Related
Hi guys I hope im just confusing myself! While reading some reviews I came across the tool spb benchmark, and thought il give it a try.
I received my xda exec today iv not installed any other 3rd party software that could cause problems
my Blueangel M2000: I have formatted it and reinstalled windows 2003 (Original ROM from orange)
IV attached a screen shot of the results table
the results are confusing the hellouta me, acording to the site(from my understanding) the higher the result the better the device has preformed- can som one just put my fears to rest please
Can anyone else substantiate this????
If this is the case I'd certainly like to know how, why what rom versions were involved, whether or not hardware used in both devices can be verified as the same hardware...
Who benchmarked the 2 devices?????
Can Anyone shed any light on this????????
The comparison is extremely unfair. If you put 8GB of RAM inside your PC, made a RAMDrive, and installed Windows XP into that, it would be far faster than if XP was installed on a hard disk. But you would lose ALL your data if the power source got interrupted.
That analogy is the same when comparing WM5 devices to WM2003SE devices. WM2003SE is installed into RAM, WM5 is installed into flash (persistent storage). Flash storage is a lot slower than RAM, but it uses a LOT less battery power than RAM, and you lose nothing if the battery dies. This is clearly a far more sensible and superior way of doing things, but at the expense of some speed.
I know which I'd rather have - more battery life and built-in NAND flash storage every time.
'disk' i/o is going to be worse because of the persistant storage. Writing to flash is much slower than to RAM.
Can't understand why the cpu rated much worse though.
Could this be partly because the Exec does NOT have a dedicated ATI chipset for GFX, hence the CPU is always worrying about the display.
Obviously a completely similar machine with ATI graphics chip would be quicker, so i expect that makes a difference even when you think all the apps are closed.
This seems to be the case, just received my exec and in comparison to my xda IIi it does seem a lot more sluggish. Even web browsing using both gprs & 3g is slower.
Is this a common issue or rom specifc?
I just ran XRick, MAN ITS SLOW!!!
I could play smooth realtime on my Himalaya (XDAII) but now? Damn, I cant play it at all. its painfull.....
Going to try Pocket Hack Master to see if that fixes it.
Damn this thing is slow.
hi everybody.
i am thinking about to buy a htc wizard (qtek 9100).
i now noticed that the qtek s110 has 416mhz, but the 9100 only 200.
is there a big difference between the two, or is the 200mhz processor as fast as the one with 416?
thx
the Wizard has a differend type of processor than the s110. Its kind of like Intel vs AMD. The mhz doesn't mean it is slower.
I think the wizard is slightly quicker then the intel one but what slows it down is lack of programs using the texas instruments processor extensions and the
non persistant program memory which slows the program loading times quite a lot.
but u get more use out of your batt as it doesnt reserve 30% batt life for ram.
Does the universal lose everything if the battery goes to 0% ? I thought the wizard and the universal were both the same in that they retained their status even on no power ?
knowsleyroader: you are correct. They use persistent memory that will be retained without power. They're slower as a result, but the benefit is what is considered a marginal battery life improvement.
All should read this:
http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2005/11/17/494177.aspx
Wizard is generally considered fine for cpu power. I've never used it, but most seem to say it's fine on everything except Skype (which some have found ok). Since you can't get another device with WM5 of the Magician's size (I think), the Wizard is pretty much your only choice right now.
Unless you've got a 700w
V
Pocket Quake runs at a respectable 8.5fps (default settings), and 14.5 (optiomized settings, no sound). I have the Spb Benchmarks (overview below) if you want them.
I find the device slow, but it is not the processor that really slows it down, it is the IO.
On the keeps memory on power-off. I have read reports of the battery needing some fiddling inorder to recharge the battery if you let it run flat.
