Related
I did some testing. Here are numbers for those of you curious about performance. All were tested on the same Nexus One, more to come soon!
Paulobrian 2.2 /w cyano 2.6.34 kern @ 1113 Mhz
Set CPU
Short - 206 ms
Long - 345 ms
CPU Benchmark
660 ms 1113 mhz
Benchmark
Graphics
Total Graphics Score - 30.36
Draw Opacity Bitmap - 10.80 Mpixels per sec
Draw Transparent bitmap - 7.77 Mpixels per sec
CPU
Total CPU Score - 2491.91
MWIPS DP - 166.94
MWIPS SP - 187.62
MFLOPS DP - 19.03
MFLOPS SP - 26.79
VAX MIPS DP - 142.033
VAX MIPS SP - 141.58
Memory
Total Memory Score - 317.97
Copy Memory - 288.93 Mb/sec
Filesystem
Total Filesystem Score - 104.72
Creating 1000 empty files - 4.502 sec
Deleting 1000 empy files - 3.252 sec
Write 1M into file - 2.351 M/sec
Read 1M into file - 203.333 M/sec
Paulobrian 2.2 @ 998 MHZ
Set CPU
Short - 243 ms
Long - 378 ms
CPU Benchmark
750 ms 998 mhz
Benchmark
Graphics
Total Graphics Score - 28.53
Draw Opacity Bitmap - 10.14 Mpixels per sec
Draw Transparent bitmap - 7.30 Mpixels per sec
CPU
Total CPU Score - 2415.09
MWIPS DP - 157.48
MWIPS SP - 182.48
MFLOPS DP - 28.37
MFLOPS SP - 26.79
VAX MIPS DP - 138.70
VAX MIPS SP - 137.20
Memory
Total Memory Score - 367.81
Copy Memory - 334.22 Mb/sec
Filesystem
Total Filesystem Score - 116.88
Creating 1000 empty files - 5.95 sec
Deleting 1000 empy files - 4.393 sec
Write 1M into file - 2.59 M/sec
Read 1M into file - 232.56 M/sec
CM 5.0.7 2.1 @ 1113 Mhz
Set CPU
Short - 248
Long - 848ms
CPU Benchmark
855ms 1113 mhz
Benchmark
Graphics
Total Graphics Score - 31.505909
Draw Opacity Bitmap - 11.191257 Mpixels per sec
Draw Transparent bitmap - 8.078896 Mpixels per sec
CPU
Total CPU Score - 794.6353
MWIPS DP - 60.86
MWIPS SP - 60.75
MFLOPS DP - 9.26
MFLOPS SP - 10.01
VAX MIPS DP - 40.39
VAX MIPS SP - 39.51
Memory
Total Memory Score - 335.01
Copy Memory - 304.41 Mb/sec
Filesystem
Total Filesystem Score - 114.35
Creating 1000 empty files - 5.30 sec
Deleting 1000 empy files - 3.99 sec
Write 1M into file - 2.79 M/sec
Read 1M into file - 227.27 M/sec
I'm not getting how the graphics are worse on 2.2 over CM.
halorin said:
I'm not getting how the graphics are worse on 2.2 over CM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea I found that kind of odd too...
Well, the 2.1 kernel is overclocked by about 10%, and the difference in total graphics score is about 11%, so this leads me to believe that graphics speeds would remain the same if these tests used the same clock speed.
Re: [Benchmarks] Paulobrian 2.2 vs CM 5.0.7 2.1
So basically 2.2 will have stock phones almost where we have all been for months with 2.1
deprecate said:
So basically 2.2 will have stock phones almost where we have all been for months with 2.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny you say that, but my coworker has a N1 unrooted and I will do something for him on his phone and you can definitely tell a difference. Mine is SOOO much smoother and faster...Once you go root, you never go back!
You should also consider that the 2.2 we have is not the full update and that Cy's is HEAVILY optimized and overclocked. This tells me that when we get the real 2.2 and optimize it, it will blow Cy's out of the water
Kind off a lousy comparison. Click 'em both to 998 min/max and then see what the differences are.
Mi|enko said:
Kind off a lousy comparison. Click 'em both to 998 min/max and then see what the differences are.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wanted to just show the performance of the best of each rom.
It's an acknowledgment of cyanogen's excellent work, to be sure.
