N = 06
A = 01
Turbo enabled
half turbo disabled (dunno what the point of a half turbo is, it just seems to halve CPU speed)
LCD_26 = 00 (dunno what this does but seems to have no effect)
Fast Bus enabled
after adding it dont forget to set as favourite and then you can enable the speed
using the above settings should give you this
CPU = 624
BUS = 208
RAM = 104
LCD = 104
Turbo enabled
SI (speed index) now 373 up from 341
MIPS (millions of instructions per second) now 261 up from 217
Memory (even though I did not overclock the memory bus) now 486 up from 465
as stated 1 more step to 728 MHZ is a no go, and if you try to decrease the bus speed and up the multiplier to get speeds in-between 624 and 728, it starts suffering from bottlenecking and is not worth it if you look at the actual stats of data rate (MIPS memory etc) despite the higher figure of CPU MHZ its actually running slower the other drawback to strange bus speeds is that screen begins to flicker

guys I apologise in advance for my dumb question : but where do I get the Pocket Hack Master;
or in fact where is a good source for progs and utilities for WM5 (I am new to this OS and platform) ???
I would appreciate your help and any directions!

im getting sick of xda pda.
i have xda,xda ll,xda lls & xda lli
i find all those pda r junk and useless.
gave me too much problem.
i even loose my business because of this useless pda

unknown_macuser said:
im getting sick of xda pda.
i have xda,xda ll,xda lls & xda lli
i find all those pda r junk and useless.
gave me too much problem.
i even loose my business because of this useless pda
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im sorry but if you were foolish enough to not have a backup of business critical data then you none other than yourself to blame !!! next time use this
http://www.sunnysoft.cz/en_clanek.php?clanekid=51
It is brilliant, I used it myself today and strongly recommend it

Amazing Gpu performance -underclocked cpu benchmarks

Our phones cannot display more then ~56 fps due to vsync
Test settings: JM2, samset 1.8, mimocans ext4 fix + dalvik cache sent to nand, 8gb class 6 sd, all benchmarks were only run once.
Neocore:
200mhz : 36.8 fps
400mhz : 56 fps
800mhz : 56 fps
1000mhz : 56 fps
Yes, with our cpu reduced by 80% we still beat the nexus one and other froyo omapp/snapdragon cpu's in neocore.
Quadrant: (world & moon, the others are more difficult to test)
200mhz : 40fps : 410 Quadrant
400mhz : 56fps : 789 Quadrant
800mhz : 56fps : 1532 Quadrant
1000mhz: 56fps: 1762 Quadrant
Fps2d is 56 fps at all cpu settings.
-IMPORTANT-
Due to the nature of vsync we have no idea what fps we could be getting, Generally when you scale down cpu performance the bandwidth available for the gpu decreases dramatically as the processor cannot handle the new frames to keep up with the gpu. What this is showing us is that in neocore at 1000mhz we only require 20% of the cpu to get 36.8 fps and somewhere around 300mhz to get to the 56fps vsync cap. For all i know the gpu might only be able to output 70 fps without vsync at 1,000mhz, the question is by how much does reducing the cpu speed effect the available bandwidth to the gpu
This shows us:
1. Our gpu is largely held back by the frame-limit, the cpu also has an impact on the gpu performance.
2. We need better benchmarks to test only 3d performance, many of the 3d tests in quadrant are either heavy on the cpu, or are 2d tests. And neocore is simply not taxing enough on our gpu.
3. Need to find a way to remove vsync
4. Its a powerful beast! looking forward to froyo

Look foward to GLbenchmark 2.0
Even currently in 1.1 it's showing some impressive results, even though it's not supported very well on latest-gen gpu's (SGX530/535/540 mostly)

*off topic*
Would you please link / pm me to the Sd card you are using?

Its a Samsung 8gb class 6

would underclocking the cpu to 600mhz for example help increase battery performance, or it it mostly the screen that drains the battery?

its mostly the screen

But really really great research there !
Its nice to know.. Hehe..
The next thing i would like too see is quadrant tests where the SGS has undergone the Lagfix and then with different SD cards

Just to fuel the fire

http://www.engadget.com/lg-star/preview/
Definitely an impressive piece of hardware, the Nexus S will have to do for now I guess.

A key question:
Does it have any US 3G (850/AWS/1900) band?
If not, it lost a leg.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cULT5ZeI44s&feature=player_embedded
^ video
Yes, such a beautiful phone, is it SLCD? I guess I can bypass SAMOLED if it is.
I am still waiting to see, the first orion-based phones, as they will be without a doubt the fastest phones. I just hope Samsung up the looks of the phones, maybe not so plasticy, more glass is nice though.

Impressive but not a fan of LG phones. Samsung galaxy 2 will be the talk bigining of next year
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

irishrally said:
Engadget just put the LG Start dual core tegra2 running on 2.2 through Quadrant and it only scored 2100. Galaxy S phones have scored much higher than this which makes me feel good about Google's choice. I just hope the file system issues are gone in the Nexus S.
If the dual core LG star was going on sale next Thursday, I would still go for the Nexus S, without a doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly

Those high 20k plus quadrant scores are due to lagfix that tricks quadrant I/O score not actual performance increase
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

also keep in mind that that phone will probably come to the US 5-10 months from now and probably only be on one provider, and it won't be t-mobile, so if your a t-mobile fan, nexus s is still for you.

You can get a better real world estimate of galaxy s series without using ext2 loop. ie all ext4. Which gives 1400 - 1700 depending on setup. I saw where nexus s did quadrant with ext4 plus some other fs and was comparable: 1400–1500. I'm with above poster, can't wait to see Orion vs tegra2.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !

Also for those who don't know...galaxy s phones gpu is capped at 56 fps seems to be same with NS..not that you really need more that 60fps but score could be much higher.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh...my MT4 got 56FPS.
Not bad.

gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.

Tegra2 ~ Hummingbird. About the same power.

Rawat said:
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore

demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.

demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not trying to talk over you. It is capped to 55.555*. There's a parameter that can be changed when compiling the kenrel, and it'll be capped at 65fps. Neocore scores 65fps with a kernel that's compiled with the parameter
Anderdroid said:
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
55.5 rounded up is 56. And 55.55 rounded up is 55.6, which is what my Galaxy S has scored since they day I got it.
EDIT: you can check build.prop, and it mentions (a rounded down) 55fps: windowsmgr.max_events_per_sec=55

this phne may be fast but it's ugly and it also has a skined version of android
The Nexus S does

FPS limit cap

whilst running Quadrant, there were a few issues that occured to me, The TF is supposed to have a superior GPU so why has Asus capped the frames per second in the graphics benchmark my Xperia X8 which is far less superior than the TF can reach around 50 FPS on the moon orbiting sun graphics, while the TF can only do about 30-35, i was just wondering if this should be an issue

Resolution

rilot said:
Resolution
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
very straightforward answer man.

Nenamark1 => 35fps
Nenamark2 => 18fps
Quadrant => 2528 avg
Smartbench 2011 = 3232
Running Roach's Prime 1.4 (HC 3.1)
Terrible FPS scores in comparison to other inferior devices. The Smartbench scores show it's pretty close to other 1.0ghz HC Tegra2 devices.... but still not great....

