I see many say they are installing the lag fix on the Tab but is it really needed? Can't say I have noticed much lag on my Tab so just wondering what I would gain if I install the lag fix?
Regards,
BTJ
i dont see the need.
It depends on whether you want to show off your Quadrant score or not, really. In all the tests I've done the only measurable impact of installing the lag fix is on the Quadrant IO score (which it increases by about x10).
If you're not interested in the benchmark, I don't think you'll notice any difference at all.
ok, that's what I thought.. Thx..
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
No lag here. Quadrant gives a score of about 900-1000.
I don't get it still.
From what I've seen so far, is that the Tab is one of the fastest Android device I've seen, but for some odd reason Quadrant is reporting a very low score. And what's funny is that it's much faster and snappier then my Nexus One (blows it off the water to be exact).
If a lag fix can fix this then it only shows how unreliable Quadrant benchmark is.
Maybe someone can shed some light here.
I installed the fix and I'm getting a 2100+ score in quadrant.
Sent from my SGH-T849 using XDA App
xoltrix2000 said:
only shows how unreliable Quadrant benchmark is.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is the worst benchmarking tool ever.
So which is the best benchmarking tool?
Related
According to this link, the upcoming Epic 4G has an I/O benchmark that is much higher than Vibrant (and therefore the similarly handicapped Captivate and international and Bell Galaxy S i9000). I started wondering whether this is due to actual hardware differences, or if there have been tweaks incorporated into the firmware that are helping. Then I found an Epic 4G system dump here. I haven't personally downloaded the dump from that link, because even if I did, I wouldn't know how to find anything. Could someone with more ability study this dump and possibly learn something useful for us?
I have also heard reports that Epic 4G has a GPS that works well. This is less of an issue for me personally, as I am on JH2, and find my GPS adequate for the occassional use I have put it through. This is another area that might be worth looking at.
Edit:
alternate Epic 4G dump download location
Interesting to say the least. Wonder if they dumped RFS or if they just figured out how to optimize it. The hardware differences between the devices shouldn't be significant enough to show that big of an I/O difference.
Who knows, maybe this indicates that Samsung has an idea what's going on with the performance issues and will eventually filter it down to the SGSs variants
Zilch25 said:
Interesting to say the least. Wonder if they dumped RFS or if they just figured out how to optimize it. The hardware differences between the devices shouldn't be significant enough to show that big of an I/O difference.
Who knows, maybe this indicates that Samsung has an idea what's going on with the performance issues and will eventually filter it down to the SGSs variants
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
QFT .................
I am going to go ahead and download the system dump zip file for archiving purposes. I'll probably put it up at an alternate download location, once I have it.
I'm not 100% sure on this but I think the Epic's total internal memory is NAND (1GB) unlike the other phones that use an internal SD card. Much different memory transfer speeds.
Thats why the one lag fix works so well, it copies data/data to the internal NAND.
I am already running the gps fix from the dump(haven't tested it yet). There is no lag fix as far as I can tell. The epic gets 850+ in quadrant. If it had a lag fix it would get a lot higher score.
I believe derek4484 is right on the 1gig of NAND. I just checked it out on a review site.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Yeah doublechecked derek too... it appears it comes with 1GB ROM only, all other storage is via microSD.
False alarm =P Samsung didn't fix or optimize anything, they just used a cheaper, more shortsighted method to avoid having to give up their precious RFS
Those test results are questionable. You can click on the link under the graph and compare other phones. They have Droid X edging out SGS in linpack: SGS- high 7's; X- low 8's.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
tiger4j said:
Those test results are questionable. You can click on the link under the graph and compare other phones. They have Droid X edging out SGS in linpack: SGS- high 7's; X- low 8's.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think they are right either. If the phone had that fast of a file system it would kill in quadrant. The epic has been reported to only get 850+ in quadrant.
Unless you're actually running an epic, the GPS fixes out there only dump the GPS files, so it wouldn't do anything to indicate the speed of the actual Epic in terms of file system performance =P
why would they let sprint have the nicest version of the galaxy s ugh -___-
Zilch25 said:
Unless you're actually running an epic, the GPS fixes out there only dump the GPS files, so it wouldn't do anything to indicate the speed of the actual Epic in terms of file system performance =P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Two different issues regarding GPS locking and file system I/O performance
rajendra82 said:
Two different issues regarding GPS locking and file system I/O performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I was commenting on sheps post =P He seems to be saying that using the gps fix from the epic would alter file system performance.
No I am saying people with epics have tested them with quadrant and are getting 850+. I cant see it getting so high scores from laptopmag.com under the file sytem benchmarks but only get 850+ in quadrant. laptopmag.com says the droid x file system benchmarks the same but it gets over 1200 in quadrant with slower cpu and gpu.
shep211 said:
No I am saying people with epics have tested them with quadrant and are getting 850+. I cant see it getting so high scores from laptopmag.com under the file sytem benchmarks but only get 850+ in quadrant. laptopmag.com says the droid x file system benchmarks the same but it gets over 1200 in quadrant with slower cpu and gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah okay Thanks for the clarification. The posts were a little confusing as to what you were saying.