But if you want flash and tethering, similar performance all with a stock OS and kernel, well Froyo is the cat's ass.
tengtou said:
I wanted to just show the performance of the best of each rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You actually showing the performance of the kernel not the rom, and no even mentioning the kernels.
JCopernicus said:
You actually showing the performance of the kernel not the rom, and no even mentioning the kernels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not sure what kernals they are, just the roms itself, and whichever kernals came with it...
custom374 said:
You should also consider that the 2.2 we have is not the full update and that Cy's is HEAVILY optimized and overclocked. This tells me that when we get the real 2.2 and optimize it, it will blow Cy's out of the water
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or perhaps, once Cy gets his hands on 2.2 (when published to aosp), we will see just how amazing froyo can be when unrestricted.
deprecate said:
Or perhaps, once Cy gets his hands on 2.2 (when published to aosp), we will see just how amazing froyo can be when unrestricted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cant wait!
If the SGX540 in P1000 can be overclocked to 370MHz, the performance of it can be highly improved like in Overcome Kernel.
(Can be showed in Quadrant Standard Edition. When it is in 370 MHz, the fps in the graphic animation of DNA can be promoted to 60fps. And got no lagging in anything. The speed(smoothness is nearly reached S2 which is official 2.3.6)
But however, it doesn't seem that any ICS supporting kernel can set the clock of GPU.
I am sorry that my English is not good enough to represent my idea, but I hope you can get what I am talking about.
And the most reason I want it to be real is that the potential of P1000 is quite big and in fact it is quite good!
PS Antutu SetCPU app can set GPU clock in Overcome Kernel.
Dang, I never knew that our GPU can be overclocked ^^
since this tab is getting old, maybe its time to overclock the gpu also?
Personally I'm agree with this
Probs a little off topic, (also to bump this up a bit)
But the Gnex which uses the same GPU can be overclocked to 512Mhz (Stock is 300 something I think), improvement seems noticeable in apps and in nenamark, you go from 27-28ish FPS to 31-32.
It would really help the tab, it seems to show age now (which makes me lust over a 7.7......)
What I knew is the potential of SGX540 in GNexus and GT are different.
GT one is 200MHz and GNexus one is 374MHz.
In Overcome Kernel w/ GT, the clock of SGX540 can be set to 370~38X Mhz w/ no crush but when it is 400MHz , the machine is seemed to be lagged.
The benchmark in Overcome 4.1 plus Overcome Kernel 4.0 can be promoted over the GT 7.7 (of course the mark doesn't represent the real using experience but let's just look at the 3D mark)
http: / / i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww300/ngtinching/SC20120401-173417.jpg
edwardplus said:
What I knew is the potential of SGX540 in GNexus and GT are different.
GT one is 200MHz and GNexus one is 374MHz.
In Overcome Kernel w/ GT, the clock of SGX540 can be set to 370~38X Mhz w/ no crush but when it is 400MHz , the machine is seemed to be lagged.
The benchmark in Overcome 4.1 plus Overcome Kernel 4.0 can be promoted over the GT 7.7 (of course the mark doesn't represent the real using experience but let's just look at the 3D mark)
http: / / i729.photobucket.com/albums/ww300/ngtinching/SC20120401-173417.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, yea I know they have different potentials Just that I thought I'd let you guys know how much better overclocking the GPU would be.
I think its worth it, there is little impact on battery life, but the improvements in apps and usage are noticeable.
FC1032 said:
Haha, yea I know they have different potentials Just that I thought I'd let you guys know how much better overclocking the GPU would be.
I think its worth it, there is little impact on battery life, but the improvements in apps and usage are noticeable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the battery usage for extra cost of GPU is not as high as CPU.
It is being a great difference if we compared the overclocking for either CPU and GPU.
The consumption of GPU is low and it won't make the device hot as CPU overclocking.
And the temperature can keep around 35 to 36 degree Celsius under a room temperature 20 Degree Celsius.
The result screenshot I have posted is undergoing CPU overclocked (1.4GHz) plus GPU overclocked(370MHz) w/ overcome kernel and rom.
Success!!!
edwardplus said:
If the SGX540 in P1000 can be overclocked to 370MHz, the performance of it can be highly improved like in Overcome Kernel.
(Can be showed in Quadrant Standard Edition. When it is in 370 MHz, the fps in the graphic animation of DNA can be promoted to 60fps. And got no lagging in anything. The speed(smoothness is nearly reached S2 which is official 2.3.6)
But however, it doesn't seem that any ICS supporting kernel can set the clock of GPU.
