Database Users

Quadrant Scores

I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!

SamsungVibrant said:
I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure there will be plenty of scores on the 16th

slowz3r said:
Pretty sure there will be plenty of scores on the 16th
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya but some people get their hands on it early, like some of the tech sites do, i.e. phonedog. Maybe someone had found a review video showing Quadrant Advanced being run, and could post it Thats all.

SamsungVibrant said:
Ya but some people get their hands on it early, like some of the tech sites do, i.e. phonedog. Maybe someone had found a review video showing Quadrant Advanced being run, and could post it Thats all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that if androidandme get ahold of one early theyll bench it

SamsungVibrant said:
I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is obsolete. It was designed for Snapdragon architecture.

Engadget just ran the dual core LG Star running 2.2 through quadrant and it only scored 2100. I know Galaxy s phones with the file system fix has beat this easily, which makes me wonder, will the Nexus S have the same file issue problem?
If the dual core lg star was coming out next Thursday as well, I would still get the Nexus S.

the nexus s will have ext4 on the system, data, cache etc. and vfat on the sdcard. so there won't be any file system problem like the SGS already has.

Can't wait for futuremark to release their mobile benchmark and not have to rely on this quadrant bs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM_3QG4U63I&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Also its been said million times galaxy s lag fix trick quadrant I/O scores not actual performance gain.
I don't see nexus s getting any higher than 16K at moment vibrant around 12-13 with Eugene new non lag fix that's base off new leaked firmware for i9000
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

I'm fully sure that the Nexus S will have a wonderfully smooth experience.
And I think that this is all that matters.

someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread

bananenlarry said:
someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya I don't know why he made a whole new thread instead of posting it in here. Anyway, I think he referenced phonedog, but I can't find it anywhere on phonedogs site.

SamsungVibrant said:
Ya I don't know why he made a whole new thread instead of posting it in here. Anyway, I think he referenced phonedog, but I can't find it anywhere on phonedogs site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He did it because he was at work at the time, found the info and was excited to share it.

bananenlarry said:
someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm..... 1631 is not a very compelling score for my N1, so the NS had better exceed 1631 by a mile, or else what's the point???

makelegs said:
Ummm..... 1631 is not a very compelling score for my N1, so the NS had better exceed 1631 by a mile, or else what's the point???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.

Anderdroid said:
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is quadrant obsolete? Mind stating some factual evidence that shows quadrant is obsolete, or were you just stating your opinion as fact?

irishrally said:
If the dual core lg star was coming out next Thursday as well, I would still get the Nexus S.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
U LIE!!!!!!!

I don't I will still buy NS instead of that LG Star with dual core!
Reasons:
1. I am so tired waiting manufacturer or mobile operator to provide software update. So, pure Google experience is my biggest reason. I want to get the first update, always
Oh yeah, I don't have much time for rooting and ROM flashing.
2. The LG Star dual core benchmark are not that impressive. It is faster, but not by far, not fast enough to be significant. Hummingbird CPU + sgx 540 gpu platform is still not fully utilized.
I think, the dual core is more towards tablet. Good single core platform is more than enough to handle Android mobile phone, at least right now
andyandrwew said:
U LIE!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Check it out
YoutubeDotcomSlashwatch?v=wcOMLbIRmoQ
It's only the standard version and doesn't work at all...

Anderdroid said:
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant, used as a benchmark standard, clearly isn't obsolete, because here we are talking about and comparing quadrant scores.
I think what you mean is that the score itself is pretty much useless as a predictor of user experience. In that sense, I couldn't agree more!!! I've seen ROMs that get higher scores run like total crap, and ROMs with lower scores run like a dream. I've also seen ROMs with high scores run super-fantastic, too!
My point is...that the Nexus S had better outperform my Nexus 1 on Quadrant, otherwise it's just not that impressive of a statement for the Nexus S hardware OR the Gingerbread software, when compared to my N1 (on CM).
I really hope this phone kicks ass, b/c I hope to upgrade my wife's bb to the Nexus S. But, I know that I'm gonna play with a lot, too.... so I want the goods!
Just my .02

[OFFTOPIC] Motorola Xoom OC'd to 1.5GHz and benchmarked!

Motorola Xoom overclocked to 1.5GHz, eats Quadrant and Linpack for breakfast
Hold on to your hats, gents, because things just got real -- that's a Motorola Xoom in the picture above, clocked at a blazing 1.504GHz. While we highly doubt that's a new world record of any sort, the dual-core Tegra 2 inside seriously screams at that clockspeed, scorching Quadrant to the tune of 3105 (remember this?) and delivering 47 MFLOPS in Linpack. Oh, and in case you're curious, this achievement wasn't some random hack. It was perpetrated for our collective benefit by the master of SetCPU himself, and you'll find full video proof of his accomplishment below and instructions at our source link. Got root? Then you're on your way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey guess what? At 1.5GHz the Nexus S can break 4k without a sweat. Simms22, care to post some of your Quadrant scores
******Official Scoreboard*******
Premier DC Honeycomb Tablet: 0
Google Nexus S: 1

who cares quadrant sucks not to mention it still does not still work correctly with 2.3 i highly doubt its accurate with honeycomb and dualcore CPU
also you're talking about a 4k plus score with voodoo

demo23019 said:
who cares quadrant sucks does not still work correctly with 2.3 i highly doubt its accurate with honeycomb and dualcore CPU
also youre talking about a 4k plus score with voodoo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pardon? What do you mean by Voodoo? If you mean the ext4 hack then the 4k I am referring to was actually before the ext4 hack was implemented. And if its broken for both Gingerbread and Honeycomb then wouldn't it kind of negate the being broken? Since their both broken?
Why do people always have to **** all over everything? It was an interesting post and I found it funny that Engadget would use the phrase "eat for breakfast" when in reality 3.1k is not that impressive. Seriously though, why is it necessary to be an ass instead of just having a laugh? Clearly I posted this in good fun. JFC.

And only scores 47 MFLOPS when the nexus one snapdragon can score higher you going to say nexus one is faster than xoom and Nexus S i dont thin so
Being huge into PC benchmarking and im not impressed with what android currently has for software...Anything that can be manipulated into giving false result is bogus
reminds me of 3dmark vantage with nvidia cards giving off very high inaccurate CPU scores with physx is enabled
....Not saying vantage is bogus

demo23019 said:
And only scores 47 MFLOPS when the nexus one snapdragon can score higher you going to say nexus one is faster than xoom and Nexus S i dont thin so
Being huge into PC benchmarking and im not impressed with what android currently has for software...Anything that can be manipulated into giving false result is bogus
reminds me of 3dmark vantage with nvidia cards giving off very high inaccurate CPU scores with physx is enabled
....Not saying vantage is bogus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which benchmarks if any do you think are valid or quasi valid for the NS? I use Fps2D to test FPS

jlevy73 said:
Which benchmarks if any do you think are valid or quasi valid for the NS? I use Fps2D to test FPS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am using an3DXL for benchmarking as well as nenamark. an3DXL gave results that had the lowest spread, while quadrant was all over the place, having as much as a 500 point different..

Low Benchmarks scores

I know about the differences in benchmarks and how they arent set up for dual core, but I just ran smartbench 2011 and my gaming score is off by 1000 points on a stock xoom, I am rooted and running stock kernel. I am not sure why, maybe something is wrong with it.

My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App

Off from what? A phone? Synthetic benchmarks say almost nothing about real world performance, and they will always be different with devices at different resolutions.
A 1280x800 tablet will always score unusually low on a graphics benchmark that scales to resolution compared to a phone.

Usmc7356 said:
My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant also places a lot of weight on the filesystem, and my Xoom always hangs quite a while during database writes.
Also I think that getting ~6 FPS on their first 2D animation test can't help.
The Xoom is really zippy, take the benchmarks with many, many grains of salt.

I was just talking about smart bench, everything else is working fine, but the smartbench 2011 shows a galaxy s as being more powerful than my xoom, and the half the speed of a stock xoom. I am just wondering if other people were showing that they are below what a stock xoom should be too.

you have to make sure that these benchmarks are compatible with dual core processors. otherwise the results are moot.

I know that, but it is shows below the average xoom, thats the problem I am seeing, average xoom gets like 2k I get 1k

I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.

joepfalzgraf said:
I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Confirmed that is it, thanks for this I guess I was overlooking it and thinking my xoom wasnt up to par.

3.1 Quadrant drop

After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it

so i guess that begs the question: is your TF's performance lower?

Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed this too... BUT... the system seems a lot faster and more responsive, so i guess scores arent everything.

For sure score isn't everything, even more with quadrant.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu

Vellamo is a web browser benchmark IIRC, where as Quadrant is a CPU/GPU benchmark. I dont know about the other one you mentioned.
15xx is pretty damn low, I'm getting around 35xx with Quadrant at 1.5 GHz. Check your clockspeed in setcpu to make sure nothing is out of wack.

mrevankyle said:
quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or CF Bench
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA Premium App

Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated

quadrant is a horrible benchmark. there are hacks and tweaks to get you stupid high scores.

Wierd i get2 2600

Tortel1210 said:
Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras

My quadrant is 1.7 not rooted or anything. I must say this tab runs extremely fast and I have no problems with it minus apps crashing once in a blue moon. If quadrant ment something my vibrant has 2.2k and it still doesn't run as smooth as my tab
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too used to be quadrant this or that using it as a gauge...then after I owned a few android devices...I came to the conclusion...its a piece of ****... First its inaccurate...my EVO. 3d is way faster then my color nookut yet I get better scores with the nook...same with the tf...second...it uses testing methods that can be cheated by some settings...hardware stuff..3rd...if you run it 3 times...you will usually get 3 different darn scores that range widely. To me using is the best test...not benchmarks..however if you need to use this as a guage...do it...but be warned...for real life...it don't mean anything

sassafras_ said:
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.

life64x said:
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras

sassafras_ said:
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.

life64x said:
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he wasn't accusing you if being sarcastic, he was being sarcastic.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

Thanks, my bad. I am a optimist and thought my pessimist came out... With only a couple hours sleep my mind plays tricks on me. Oh well, go back to watching dune...I would have used my gom jabber( watch dune to know what I mean).

Only thing worst than benchmark nerds are benchmark nerds who are stupid enough to still be using quadrant software that's over a year old and is not optimized for dualcore or honeycomb.

Discovery(Can I call it so?) about Sensation's and Galaxy S 2's CPUs' performance

Hey guys,a long time ago in a galaxy far far away(well,it was only last week,but I gotta make it sound more dramatic ),I was watching video comparisons of the two phones on youtube and reading others like a maniac,trying to decide which is best.In every review that someone made a benchmark between the two and used Linpack to measure the CPU's power(believe me,there is nothing more reliable for the CPU),the end result was that the Sensation's CPU is better clock for clock marginally.
So there I was earlier today,trying to show myself how good my purchase was,and I was comparing my GS2 with my Desire HD.Before someone comes up and tries to defend the Sensation,bear in mind that:
1)The Sensation's dual-core CPU is actually two identical Scorpion cores,like the one found inside the Desire HD,just overclocked to 1.2GHz insted of 1GHz.
2)Linpack isn't able to properly benchmark dual-core CPUs,so the result you get is from one core.
Now,as most reviews showed,on 1.2GHz(yes,my DHD is rooted etc,check my sig) the scores of the Desire HD were slightly better than those of the GS2.Better...like 46MFLOPS against 45MFLOPS or so.
Then,the spirit of the overclocker took over my mind.So I grab both phones and overclock them all the way up to 1612MHz(usign Tegrak overclock ultimate on my GS2).The results are what I want to point out with this thread.
At that clock speed,the Desire HD struggled to get 60MFLOPS(In fact I don't think it ever reached that much,more like 58-59),while the GS2 was confidently between 63 and 65 MFLOPS.
Bottom line is that the GS2's performance increases in a more "linear" way than the Sensation's.I know most people won't overclock,but I am here to defend our phones!
In case you don't even care or find this thread pointless etc,you can pretty much press your back button and get out without flaming/trolling.Please?

Hey you went to all that effort so ill say good work, and having a positive thread about the gs2 is a good thing so double thumbs up.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

NIK516 said:
Hey you went to all that effort so ill say good work, and having a positive thread about the gs2 is a good thing so double thumbs up.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha!Yep,I thought so!
Well,it's a nice find for me.At least I've proven that the Sensation doesn't have a better CPU as its users would like to believe and boast about!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

erm... aren't sensation and desire hd two different phones? also, you first say that linpack is the best cpu benchmark out there, but then you continue by saying that it cannot test dual core cpu?
i'm a bit confused.

andrej.marinic said:
erm... aren't sensation and desire hd two different phones? also, you first say that linpack is the best cpu benchmark out there, but then you continue by saying that it cannot test dual core cpu?
i'm a bit confused.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep,one doesn't cancel the other.The only benchmarking tool that uses both cores is smartbench 2011 as of now.Others will probably follow.It's not a fault that Linpack doesn't benchmark both cores,the programmers haven't done the coding yet.Just that.
And yes,the Desire HD and the Sensation are different phones,albeit with the same CPU CORE,not the same CPU.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