Galaxy note 3 cracked screen + camera off balance (filter)

Hi,
Wondering if my diagnosis is correct at this point...
The phone (Note 3, on the back is written n9005) fell and the screen cracked... also the LCD beneath it cracked. My previous phone back in the days also had a cracked screen (the Galaxy Nexus), but the screen underneath was OK. Presumably because it is an amoLED? They do not break to my knowledge...
So now, I read on the specs the note 3 has an amoLED screen. Why is it cracked? This, I find weird...
My second problem;
I tried to start the camera and I found it had a green filter moving around when you give the phone a little slap from the side. So, now I was reading this article that was talking about a green filter... Is this the same filter that got loose? I also opened the phone and saw underneath the lens (which I loosened) a green circular piece of glass that was moving freely.
Here is the article:
http://www.engadget.com/2015/11/18/samsung-smartphone-camera-BRITECELL/
Also check my pictures to see the green filter from camera-view. You clearly see the filter moving around.
Is my diagnosis correct (screen and camera)?

Strange knowledge you have. Sure does a AMOLED crack...

Why do you think an AMOLED screen won't crack? My old s2 and s4 both had cracked screens.
Sent from my SM-N9005

Because,
1/
Amoled + hammer on youtube = no cracks.
Oled + hammet + youtube = no damage
2/
My Galaxy nexus touchscreen cracked but the screen underneath (amoled) didnt crack.
So both points made me think it does not crack (not talking about the touch/digitizer).

G1-Amateur said:
Because,
1/
Amoled + hammer on youtube = no cracks.
Oled + hammet + youtube = no damage
2/
My Galaxy nexus touchscreen cracked but the screen underneath (amoled) didnt crack.
So both points made me think it does not crack (not talking about the touch/digitizer).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does crack any screen can crack with the right stress .
You have a cracked screen that really needs someone capable to look at it .
---------- Post added at 06:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:34 PM ----------
G1-Amateur said:
Because,
1/
Amoled + hammer on youtube = no cracks.
Oled + hammet + youtube = no damage
2/
My Galaxy nexus touchscreen cracked but the screen underneath (amoled) didnt crack.
So both points made me think it does not crack (not talking about the touch/digitizer).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does crack any screen can crack with the right stress .
You have a cracked screen that really needs someone capable to look at it .
Or you have a UTube Note 3 with no cracks .

This is deffintely a fake one. Real amoled does not crack + read this below:
On the back is written n9005 and in the settings it's written n9006.
Also, installed system info android and I see different stats...
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=5665&idPhone2=5961&idPhone3=5665
*System Info Android:
memory
download cache: 370/364
max: 1,27/free 547
external: mounted
extern max 1,25/1,07
removable: false
emulated: false
RAM: 468
available RAM: 65,43
limit RAM: 43,09
CPU
ARMv7 Processor rev 3 (v7l)
processor 0
BogoMIPS 1993.93
processor 1
BogoMIPS 1993.93
...
Freq 598.0 -> 1001.0 MHz
Current freq 1001.0 MHz
Screen
540 x 960
240 dpi
*CPU-Z
MediaTek MT6572
1,00 GHz
Cores 4
Architecture 2x ARM Cortex-A7 @ 1.00 GHz
Speed 598 MHz - 1.00 GHz
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 (SM-N9006)
Screen 5,7 inches
Res 540 x 960
density 193 dpi
Total RAM 2440 MB
Available 317 MB (13%)
Internal 1,27 GB
Available storage 4.98 GB (41 %)
Release date 2013-09-25
*AnTuTu
RAM 4019
CPU integer 5801
CPU float-point 3984
2D 579
3D 2074
Database 525
SD write 190
SD read 195
Total score: 17367
CPU frequency 1400 MHz
CPU model:
Quad-Core ARMv7 Processor (VFPv3, NEON)
CPU freq 300.0-2265.6 MHz
Screen 720 x 1280
GPU Qualcomm
Adreno 330
Scroll up... memory size 16 GBz... then crashed (every time I scroll up)
First benchmark was in 2012...
*Updated Antutu today
Error 492
*2nd and 3rd attempt to update
Error - package incorrectly signed, please remove the previous app
*3rd try - freshly install AnTuTu
uninstall impossible
-> built in app AnTuTu Benchmark v2.9
-> turned off
-> Google
"NO.1 To cheat on factory setting"
-> http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=7242