I am sorry that my English is not good enough to represent my idea, but I hope you can get what I am talking about.
And the most reason I want it to be real is that the potential of P1000 is quite big and in fact it is quite good!
PS Antutu SetCPU app can set GPU clock in Overcome Kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello, i have been trying to implement LiveOC into humberos's kernel and it is a success
LiveOC
This allows us to modify the bus speed which increase both the cpu and gpu clock at the same time using an app called NStools
i have only been using this for a day now and it seems to be working very well
please report back any bugs thank you,
BTW i will post the settings i have used in NStools and this kernel is for the latest MTD build
Link: http://www.4shared.com/file/216rF_WJ/boot.html?
My settings:
Governor: smartassV2
min CPU freq: 200MHz (240MHz after applying OC Value)
Max CPU freq: 1000MHz (1200MHz after applying OC Value)
OC target low: 200MHz
OC target high: 1000MHz
OC Value: 120%
hello20 said:
Hello, i have been trying to implement LiveOC into humberos's kernel and it is a success
LiveOC
This allows us to modify the bus speed which increase both the cpu and gpu clock at the same time using an app called NStools
i have only been using this for a day now and it seems to be working very well
please report back any bugs thank you,
BTW i will post the settings i have used in NStools and this kernel is for the latest MTD build
Link: http://www.4shared.com/file/216rF_WJ/boot.html?
My settings:
Governor: smartassV2
min CPU freq: 200MHz (240MHz after applying OC Value)
Max CPU freq: 1000MHz (1200MHz after applying OC Value)
OC target low: 200MHz
OC target high: 1000MHz
OC Value: 120%
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll give that a try when I get home (or maybe a few days later). So which ICS rom did you try this on?
EDIT: In terms of quadrant (which I know can be a bit volatile... but a nice way/quick way to see differences), ICS gets a lower mem score :< 3d is slightly lower, 2d is about double (I suspect thats forcing 2d rendering). This is comparing the gtab score in quadrant, I haven't used GB on my tab for a longgg time...)
how can i implement the boot.img file into the system???
tidusdacapo said:
how can i implement the boot.img file into the system???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This kernel is one i did 2 months ago and since then it has been updated. the kernel is in my most recent ROM
henryedwardrose said:
This kernel is one i did 2 months ago and since then it has been updated. the kernel is in my most recent ROM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the information
as a newbie, i just thought another aokp by stimpz0r is identical
there is a strange point which is the fc of the camera while the shutter sound is closed, but it works while enabling the shutter sound
It is a great rom and thank you for your great work
when i flashed Bugless Beast + air kernel 3.2
i decided to do smartbench 2012 to see if its any good (benchmarks don't represent actual feel of ROM)
i scored 3236 on gaming index!
false score?... my phone spazed? i don't know ... but i thought i might share it with you guys
qaz2453 said:
when i flashed Bugless Beast + air kernel 3.2
i decided to do smartbench 2012 to see if its any good (benchmarks don't represent actual feel of ROM)
i scored 3236 on gaming index!
false score... my phone spazed i don't know ... but i thought i might share it with you guys
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you might find this interesting(lol) http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nexus-s-hacked-and-tweaked-to-slaughter-benchmarks-reality-be-d/
my highest was 15000+. btw, the developer of smartbench and i worked at trying to squash those bugs in smartbench. i think that they are still there, so i generally dont use it anymore
simms22 said:
you might find this interesting(lol) http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nexus-s-hacked-and-tweaked-to-slaughter-benchmarks-reality-be-d/
my highest was 15000+. btw, the developer of smartbench and i worked at trying to squash those bugs in smartbench. i think that they are still there, so i generally dont use it anymore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow nice
qaz2453 said:
wow nice
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but, you are the only other nexus s owner that ive seen get those special scores. so..congrats!
simms22 said:
but, you are the only other nexus s owner that ive seen get those special scores. so..congrats!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why thank you sir
my rooted stock ics with the performance mod
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1575676
my smartbench score was like about 495. I think their is something wrong with ics it seems faster with the performance mod but smartbench says no...\
here is proof of my low score of only about 495
-= SG Mod =-
What it does:
-enables full gpu rendering
-enables android tile rendering
-increased wifi scan rate (save battery)
-increased vm heap (48 > 64)
-display tweaks for improved graphics (higher fps, decrease lag, increase quality)
-higher fps when scrolling in menus
Introduction
"It takes few hours to make a thread but it doesn't even take few seconds to say Thanks"- arpith.fbi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Code:
Don't be afraid to ask me anything.
I won't bite, but I might lick you.
Just thank me for this super brief thread.
Give credits to this thread by linking it if you're using any of my info.
Thank you to you too
Have you unlocked your bootloader of your current device ? If so, read it ! If not, learn the benifits ! :victory:
What is this thread about ? It is a very brief explanation of every governors and schedulers to let you find the best combo for your device.
I've been searching a lot about informations about Kernels, Governors, I/O Schedulers and also Android Optimization Tips. No matter its Google or XDA or other android forums. I will go into it and try the best I can to find these infos. So I thought of sharing it to here for the XPlay users.
My main reason to share this is to benefit users for better knowledge about Kernels, Governors, I/O Schedulers and Tips on Android Optimization. I'm not aware of whether where this should be posted, its related to kernels, governors and schedulers so I think it would be best if I share it to here. Yes, I wrote it word by word with references.Happy learning. :angel:
After months on XDA, no matter its in a development forum or Off Topic forum. Users kept on asking what's this what's that. And I'm sure that not all members will understand what is it until they bump into my thread
FAQs regarding on :-
-I/O Schedulers
-Kernel Governers
-Better RAM
-Better Battery
-FAQs
*Will add more when I found something useful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do a lot of asking by PM, to learn, it doesn't matter whether its a stupid one. (People who know me understands)
With my experience and lots of asking. I managed to find a lot of infos that we can use to optimize our phone.
I will try to explain as clear as I can.
Governors :-
-Smoothass
-Smartass
-SmartassV2
-SavagedZen
-Interactivex
-Lagfree
-Minmax
-Ondemand
-Conservative
-Brazilianwax
-Userspacce
-Powersave
-Performance
-Scary
-Lulzactive *
-Intellidemand *
-Badass *
-Lionheart *
-Lionheartx *
-Virtuous *
* Haven't gathered much needed information. Will add it later.
Explanation
OnDemand
Brief
Available in most kernels, and the default governor in most kernels. When the CPU load reaches a certain point, OnDemand will rapidly scale the CPU up to meet the demand, then gradually scale the CPU down when it isn't needed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Brief says all. By a simple explantion, OnDemand scales up to the required frequency to undergo the action you are doing and rapidly scales down after use.
Conservative
Brief
It is similar to the OnDemand governor, but will scale the CPU up more gradually to better fit demand. Conservative governor provides a less responsive experience than OnDemand, but it does save batter
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Conservative is the opposite of Interactive; it will slowly ramp up the frequency, then quickly drops the frequency once the CPU is no longer under a certain usage.
Interactive
Brief
Available in latest kernels, it is the default scaling option in some stock kernels. Interactive governor is similar to the OnDemand governor with an even greater focus on responsiveness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Interactive is the opposite of Conservative; it quickly scales up to the maximum allowed frequency, then slowly drops the frequency once no longer in use.
Performance
Brief
Performance governer locks the phone's CPU at maximum frequency. While this may sound like an ugly idea, there is growing evidence to suggest that running a phone at its maximum frequency at all times will allow a faster race-to-idle. Race-to-idle is the process by which a phone completes a given task. After that it returns the CPU to extremely efficient low-power state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Good at gaming, Really good. Disadvantages are it may damage your phone if too much usage.
Powersave
Brief
The opposite of the Performance governor, the Powersave governor locks the CPU frequency at the lowest frequency set by the user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Set it to your desired minimum frequency and you won't have to look for your charger for once in a while.
Scary
Brief
A new governor wrote based on Conservative with some Smartass features, it scales accordingly to Conservative's way. It will start from the bottom. It spends most of its time at lower frequencies. The goal of this is to get the best battery life with decent performance. It will give the same performance as Conservative right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Hmm.. Overall I don't see any difference. After I understand its main objective. I was very curious and decided to use it again. Results are the same.. No difference. Report to me if anyone has tested this.
Userspace
Brief
Userspace is not a governor pre-set, but instead allows for non-kernel daemons or apps with root permissions to control the frequency. Commonly seen as a redundant and not useful since SetCPU and NoFrills exist.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Highly not recommended for use.
Smartass
Brief
It is based on the concept of the Interactive governor.
Smartass is a complete rewrite of the code of Interactive. Performance is on par with the “old” minmax and Smartass is a bit more responsive. Battery life is hard to quantify precisely but it does spend much more time at the lower frequencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Smartass is rather the governer that will save your battery and make use of your processor for daily use. Like the brief explantion said " Smartass will spend much more time on lower frequencies." So logically you don't need for sleep profiles anymore.
SmartassV2
Brief
Theoretically a merge of the best properties of Interactive and OnDemand; automatically reduces the maximum CPU frequency when phone is idle or asleep, and attempts to balance performance with efficiency by focusing on an "ideal" frequency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
This is a much favourite to everybody. I believe almost everyone here is using SmartassV2. Yes, it is better than Smartass because of its speed no scaling frequencies from min to max at a short period of time.
Smoothass
Brief
A much more aggressive version of Smartass that is very quick to ramp up and down, and keeps the idle/asleep maximum frequency even lower.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
In my personal experience, this is really useful for daily use. And yes, I'm using it all the time. It may decrease your battery life. I saw it OC itself to 1.4 gHz when I set it to 1.2. Good use. Recommended.
Brazilianwax
Brief
Similar to SmartassV2. More aggressive scaling, so more performance, but less battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Based on SmartassV2. But its advantage is a much more performance wise governor.
SavagedZen
Brief
Another SmartassV2 based governor. Achieves good balance between performance & battery as compared to Brazilianwax.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Not much difference compared to SmartassV2. But it is a optimized version of it.
Lagfree
Brief
Again, similar to Smartass but based on Conservative rather than Interactive, instantly jumps to a certain CPU frequency after the device wakes, then operates similar to Conservative. However, it has been noted as being very slow when down-scaling, taking up to a second to switch frequencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Used it before. Like the name of the governor, I didn't experience any lag whatsoever. Another governor based on performance, but not battery efficient.
MinMax
Brief
MinMax is just a normal governor. No scaling intermediate frequency scaling is used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
Well.. it's too normal that I can't really say anything about it..
Interactivex
Brief
InteractiveX governor is based heavily on the Interactive governor, enhanced with tuned timer parameters to optimize the balance of battery vs performance. InteractiveX governor's defining feature, however, is that it locks the CPU frequency to the user's lowest defined speed when the screen is off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Review
A better understanding from the brief to you users, this is an Interactive governor with a wake profile. More battery friendly than Interactive.
Due to current kernels doesn't have these governors. I will be delaying the explanation, its very interesting. If you want it ASAP, post below
-Lulzactive *
-Intellidemand *
-Badass *
-Lionheart *
-Lionheartx *
-Virtuous *
**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************
I/O Schedulers(thanks to droidphile)
Deadline
Goal is to minimize I/O latency or starvation of a request. The same is achieved by round robin policy to be fair among multiple I/O requests. Five queues are aggressively used to reorder incoming requests.
Advantages:
Nearly a real time scheduler.
Excels in reducing latency of any given single I/O.
Best scheduler for database access and queries.
Bandwidth requirement of a process - what percentage of CPU it needs, is easily calculated.
Like noop, a good scheduler for solid state/flash drives.
Disadvantages:
When system is overloaded, set of processes that may miss deadline is largely unpredictable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Noop
Inserts all the incoming I/O requests to a First In First Out queue and implements request merging. Best used with storage devices that does not depend on mechanical movement to access data. Advantage here is that flash drives does not require reordering of multiple I/O requests unlike in normal hard drives.
Advantages:
Serves I/O requests with least number of cpu cycles. (Battery friendly?)
Best for flash drives since there is no seeking penalty.
Good throughput on db systems.
Disadvantages:
Reduction in number of cpu cycles used is proportional to drop in performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anticipatory
Based on two facts
i) Disk seeks are really slow.
ii) Write operations can happen whenever, but there is always some process waiting for read operation.
So anticipatory prioritize read operations over write. It anticipates synchronous read operations.
Advantages:
Read requests from processes are never starved.
As good as noop for read-performance on flash drives.
Disadvantages:
'Guess works' might not be always reliable.
Reduced write-performance on high performance disks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BFQ
nstead of time slices allocation by CFQ, BFQ assigns budgets. Disk is granted to an active process until it's budget (number of sectors) expires. BFQ assigns high budgets to non-read tasks. Budget assigned to a process varies over time as a function of it's behavior.
Advantages:
Believed to be very good for usb data transfer rate.
Believed to be the best scheduler for HD video recording and video streaming. (because of less jitter as compared to CFQ and others)
Considered an accurate i/o scheduler.
Achieves about 30% more throughput than CFQ on most workloads.
Disadvantages:
Not the best scheduler for benchmarking.
Higher budget assigned to a process can affect interactivity and increased latency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CFQ
Completely Fair Queuing scheduler maintains a scalable per-process I/O queue and attempts to distribute the available I/O bandwidth equally among all I/O requests. Each per-process queue contains synchronous requests from processes. Time slice allocated for each queue depends on the priority of the 'parent' process. V2 of CFQ has some fixes which solves process' i/o starvation and some small backward seeks in the hope of improving responsiveness.
Advantages:
Considered to deliver a balanced i/o performance.
Easiest to tune.
Excels on multiprocessor systems.
Best database system performance after deadline.
Disadvantages:
Some users report media scanning takes longest to complete using CFQ. This could be because of the property that since the bandwidth is equally distributed to all i/o operations during boot-up, media scanning is not given any special priority.
Jitter (worst-case-delay) exhibited can sometimes be high, because of the number of tasks competing for the disk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SIO
Simple I/O scheduler aims to keep minimum overhead to achieve low latency to serve I/O requests. No priority quesues concepts, but only basic merging. Sio is a mix between noop & deadline. No reordering or sorting of requests.
Advantages:
Simple, so reliable.
Minimized starvation of requests.
Disadvantages:
Slow random-read speeds on flash drives, compared to other schedulers.
Sequential-read speeds on flash drives also not so good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
VR
Unlike other schedulers, synchronous and asynchronous requests are not treated separately, instead a deadline is imposed for fairness. The next request to be served is based on it's distance from last request.
Advantages:
May be best for benchmarking because at the peak of it's 'form' VR performs best.
Disadvantages:
Performance fluctuation results in below-average performance at times.
Least reliable/most unstable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Credits
-droidphile
-kokzhanjia
Reserved for kernel infos
Sent from my WT19i
Yes, we do have kernels with Lionheart, lulzactive and intellidemand.
Nice reference cheers.
Sent from Xperia Play (R800a) with Tapatalk
CosmicDan said:
Yes, we do have kernels with Lionheart, lulzactive and intellidemand.
Nice reference cheers.
Sent from Xperia Play (R800a) with Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really ? Okay will add it in later
Sent from my WT19i
kokzhanjia said:
Really ? Okay will add it in later
Sent from my WT19i
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah LuPuS has Lulzactive, Virtuous, Intellidemand, Lazy, Ondemandx, Lionheart and Badass added (but no mention of LionheartX).
Turbo kernel also has intellidemand but the parameters have been modified quite a bit (by me) to suit our snapdragon SOC's better. I think wedgess also put these changes into LuPuS too (at least one of the ICS/JB kernels he builds he said he did). The browser mode still has no effect AFAIK but in my experience it's more battery-friendly and better performance than on-demand (thanks mainly to dbus_input ramping). But many users have reported slightly better gaming experience with SmartAssv2.
Great reference, this will be of much help to new comers, thanks for the hard work you put into this.
CosmicDan said:
Yeah LuPuS has Lulzactive, Virtuous, Intellidemand, Lazy, Ondemandx, Lionheart and Badass added (but no mention of LionheartX).
Turbo kernel also has intellidemand but the parameters have been modified quite a bit (by me) to suit our snapdragon SOC's better. I think wedgess also put these changes into LuPuS too (at least one of the ICS/JB kernels he builds he said he did). The browser mode still has no effect AFAIK but in my experience it's more battery-friendly and better performance than on-demand (thanks mainly to dbus_input ramping). But many users have reported slightly better gaming experience with SmartAssv2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. Saw your work Nice one.. anymore in depth infos about kernels at here ? I want to add a bonus one for this..
paragroth said:
Great reference, this will be of much help to new comers, thanks for the hard work you put into this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks
Coloured signatures are nice
Nah that's pretty much it
Sent from Xperia Play (R800a) with Tapatalk
Throughout my experience(mainly from observing CPU speeds during music playback), I found that:
Scary:
Ramps up to max after reaching a threshold (50/60% CPU load) then slow scales down to match as 50-80% CPU Load @ X MHz. After a while if load lowers (30-40%), it will clock down to match the 50-80% load. You will see a lot of 100% @ low MHz with this governor.
SavagedZen:
It maintains a 80-90% CPU Load @ X MHz for a fairly constant load. This one also scales based on the Max CPU Freq. settings. So the lower your Max CPU Freq, the better it is at maintaining the CPU Load/MHz balance (for music playback at least).
I didn't look at the source, so these are just from observations only. So I might be talking out of my ass.
Also, having good CPU Load at appropriate CPU Speeds may or may not contribute to battery life. No experiments showed that yet iirc.
Monitoring done via "Diagnosis - System Information" an app that generates an overlay with whatever information your want ie cpu load, speed, memory free, used, disk io, network io, etc.
Refresh rate kept at 5 seconds to keep CPU Load interference minimal (lower than ICS/JB CPU Info overlay from Development, Settings tab).
Great thread, this should be sticky!
jabberwocky_one said:
Throughout my experience(mainly from observing CPU speeds during music playback), I found that:
Scary:
Ramps up to max after reaching a threshold (50/60% CPU load) then slow scales down to match as 50-80% CPU Load @ X MHz. After a while if load lowers (30-40%), it will clock down to match the 50-80% load. You will see a lot of 100% @ low MHz with this governor.
SavagedZen:
It maintains a 80-90% CPU Load @ X MHz for a fairly constant load. This one also scales based on the Max CPU Freq. settings. So the lower your Max CPU Freq, the better it is at maintaining the CPU Load/MHz balance (for music playback at least).
I didn't look at the source, so these are just from observations only. So I might be talking out of my ass.
Also, having good CPU Load at appropriate CPU Speeds may or may not contribute to battery life. No experiments showed that yet iirc.
Monitoring done via "Diagnosis - System Information" an app that generates an overlay with whatever information your want ie cpu load, speed, memory free, used, disk io, network io, etc.
Refresh rate kept at 5 seconds to keep CPU Load interference minimal (lower than ICS/JB CPU Info overlay from Development, Settings tab).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nono you are right. I read these before and your observation is just about it, thanks for the info
chabbe11 said:
Great thread, this should be sticky!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you
Sent from my WT19i with Real Xperia r1
Am I setting it up the right way?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I prefer using that minimum and maximum.
And would this screen off profile work, even if I have configured the main minimum? The 100mhz for screen off really saves a lot of my battery.
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk 2
Gr8 helped me a lot in understanding alll of this .....
bhavei said:
Am I setting it up the right way?
I prefer using that minimum and maximum.
And would this screen off profile work, even if I have configured the main minimum? The 100mhz for screen off really saves a lot of my battery.
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it is right. I didnt really tried the other way that you mentioned, because i have No-Frills pre-installed in my settings..but i see it worked. Of course it will save battery.. Nice
piku2008 said:
Gr8 helped me a lot in understanding alll of this .....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will add more soon About kernels, Is there any BFS kernels around here ? Most kernels are CFS..
Sent from my WT19i with Real Xperia r1
kokzhanjia said:
About kernels, Is there any BFS kernels around here ? Most kernels are CFS..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There was, I ported it over a few months ago. But I removed it because it was causing priority issues. The latest BFS patch for our kernel has some critical bugs, so I ditched it. When I get ext# fixed in .60 kernel up and going I will probably take another crack at it, backporting one of the more recent 3.x BFS versions.
One of the LuPuS kernels might still have na laternative BFS version, but I think wedgess stopped building it for the same reason as me.
CosmicDan said:
There was, I ported it over a few months ago. But I removed it because it was causing priority issues. The latest BFS patch for our kernel has some critical bugs, so I ditched it. When I get ext# fixed in .60 kernel up and going I will probably take another crack at it, backporting one of the more recent 3.x BFS versions.
One of the LuPuS kernels might still have na laternative BFS version, but I think wedgess stopped building it for the same reason as me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see, there are really few BFS based kernels out there. BFS is better in my opinion so i would like to elaborate more about BFS to attract more users.