shep211 said:
No I am saying people with epics have tested them with quadrant and are getting 850+. I cant see it getting so high scores from laptopmag.com under the file sytem benchmarks but only get 850+ in quadrant. laptopmag.com says the droid x file system benchmarks the same but it gets over 1200 in quadrant with slower cpu and gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FYI, Quadrant scores MEAN JACK
andy2na said:
FYI, Quadrant scores MEAN JACK
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless youre comparing the same phone. Especially when one with lag vs one without it get the same score. Even though quadrant isn't the best thing to use you can still use it to show an improvement after a fix or a mod from the base number. So his question was why do the phones get the exact same score but one has lag.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Clienterror said:
Unless youre comparing the same phone. Especially when one with lag vs one without it get the same score. Even though quadrant isn't the best thing to use you can still use it to show an improvement after a fix or a mod from the base number. So his question was why do the phones get the exact same score but one has lag.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant only tests throughput bandwidth not latency, etc. The internal NAND may be just as fast in terms of MB/s but it could have lower latency or other charecterists that Quadrant does not test.
Which lag fix do you think is the best. ..I'm recently using one and my quadrant is 1850 but I've seen others with a score of 2080 is there a difference in lag fixes?
yokozuna82 said:
Which lag fix do you think is the best. ..I'm recently using one and my quadrant is 1850 but I've seen others with a score of 2080 is there a difference in lag fixes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i use the Ext2 fix by RyanZA here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=751864
after some tweaking i was able to get 2790 on quadrant *note - the scores dont necessarily equate to real world speed*
yokozuna82 said:
Which lag fix do you think is the best. ..I'm recently using one and my quadrant is 1850 but I've seen others with a score of 2080 is there a difference in lag fixes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
quadrant scores are being inflated by read/write speeds and nothing else. Any one of the lag fixes will cause apps that really heavily on read/writes to the system to lag considerably less, such as facebook, dolphin hd, and a few others. But they will all have nearly the same real world performance. I would personally avoid any lag fix that mounts a different partition (such as ext3) to the internal SD card, because the partitions are not designed for flash memory and will wear it out faster than the system already on there.
Look in my sig for the lagfix I use. it doesn't have the fastest quad scores, but like I said, you don't need them to get the real world performance.
Thread closed. You will have to decide which is the best lag fix for you.
I've been seeing alot of people make a big deal about quadrant scores that pass the 1000 mark...but not too long ago when 2.1 was around.. 2207 was my average score with all these lag fixes installed..
i know i must have missed a post about this.... but nowadays w/ voodoo... i'm lucky to get 1000.... what gives?
Do a search for the answer! people have gone over this countless times.
Lag fixes trick quadrant. It's not an accurate reflection of performance. Therefore over 1000 stock is an improvement from the 930 average score of previous stock builds.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
solidkundi said:
I've been seeing alot of people make a big deal about quadrant scores that pass the 1000 mark...but not too long ago when 2.1 was around.. 2207 was my average score with all these lag fixes installed..
i know i must have missed a post about this.... but nowadays w/ voodoo... i'm lucky to get 1000.... what gives?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because that benchmark is bunk.
Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.
OmegaRED^ said:
Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, will give it a try but it'd been better if you post this in themes & apps I guess
by the way what scores do you get with this rom in quadrant?
Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market
i've got 1973 on CM6 006 at 1.1Ghz
benchmarking
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.
kryptoner said:
Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2232 hmm right behind the nexus s
Cm6 wb bb67 custom kernel z
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
Try smartbench 2011. That's the best one
Sent from my x10 on gingerbread
All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
pepy_24 said:
All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it's a good comparison between phones after having a average score for each phone. But like you say, the numbers don't mean anything. Everything is personal.
zodiac100 said:
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True about benchmark apps but I don't think I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see. What the OP is saying that with this app the difference between each time's score is not much hence why calling it accurate.
To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously
maddes1402 said:
To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It comes down to what you have happening in the background.
If your phone suddenly "for example" decides to fetch data off of 3G or suddenly refreshes the media midway thru the bench then it can effect your score. this is why it's best to do tests when the rom is clean and gone silent. "no background activity" with data disabled.
Benchmarking is used to place the current performance of a device in a certain category.
It's no different from benchmarking PC's.
A whole profession has been built around PC benchmarking with people competing for a first place.
If your score is higher than everyone else you win the competition.
i got 2232 on custom kernel at 1113 mhz processor
Sent from my X10 TripNMiUI-IRIS
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF Bench (full version) has the most stable results, and IMO its the best out there.
Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia™ phone
Linpack is perfect
kantk20111 said:
Linpack is perfect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linpack only tests the cpu.
I haven't checked how CF bench works yet.
will report.
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF bench 101%
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chainfire one!
that thing is scale-able across cores (single/multi-cores) and fairly accurate
Anyone else that uses quadrant notice that since the last update, it takes for ever to run a benchmark compared to how long it use to take. Also i'm only scoring a 1168, before the update it was 18** something. I know quadrant dosent really mean squat anyways, but is there a better benchmark app out there, one thats more accurate?
cmlusco said:
Anyone else that uses quadrant notice that since the last update, it takes for ever to run a benchmark compared to how long it use to take. Also i'm only scoring a 1168, before the update it was 18** something. I know quadrant dosent really mean squat anyways, but is there a better benchmark app out there, one thats more accurate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they redid everything and the new scores will be different. You can't compare the new score to the old. In fact quadrant should be more accurate now I think. Try antutu to benchmark.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk