Database Users

[LAG FIX/GPS] Can someone study this for us?

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.

[Q] No JIT in DK28

So DK28 is supposedly 2.2.1 but I ran Quandrat with the stock rom and it comes up 873, almost exactly the same as Galaxy S 2.1, leading me to believe that JIT is not in the rom. Correct?

avenger213 said:
So DK28 is supposedly 2.2.1 but I ran Quandrat with the stock rom and it comes up 873, almost exactly the same as Galaxy S 2.1, leading me to believe that JIT is not in the rom. Correct?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I may be wrong but quadrant:
1) Isn't the best way to base performance
2) Doesn't really show improvements that JIT provides
Download linpack if you want and your score should be around a 14 or so, compared to the 8.5-9 on 2.1

Quadrant isn't a real life benchmark, and is highly flawed. Check out Quantum's "warp speed edition" ROM for proof.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

I got 1205 with stock dk28 but I have noticed others reporting lower scores. Variability in testing with a bad benchmark perhaps?

I've got 1839 lol... For some reason I doubt that's accurate

I did a quadrant test with a stock epic 2.1 and an epic on dk28 and the scores were pretty much the same every time. The major difference was that the Froyo epic ran the cpu benchmarks much faster but hung during the first I/O test. The 2.1 epic ran everything about the same speed and completed the whole test much faster than the froyo epic.

I also noticed this and posted in another thread...
to quote myself
I was getting around 8.3xx in 2.1, and now I'm getting 13.7xx in 2.2.
(I used the 1506bdf2e04b.update-SPH-D700_DI18ToDK28.zip renamed to update.zip method.)
Saw a video the other day showing a nexus 1 scoring 20+ on 1st run and 40+ on 2nd.. My friends Evo (with 2.2) scored @ 38 or so..
Quadrant still shows me well under all of the 2.2+ phones listed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I expected a bit more of an increase..
I too am wondering if the JIT was left out of our Froyo (if that's even possible, I'm still a total nube to andriod stuff).

What exactly is JIT, does it speed the phone up?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

Just In Time compiling...
From what I know about .Net (I'm a C# coder), it allows for compilation of the app for the specific CPU during the 1st run.
Someone please correct me if this differes from andriod's JIT...

the epic has fast computation hw between the cpu and gpu, it could be the case that the JIT benefit doesn't show in the benchmark margins.
the device is a fast one, all compared.

Best Way to Improve Performance

So I am wondering what others opinions are of the roms and kernels available for the SF. Doesn't seem to be much of an improvement on Quadrant scores utilizing another rom or even stupidfast kernels.
Are we just kind of screwed a bit until 2.2? Is there a kernel that is overclocked?
TIA.

Quadrant scores are mostly meaningless, and 2.2 is unlikely to be revolutionary. The phone performs well on 2.1 - keep reading the forum and you'll get there.

In my opinion the biggest performance increases ive seen werent in any benchmarks but in dj05. it runs amazing. If u havent tried it i dont know whether you should or not. With the impending froyo release no one knows if they are actually going to release DJ05 or not. I think they should release it and then put froyo on top of that foundation if at all possible
Sent from my SCH-I800(tab) using ksizzle9's crazy kool ROM(bone stock with root) from within the XDA App

What do you feel about DJ that helped it out?
I finally stayed with just a Voodoo lag kernel. There certain operations on the phone I had gotten used to that were slow. The kernel with lag fix did show me noticeable improvement, more than just a higher I/O score in Quadrant.
I think the phone is fairly solid on 2.1 but needs a little help. Hopefully the Froyo upgrade really is around the corner but Im not holding my breath

jfigura said:
What do you feel about DJ that helped it out?
I finally stayed with just a Voodoo lag kernel. There certain operations on the phone I had gotten used to that were slow. The kernel with lag fix did show me noticeable improvement, more than just a higher I/O score in Quadrant.
I think the phone is fairly solid on 2.1 but needs a little help. Hopefully the Froyo upgrade really is around the corner but Im not holding my breath
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm running DJ05 deox, and the stock DJ05 kernel. I used Titanium Backup to remove all the bloatware, and I use ADW instead of TouchWiz crap. (I took TW off with Titanium Backup too). SetCPU to set max to 1ghz, and minimum to 400mhz. (NO PROFILES!!!) It runs just fine for me. Rather damn speedy actually!! I dont do the whole benchmark test business, doesn't really mean much IMO.

Yes benchmarks dont mean too much. But they are a good indication of overall performance in their specific areas that they test. As they fascinate test well in every area except i/o. But we already kne that. Im not sure what about DJ05 Made it feel so solid to me just overall improvement and actual working GPS
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

ksizzle9 said:
Yes benchmarks dont mean too much. But they are a good indication of overall performance in their specific areas that they test. As they fascinate test well in every area except i/o. But we already kne that. Im not sure what about DJ05 Made it feel so solid to me just overall improvement and actual working GPS
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you get the dj05 update?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App

Ive only tried voodoo/lagfix
It made a significant difference on my phone. I reverted and restored all the factory stuff in anticipation of JD05 because I want to get it OTA when it drops.
I tried to get the leaked one in IRC but people just kept calling me n00b so I gave up.
I am hopeful that it will solve all my woes and usher in a new era of speed only previously dreamt about

Powell730 said:
Where did you get the dj05 update?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its been discussed dozens of times where and how to get dj05

joe3681 said:
I'm running DJ05 deox, and the stock DJ05 kernel. I used Titanium Backup to remove all the bloatware, and I use ADW instead of TouchWiz crap. (I took TW off with Titanium Backup too). SetCPU to set max to 1ghz, and minimum to 400mhz. (NO PROFILES!!!) It runs just fine for me. Rather damn speedy actually!! I dont do the whole benchmark test business, doesn't really mean much IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ksizzle9 said:
Yes benchmarks dont mean too much. But they are a good indication of overall performance in their specific areas that they test. As they fascinate test well in every area except i/o. But we already kne that. Im not sure what about DJ05 Made it feel so solid to me just overall improvement and actual working GPS
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@Joe: same setup here (DJ05 deo, Stock Kernel and Rom, Frozen bloat in Titanium) without SetCPU. It's FAST. My GF and both my sons have EVOs running 2.2 and my Fascinate is just as fast (or faster)
@ksizzle: I agree, it's hard to quantify exactly what is so good about it. I think it's not what's there, but what's NOT there (lag) I think there are going to be plenty of happy n00bs when the OTA hits. This phone will be a screamer right out of the box!

NOsquid said:
Quadrant scores are mostly meaningless, and 2.2 is unlikely to be revolutionary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, the real performance difference between 2.2. and 2.1 is very revolutionary, though I certainly agree with you about the irrelevance of Quadrant scores. The Java virtual machine, for example, executes code 450% -- that's not a typo -- faster, which directly impacts most apps.
And, 2.2's browser is also significantly faster than 2.1's -- and iOS4's, for that matter.
I like my Fascinate, and yes, I would consider it fast (especially running DJ05 with Geeknik's kernels) but like many others, I too see slowdowns sometimes that just shouldn't happen with the phone's hardware. Froyo isn't a magic pill, per se, but it should significantly reduce or eliminate those slowdowns (as it did on my old Droid 1, despite it's far-slower processor).
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/and...r-vs-android-15-cupcake-speed-taste-49305763/
http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/0...-it-compared-to-2-1-oh-only-about-450-faster/
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/07/android-22-demolishes-ios4-in-javascript-benchmarks.ars

Actually, the real performance difference between 2.2. and 2.1 is very revolutionary, though I certainly agree with you about the irrelevance of Quadrant scores. The Java virtual machine, for example, executes code 450% in benchmarks -- that's not a typo -- faster, which do not directly impact most apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed that for ya. Don't let marketing hype get the best of ya.

Everything I've read states that the performance improvements between 2.1 and 2.2 have little effect on Hummingbird processors (which is what is in all Galaxy S phones), and the biggest performance gains are seen on Snapdragon processors. As far as performance goes, I'll believe it when I see it.

imnuts said:
Everything I've read states that the performance improvements between 2.1 and 2.2 have little effect on Hummingbird processors (which is what is in all Galaxy S phones), and the biggest performance gains are seen on Snapdragon processors. As far as performance goes, I'll believe it when I see it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is because JIT was designed specifically around a Snapdragon processor.

Quadrant scores

Ok so ive rooted this toy, flashed the 1.2ghz kernal and ran quadrant on it. I hit anywhere from 1080 to 1180. Have setcpu on demand at 800 min and 1200 max so why on earth is my rooted nook color running android 2.1 and a flashed 1100mhz kernal hitting wayyyy higher scores? (Around 1280) doesnt seem logical at all. Specially cause this is an actual tablet and thats just a rooted e reader. Did I do something wrong?
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Quadrant is a bad benchmark. It weights i/o far too heavily.
The Tabs RFS filesystems bring its Quadrant score way below where it should be, though in actual use it's very fast.
If you move to EXT4, your Quadrant scores will shoot up by around 80%.
Regards,
Dave

O sweet love of mary. 80% you say. Ok ive seen some posts redarding this ext4 thingymabob. Ill check it out. So if im understanding you correctly by changing to this my tab will perform even better than it does now? Or ill just see a genaric increase on this quadrant test that really means nothing? Sorry im noobish lol
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Well, my tab is currently on ext4 and my quadrant scores completely destroys my rfs score taken earlier.
However, that said, i don't really feel any performance improvements except the satisfaction knowing that my toy is now on an open and faster file system as opposed to a propriatory and slower one ;-)
Sent from my GT-P1000

Ok so ive looked at some threads containing info but I see no post telling me how to do this magic. Could one of you nice, young, kindhearted souls link me to where I need to go to put this thing on my verizon cdma galaxy tab? Please and thank you sirs?
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Quadrant scores aren't as accurate as people think you know...
Sent from zombie infested Gingerbread.

There's an app called OCLF that will transparently add an EXT4 area on the RFS filesystem without needing to convert the whole thing to EXT4, giving you EXT4 IO performance in an easily installable and reversible way. Probably your best choice for trying it out. Otherwise, for the complete conversion, you could try this Modaco ROM/Kernel, which includes a complete conversion to EXT4.
As far as performance differences go, it makes a huge (10x) difference to the Quadrant IO score (measured before and after figures), but no measurable difference to actual performance (measured real-world usage figures). Some people claim to notice a subjective difference, but I never did.

Im using the modaco rom and kernel with ext4.
And it does make a huge difference. I get around 1800 in quadrant now.

conan1600 said:
Ok so ive looked at some threads containing info but I see no post telling me how to do this magic. Could one of you nice, young, kindhearted souls link me to where I need to go to put this thing on my verizon cdma galaxy tab? Please and thank you sirs?
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hi,
please be aware that the modaco kernel (rfs/ext4) will not work on CDMA Tabs.
from modaco kernel thread
This kernel is ONLY tested on a UK Galaxy Tab. It MAY work on other GSM Tabs, it almost certainly WON'T work on a CDMA Tab. If you have a non UK Tab and want to test (and know how to flash back to a regular version), then go ahead and report your results. At your own risk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
regards,
mike

robertsydbrink said:
Im using the modaco rom and kernel with ext4.
And it does make a huge difference. I get around 1800 in quadrant now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the point!
It makes a huge difference in Quadrant, which is a synthetic benchmark, but far, far less difference in real world usage - hence it is a crap benchmark!
Pre-EXT4 my Tab would pull around 1000 in Quadrant, whereas my Desire HD would pull around 1800. However in real usage, they seem to perform pretty much the same which is not too surprising as they are similarly specified. On EXT4, my Tab pulls around 1800 now, but still performs much like my DHD.
I so wish people would stop bandying about Quadrant scores because they are meaningless.
Regards,
Dave

If you look at the scores in quadrant , they are split by colour so you can see how good the graphics capabilities are for example and compare to other phones. The colour codes are at the bottom of quadrant by the way

Linpack is a better benchmark. Not perfect, but better

Not really - Linpack only tests floating point performance.
Regards,
Dave

Wow, I started a heated discussion lol. Well ive downloaded the one click lag fix but have not applied the ext2 tools as yet. Want to do more reading about it first. Obviously I want my yab to be the best it can be but I surely dont want to make it genericly better at the expence of my video grafix as one user said he suffered in that thread.
More reserch required
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Taking Quadrant scores aside, when I made the switch from CF-Root to the Ext4 MCK, I really did notice a huge improvement in real world usage. I'm not sure if it is really because of the change in file system, but nevertheless thats the only big thing present in that kernel aside from CWM.