Btw, one guy in Xperia Mini, Mini Pro and Active forums had already successfully making it up and running for stock and CM ROMs. Its already hitted version 2.3
Maybe you could get some help from him ? Name is Mesa Kernel.
Sent from my WT19i with Real Xperia r1
kokzhanjia said:
I see, there are really few BFS based kernels out there. BFS is better in my opinion so i would like to elaborate more about BFS to attract more users.
Btw, one guy in Xperia Mini, Mini Pro and Active forums had already successfully making it up and running for stock and CM ROMs. Its already hitted version 2.3
Maybe you could get some help from him ? Name is Mesa Kernel.
Sent from my WT19i with Real Xperia r1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was using v0.313 of BFS, it wasn't that hard - just had to adapt the patch for the Xperia's stupid kernel. That version is so unstable and buggy, in fact all 2.6.x BFS patches were so problematic that the official page has removed them.
I'll check it out, if he back-ported BFS for Linux kernel 3.0 and has them on GitHub, otherwise it would be easier just to do it myself. But I have other more important concerns for Zeus development right now, BFS doesn't really bring any significant performance boost (which is why it is continually rejected from AOSP inclusion).
CosmicDan said:
I was using v0.313 of BFS, it wasn't that hard - just had to adapt the patch for the Xperia's stupid kernel. That version is so unstable and buggy, in fact all 2.6.x BFS patches were so problematic that the official page has removed them.
I'll check it out, if he back-ported BFS for Linux kernel 3.0 and has them on GitHub, otherwise it would be easier just to do it myself. But I have other more important concerns for Zeus development right now, BFS doesn't really bring any significant performance boost (which is why it is continually rejected from AOSP inclusion).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh... i didnt know that.. anyway, I don't think he has his github set up. I didnt saw a link to his github on his thread. And isnt BFS aimed for forward looking(like only performing on a task that is given without any concerns) ? I read about it at google docs about it. And i don't really know how to explain it clearly..
Good luck in your development my frirend. And this thread has been moved to General section. Hope you can find it and Nice to have another friend
Sent from my WT19i with Real Xperia r1
This is nice info,
Thanks
Thanks man. This is awesome. Much appreciated
Hi,
I don't know if these benchmark applications are valid, but I downloaded AnTuTu Benchmark and messed around with my CPU frequency. At first, I maxed out the core clock speed to 1.3 GHz. Next, I set the maximum clock speed to 475 MHz. When I set it to 475 MHz, I get a better CPU score.
Something does not seem right. Any thoughts?
...and now you know why folks don't trust benchmarks.
There is a thermal CPU control. By overclocking, you are overheating, and it's underclocking to prevent itself overheating...
CrazyPeter said:
There is a thermal CPU control. By overclocking, you are overheating, and it's underclocking to prevent itself overheating...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was funny to read.
By overclocking, your in fact under clocking or so it seems.
Yes that can happen. If it gets too hot it will probably start throttling each core back which gives worse and worse scores.
Right now I have mine up at 1600Mhz and I get better scores than 1300Mhz but as well I'm running nearly the same voltages that 1300Mhz is.
Nice!
Interesting guys,
I guess I'll just leave it at default settings
Too bad I can't root my device .......
STXInnovation said:
Interesting guys,
I guess I'll just leave it at default settings
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I made a bunch of (repeated) measurements with a CM10.1 nightly kernel (at various Fmax settings) and the results were quite squirrelly. When I get a little time, I'll make some more tests and post up the data.
BTW - if you were using TricksterMod are you sure you actually applied the changes? You didn't provide any numbers (your results) and it is not uncommon for Antutu to produce 10% different results in that benchmark from run to run (and much much worse at different Fmax values!!) - so is it possible you just mistook a random variation for a "change for the worse"?
bftb0 said:
I made a bunch of (repeated) measurements with a CM10.1 nightly kernel (at various Fmax settings) and the results were quite squirrelly. When I get a little time, I'll make some more tests and post up the data.
BTW - if you were using TricksterMod are you sure you actually applied the changes? You didn't provide any numbers (your results) and it is not uncommon for Antutu to produce 10% different results in that benchmark from run to run (and much much worse at different Fmax values!!) - so is it possible you just mistook a random variation for a "change for the worse"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah would have to agree here. Between voltage and clocks you can really affect any benchmark score. I knits I've been playing with it. Though a swing of 10% in AuTutu is pretty big. I've had maybe a few hundred points at most.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app