tolis626 said:
Hey guys,a long time ago in a galaxy far far away(well,it was only last week,but I gotta make it sound more dramatic ),I was watching video comparisons of the two phones on youtube and reading others like a maniac,trying to decide which is best.In every review that someone made a benchmark between the two and used Linpack to measure the CPU's power(believe me,there is nothing more reliable for the CPU),the end result was that the Sensation's CPU is better clock for clock marginally.
So there I was earlier today,trying to show myself how good my purchase was,and I was comparing my GS2 with my Desire HD.Before someone comes up and tries to defend the Sensation,bear in mind that:
1)The Sensation's dual-core CPU is actually two identical Scorpion cores,like the one found inside the Desire HD,just overclocked to 1.2GHz insted of 1GHz.
2)Linpack isn't able to properly benchmark dual-core CPUs,so the result you get is from one core.
Now,as most reviews showed,on 1.2GHz(yes,my DHD is rooted etc,check my sig) the scores of the Desire HD were slightly better than those of the GS2.Better...like 46MFLOPS against 45MFLOPS or so.
Then,the spirit of the overclocker took over my mind.So I grab both phones and overclock them all the way up to 1612MHz(usign Tegrak overclock ultimate on my GS2).The results are what I want to point out with this thread.
At that clock speed,the Desire HD struggled to get 60MFLOPS(In fact I don't think it ever reached that much,more like 58-59),while the GS2 was confidently between 63 and 65 MFLOPS.
Bottom line is that the GS2's performance increases in a more "linear" way than the Sensation's.I know most people won't overclock,but I am here to defend our phones!
In case you don't even care or find this thread pointless etc,you can pretty much press your back button and get out without flaming/trolling.Please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In regards to the linpack, i think i've seen the same comparison review. I mentioned it in the same thread that i ran the test and also got near 47MFLOPS when i ran the test. Same thing goes for quadrant, i've hit as high as 3450ish on stock rom and then gotten as low as 2900. I've posted in the same website that their testing method is flawed because they don't run multiple tests

I hate the fact that in comparision reviews between GS2 and Sensation, reviews usually just say both of them use 1.2GHz dual-cores and fail to mention that the CPUs are not the same.
As tolis626 pointed out that the CPU's cores in the sensation are the old Scorpion CPU used in the DHD but have one more core. They are partially out of order, while the Cortex-A9 in GS2 are fully out of order which translate to a win for GS2.
On the Linpack benchmark, it measures floating point performance and Scorpion has a better implementation of floating point unit hence Scorpion is better than Cortex-A9 clock for clock in Linpack. But smartphone application is not bound by floating point performance, according to AnandTech, so we won't see that extra performance all the time.

well I got 48.208MFLOPS without any overclock on my SGS2

Like the majority of users, I'm a noob when it comes to overclocking/rooting/benchmarking, I just haven't gone near it (yet )
I watch others' videos on it. And basically, on the stock browser, on the stock ROM, the GSII always get significantly better than the Sensation....so I'm happy with my purchase. Seems soo pointless going for a "HTC" because it has the "HTC" logo, even though it's browser is poor and it's signal fails.
ok, the above is a stupid troll comment. But you get the point.

nhat2991 said:
I hate the fact that in comparision reviews between GS2 and Sensation, reviews usually just say both of them use 1.2GHz dual-cores and fail to mention that the CPUs are not the same.
As tolis626 pointed out that the CPU's cores in the sensation are the old Scorpion CPU used in the DHD but have one more core. They are partially out of order, while the Cortex-A9 in GS2 are fully out of order which translate to a win for GS2.
On the Linpack benchmark, it measures floating point performance and Scorpion has a better implementation of floating point unit hence Scorpion is better than Cortex-A9 clock for clock in Linpack. But smartphone application is not bound by floating point performance, according to AnandTech, so we won't see that extra performance all the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I was trying to get at is that the Sensation is NOT better clock for clock,it just gives better numbers at that frequency.It also kneels when underclocked and under terrible load,something the GS2 doesn't suffer from.
Don't be mistaken,the Scorpion CPU core is a really good one.And as far as I'm concerned it's by far better than the CPU of the Hummingbird inside the original GS.What plagues the Sensation is a terrible implementanion of the Scorpion core in a dual-core chipset.We should wait till some devs do their magic on that thing before we can call it worse.
Just my...5 cents,I wrote too much!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

tolis626 said:
And as far as I'm concerned it's [scorpion] by far better than the CPU of the Hummingbird inside the original GS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is this a subjective or an objective observation?
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/for...-gen-snapdragon-processors-how-fast-are-they/
they both seem quite competitive

vizir said:
is this a subjective or an objective observation?
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/for...-gen-snapdragon-processors-how-fast-are-they/
they both seem quite competitive
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Woah,I did state that ONLY the CPU is better on the QSD8255,not that the whole SoC is better than the Hummingbird.The latter was a beast in the graphics department(and still is),so it's more than competitive actually.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App