Everything said make sense and seems to be valid but let me share my experience.
I have Samsung Galaxy Vibrant and T-mobile Tab. Now both are using EXT4 file system and have fully functional recovery allowing for flashing straight from the phone.
Both now have Quanrant score around 1700-1800 and run very smothly.
Is I/O speed important? I think it is very important because task switching requires reading of huge chuncks of memory. Until read operation completed the user is essencially suspended. Multitasking is the major distinction of Android and lags associated with the tasks switching might be the most noticeable issue since its used so much. Converting of the RFS file system to EXT4 practically reduced lags to unnoticeable level. I don't need any better.
Another critical area for I/O is playing video and especially capturing HD video. The latter works only if I set internal storage and shut down all tasks.
This is work in progress but it seems it reached level of usability when most critical bugs eliminated.
It should be noted that the Tab is flashed with Rotohammer KM2 v1 ROM and Paul Obrien's kernel on a top. The kernel contains scripts converting the file system and flashing recovery. This combination works well, no issues so far.

Well I decided to give it a try and after install my quadrant is 2556 and linpack is 16.865 mflops at 1200mhz. Good scores but just numbers. I do however believe im seeing a bit of snap that I didnt have before when accessing my library. Still really unsure if this is a good thing as im not sure if I can use apps to sd anymore so I may uninstall at some point in the future but thanks to all you who helped the old man out. Atm im quite happy
Now lets get ta craka lackin on a 1.5 ghz update for our tabs
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Of course you can use a2sd. Froyo does it by default
Sent from my Legend using XDA App

I think you are pushing!
Overclocking will raise processor/RAM heat dissipation and thus might lead to a catastrophic failure. It would be great to have temperature sensor on the board or at least measure current consumption from the battery but it is not easy.

Of course im a pushin lol. Only way to achieve is to try. Course ive read about the tab proccessor being able to handle 1.4 stable and can handle 1.6... Not that id know about these things first hand. Just taking the words of better men.
Just an old man with a little time to kill and a dream to be able to play facebook cityville on my tab haha. Well that and I have always enjoyed souping up my toys lmao.
Sent from my SCH-I800 using XDA App

Samfirmware "speed test" Nexus S vs Galaxy S "credibility" of samfirmware

Samfirmware "speed test" Nexus S vs Galaxy S "credibility" of samfirmware
Not much to say to it really. But with this I lost any last drop of "faith" I had for them, even after the fiasco with the latest JVK.
http://goo.gl/t3uik
Are they joking? I mean, late 1 april joke? (link to the youtube video http://goo.gl/3ADAD )
For those that wont understand what I am saying with this:
1. quadrant cant be used to test the "real" speed or "user experience" its completely irrelevant. (look up threads about it)
2. they compared 2 different filesystems rfs4 vs ext4 .
The test and samfirmware along with it is a joke
(If its already here, erase me , if I got into the wrong forum do the same )

very true!
once the video started, and that guy clicked run benchmark, i did the same with my phone and it ended up completing only a second later than the nexus s.. besides i am on 2.2.1 wheras the nexus one was 2.3.3.. very strange?? but if u overlook the speed of completing the test, the scores were correct. that is purely because of the crappy touch wiz....but this does not in any way mean that nexus s was faster in reality.. and hey did u check the colours in galaxy s compared to nexus s.. i mean both have the same screen but it did not seem that way, probably the nexus s used for the display was super lcd..!

Well I meant with this test that samfirmware should know better as to compare rfs with ext4.
The Samsung Galaxy S has rfs compared to ext4 to the nexus S. The filesystem itself will give another score in the "benchmark". But this benchmark cant be used as a reference. NOT even comparing speed on one phone. Look up threads about it.
And yeah the colors look better on SGS,but thats irrelevant too

Why RFS is on Samsung Galaxy S ??????????????????????????

Noticed that the Colors on Gingerbread version of Nexus S look a bit off. White looks Yellowish. Noticed this with CM7.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/27/nexus-s-2-3-3-update-adjusts-screens-color-temperature-we-go-e/

Naeem786 said:
Why RFS is on Samsung Galaxy S ??????????????????????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ive tried ext4 on my 2.3.3 and its not as smooth... im now using stock and its much smoother.
my phone is faster and smoother than my old froyo 2100 quadrant setup - yet scores 980 on avg on quadrant.
ive already left a few comments on that samfirmware post.
enable jit and add ext4 to samsung galaxy s, which is a match to the nexus s and the galaxy s wins by some distance.
2300 - galaxy s with jit enabled and ext4
1800 - nexus s
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

chrisjcks said:
...enable jit...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thing is JIT is enabled on JVK (and I think since froyo roms). Dunno why some ppl thing its still disabled
the build.prop line that everyone is tweaking is the one with stagefright to tweak/hack the quadrant score. (it pushes the score from 1600-1700 above 2000)
But funny their comment to me:
We just test both phones on his speed.
Its only a show how slow Samsungs own software is when you compare this with a clean Google rom. like the Nexus S.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@Samfirmware ITS NOT A SPEED TEST! Its testing books with tanks....
Samfirmware
We are bringing Samsung mobile fans together!
Trusted by 3 Site Members!

i am running stock xxjvk, rooted with cf-root 2.7.
started the benchmark at the same time, finished it 13 seconds BEFORE GOOGLE NEXUS S, 990 points ).

It's clear that the SGS they are using have an issue when I/O test get stuck there at 0/4 for a long time, however, change this line in build.prop from :
media.stagefright.enable-player=false
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to:
media.stagefright.enable-player=true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And your quadrant score will be 1600-1700 points, now install the hacked kernel by supercurio and enable ext4: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=975349 and see your device score 2400-2500 if not more.
Samfirmware have proved again that they mean as much as a Quadrant score in a worthless comparison that is only meant to promote Nexus S against Galaxy S, even though that we all know that they are mainly the same device.
Thanks to PAGOT for this find

Quadrant means nothing, in my desire I had about 3000pts, on my galaxy s about 2400pts but the galaxy is quicker when you use it..

I know that you all say quadrant score means nothing, or maybe it's just sgs owners that say that (ducks for cover ;-)
...but if you go over to the Droid X forum, there is a video review of a Droid X with Gingerbread and it clearly shows that the Droid X Quadrant score is doubled with Gingerbread and the phone looks really speedy on the video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=339bnvTQ87g
Can anyone explain this?

nice ginger on droid x look faster than my Froyo on galaxy

Oh yeah, and just FYI, I though that the samfirmware video review was absolute rubbish too.

markdj57 said:
I know that you all say quadrant score means nothing, or maybe it's just sgs owners that say that (ducks for cover ;-)
...but if you go over to the Droid X forum, there is a video review of a Droid X with Gingerbread and it clearly shows that the Droid X Quadrant score is doubled with Gingerbread and the phone looks really speedy on the video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=339bnvTQ87g
Can anyone explain this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The topic of this thread is about comparing to devices which are pretty much similar to each other, both have Gingerbread 2.3.3 installed but they have installed ext4 on one of them and left the other with RFS, beside that the SGS gets stuck on I/O test which is clearly indicate a problem with SGS which non of us have while running quadrant...this comparison is worthless..this is my opinion.
Although this is pretty much off-topic, but:
I wrote how to boost score numbers by changing only 1 line in build.prop from 900-1000 points to 1600-1700 points which proves how worthless quadrant scores are.
Beside that, any SGS owner will tell you that he/she can get 56fps in 3d test, while DroidX fails to deliver more than 10fps in that test.
Moving to linpack, DroidX scores 10-12 MFLOPS, any SGS owner can confirm that SGS scores no less than 14 MFLOPS.
Based on scores now, how is DroidX faster than SGS ? Well it's not, but in the other hand I can agree that Motorola software is better optimized for DroidX than Samsung have done with SGS.

Thanks ramad, I did notice that the fps on the quadrant test were very very low in comparison to the SGS which maxs out at 56fps (on planet test) so I do agree but interesting that so many rely on Quadrant so much that it seems flawed.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1012556

Have anyone noticed in Quadrant if you are on RFS the database write/read test finishes very quickly compared to ext4 whhch takes 2-3x longer to finish. Yet the score with ext4 is higher. THis does'nt make sense at all. Something is really very WRONG with Quadrant.

Quadrant? oh puuuhleeeezz.. shocked @ samfirmware..