Spb Benchmark index 232.4 (iPAQ 3650 scored 1000)
CPU index 927.45 (iPAQ 3650 scored 1000)
File system index 94.72 (iPAQ 3650 scored 1000)
Graphics index 2862.38 (iPAQ 3650 scored 1000)
Platform index 273.92 (iPAQ 3650 scored 1000)
intel vs AMD. The mhz doesn't mean it is slower
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
speed is everything my friend
well i had a xda2 mini s had it not even a week and took it back to the o2 shop . and told the guy that the phone is far to slow for what i use it for . so i changed it for a xda2i . and now i am very happy with it never crashes and does not hang up while changing screens like the mini .
intel (r) pxa275
speed 520mhz
128mb ram
thats the speed of my 2i . in my eyes the mini is a phone and just a phone . it cant handle being a pda also . it just dont have the power . and as for the slide out keypad what a joke . my one was starting to get slack in no time . i just could not imagine how this phone would look 6 months down the line of day to day use . be smart and get something that works . ok it looks good but its slooooow
my 0.002 pence worth
musiccube said:
intel vs AMD. The mhz doesn't mean it is slower
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
speed is everything my friend
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Speed may well be to you, personally i find the functionality more important, but the MHz quote says that processor speed doesn't mean the device operation is slower. it uses a different architecture so the clock speed doesn't need to be as high for the same output (CPS would be a better measure of cpu performance IMO then all processors would be on the same scoresheet regardless of technology or clockspeed)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/posting.php?mode=reply&t
Sorry to drag this off topic a little, but I was reading the XDA-developer encylopedia, which gives claims duel core. Is it? And does duel core in the mobile world mean the same as in the desktop?
Thanks, Mike
Having owned quite a number of Pocket PCs and Windows Mobile devices over the years I have come across this sort of conversation a number of times.
The real point from my experience is that QVGA devices such as the Wizard / Mini S do not need the speed of say a VGA device such as the Exec / HP hx4705. Speed is needed on VGA devices due to the quantity of pixels that need to be updated on the screen. My HP 2210 QVGA device was quicker in a number of ways than my hx4705 and there latter machine was quoted to have more than a 50% speed increase.
I do notice my Wizard slow a little using PocketInformant when I need to filter or search. That to me looks like processor speed. But for that I get a good battery life while using the phone side quite a bit each day (it's a work sim card in there, fully paid for). My Exec however is quicker at data sorting, filtering etc. but relatively slow to update the screen, rotate the screen etc. Exactly the same as my hx4705, also VGA running the last version of Windows Mobile.
I have no reservation in suggesting the Wizard to people wanting to do a bit of everything. I haven't tried playing a film on it yet but I would expect that to be ok as long as the film is encoded to suite. But power users would likely look to either a more powerful solo device or have a second device to compliment it.
I was just lucky that O2 in the UK are offering such rediculous prices for both the Wizard and the Exec that I could get both.
acetuk said:
Wizard / Mini S do not need the speed of say a VGA device such as the
of everything. I haven't tried playing a film on it yet but I would expect that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except the magican (a model down, sports the same size screen) is 400MHz.
That's a very interesting point. But is it the same make of processor? I expect it was running a Xscale processor.
It might well be that HTC decided / realised that for a phone edition model with a small QVGA screen pure raw speed is not really needed. By moving to the TI processor they kept to about the same speed for most real world scenarios (loading programs, looking up contacts, making calls and so on) and then gained elsewhere (received good battery life etc).
All I can really say is that my wizard is faster in certain core areas of these devices (screen redrawing for example) but loses out on pure raw data processing. But as I said at the start of this I don't read the benchmarks. My wizard is a fraction of a second slower than my exec at loading PocketInformant which I can live with.
I think the wizard is positioned correctly after one week of using it. But then I never used the predecessor so I can't compare the two. Having come from one of the fastest non-phone devices on the market though I can't say I'm really noticing the slowness of these devices. Not out in the real world when I am using them.
Now, I just have to sell on my hx4705. And to say that must mean I am happy!
Thanks for the interesting conversation - I'm new here but already feel at home.
well, but I heard alot that the MDAcII with its TI CPU is too slow to open large documents and so is useless for bussiness and that seems to be a problem of the CPU-power!
I've been using a Blue Angel for the last year and actually think that the Wizard is faster for my own use, as a Phone first and PDA second the market that IMHO opinion the Wizard is actually aimed at.
I use SPB to close down apps properly that I use infrequently (word/Excel etc..) and just minimize apps that I use frequently such as Outlook/Phone and my Wizard flies. Even TomTom5 appears to run much faster than on Blue Angel with route replanning completing in the blink of an eye.
Fair enough if you are asking it to run intensive apps a 2i or universal will be faster but those devices are more PDA than Phone whereas the Wizard is the reverse.
For reference mine is an O2 UK supplied XDA Mini S branded device on standard O2 UK rom with all O2 active rubbish removed. Even the battery life beats my SE k750i mobile it has just replaced!
wilesd said:
I've been using a Blue Angel for the last year and actually think that the Wizard is faster for my own use, as a Phone first and PDA second the market that IMHO opinion the Wizard is actually aimed at.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ooh so I'm not alone!
Same here, especially for browsing heavy sites. The BA would take ages formatting the pages, the Wizard also takes time but less. Interface seems faster to me too (once apps loaded - loading time is dependent on the new memory architecture).
Browsing photos with Resco photo explorer is about the same.
The only point on where I can see big difference is video playback. I haven't been able to play a single video without hangups yet, either by using the same ones than I had on the BA or by trying to reencode differently (using TCPMP). A video that would play at 125% on the BA runs maybe at 75-80%. That annoys me because I would like to use it to show videos to people as a demo, which obviously looks less serious if not smooth.
I wonder if that is TCPMP-related or OMAP-related...
BUT, battery life is great!!
Hey guys, i'm considering 'upgrading'(?) from an xda2i to the mini s, and i've noticed you talking about different programs running faster/slower on either device. Was wondering if you could give me a 'rule of thumb' as to which programs would have loss performance in the mini s compared the the 2i?
Thanks
kilrah said:
wilesd said:
I've been using a Blue Angel for the last year and actually think that the Wizard is faster for my own use, as a Phone first and PDA second the market that IMHO opinion the Wizard is actually aimed at.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ooh so I'm not alone!
Same here, especially for browsing heavy sites. The BA would take ages formatting the pages, the Wizard also takes time but less. Interface seems faster to me too (once apps loaded - loading time is dependent on the new memory architecture).
Browsing photos with Resco photo explorer is about the same.
The only point on where I can see big difference is video playback. I haven't been able to play a single video without hangups yet, either by using the same ones than I had on the BA or by trying to reencode differently (using TCPMP). A video that would play at 125% on the BA runs maybe at 75-80%. That annoys me because I would like to use it to show videos to people as a demo, which obviously looks less serious if not smooth.
I wonder if that is TCPMP-related or OMAP-related...
BUT, battery life is great!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Similar experience here - my former PDA is a Dell X50V with a 624Mhz processor and PocketPC 2003SE, at times it's surprisingly sluggish. However, the wizard is more responsive - although I miss the VGA screen in general I prefer the Wizard for browsing.
My only complaint about the processor so far (I haven't tried gaming) is that it's not much good for playing back wmvs. I've not experimented much with it but this is an area where the X50V is very good - it can play highish bitrate WMVs no sweat. The Wizard seems to struggle, even with lower resolution and bitrate wmvs it stutters.
John
About this, how to overclock the wizard ... ??!!
musiccube said:
intel (r) pxa275
speed 520mhz
128mb ram
thats the speed of my 2i .....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Universal has all that too. But, guess what, the overall experience of that "flagship" is slower than the Wizard. Which goes to show, the CPU clock speed has b*gger all to do with how a device performs in the real world.
Take a look at this: http://www. laptopmag.com/review/cell-phones/samsung-epic-4g.aspx?mode=benchmarks&cids=2214,2290,pa
Go to that page and add the other Galaxy S variants to the comparison charts and check the FileSystem benchmarks. As you will see, The Epic 4G beats the other phones 5+ times over, and even destroys the EVO 4G's score by a little over 4 times. This is great news for those of us concerned about the lower ROM capacity!
They are missing a lot on those benchmarks. I can't find the nexus one at all, and the linpack benchmarks all seem to be testing android 2.1 phones. I think what people are afraid of with this phone is that the JIT compiler works amazingly for Snapdragon processors but not for TI OMAP processors or the Samsung Hummingbird cpu. People are claiming extremely high scores in Linpack with afaik is a cpu benchmark utility. Now All of the Cortex A8 1 ghz processors should have the same performance give or take 5-10% variance. However Snapdragon cpus seem to get 30-50 on linpack with 2.2 on the nexus one and evo 4g, but the droid 2 only gets 13-14, and what few beta or alpha builds of 2,2 have leaked for galaxy s phones they seem to get similar scores. This is what worries people. However I think we need to wait and see why the droid 2 is getting such low scores on 2.2 and see if the official smasung 2.2 build gets similar low scores.
Also that site says that the droid x/2 has the same gpu performance as the epic 4g and on top of that the evo 4g scores less than 10% below them. Last I checked the power vr 530 in the x/2 is half as powerful or less than the 540 in the galaxy s phones and the amd gpu in the snapdragon processors is supposed to be even weaker than the 530. Given this knowledge I have to say those benchmarks are fairly unprofessional.unscientific and useless as they are clearly biased.
There's no denying the inaccuracies in the majority of benchmark tests, but the only one I want you to see is the FileSystem benchmarks. Not the cpu or gpu ones. FileSystem measures how fast the storage/memory on the phone is writable and readable. The Galaxy S phones have an issue where out the box all the apps are stored on an internal class 2 SD card, instead of the faster internal NAND memory causing severe lag and even stalls when transitioning between screens. That has been fixed through a hack though, which requires reformatting the file system and 1.5 GB of internal memory which the Epic doesn't have, making a fix impossible for the time being if indeed there is a lag/stall issue on the Epic 4G.
The benchmark for FileSystem, if accuratee, is a sigh of relief, cause it seems like there will be no lagging or stalling between transitions out the box with the Epic 4G. Let's hope This is the case, otherwise it will be a huge deal breaker. The Vibrant can take up to 10 seconds to get back to the home screen from an app when the home icon is pressed. That would really kill the experience if it's present in the Epic 4G and unable to be fixed due to low ROM.
I don't put much stock in benchmarks, but I believe he was trying to point out just 1 benchmark in particular that shows that the Epic doesn't suffer from the flaw in the Captivate\Vibrant that causes the slowness. It's interesting that the benchmarks didn't include Quadrant... which the Captivate\Vibrant somehow destroy all over phones in without 2.2 post lag fix. I'd be interested to see how the Epic performs out of the box there... but I can wait.
My bad I was just tired and didn't realize it was the filesystem speeds that were being pointed out. Though I still question this sites benchmarks and would love to know what software they used for each one.
Does anyone find it odd that the droid 2 and droid x have different filesystem benchmark speeds? I would have assumed they had the same storage and file system. However the droid 2 on 2.2 is showing speeds considerably slower than the droid x in benchmarks for that. It just makes me wonder if it is 2.1 and 2.2 just being wonky, or do these benchmarks possibly have little to no meaning.
Nice find. This test has to be running from the internal memory since it scores the same as the droid x with 8 gig internal storage. The epic has less then 500 mb of internal storage so the sd card has to come into play after the internal storage is full. The issue with that is the sd card runs 2 to 3 times slower then the internal memory. My class 6 sd card with ext2 partition scores 1000 and my captivates internal storage with ext2 partition scores 2600. This may never be a issue if you only install limited amount of apps to internal storage and music, video, games and pics to sd card. This is the only thing holding me back from the epic right now since I have a lot of games that I want on the internal storage. I will have to test and see if it even makes a real world difference. If it doesnt make a real world difference then the epic will be my new phone for sure if the gps issue is really fixed.
My sources tell me, the quadrant score was 889 on the epic 4g
noobnl said:
My sources tell me, the quadrant score was 889 on the epic 4g
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm thats weird. That means the ****ty partitioning that causes the lag is not gone. The captivate gets 900+ with no lag fix. It gets over 2500 with ext2 internal partition lag fix applied. It doesn't really matter for the captivate since there is internal storage ext2 lag fix but that wont work on the epic since it does not have enough internal storage. They will have to use the slower sd card lag fix. I really dont think they changed the way samsung partitions the storage just for the epic but we will see soon enough.
or maybe they are adding RFS R/W buffer in their 2.6.32 kernel for FroYo
So this means if there is a "lag" or whatever, for those unfamilar with all the tech stuff..I'll be stuck with a broken phone? That sucks..I'm really psyched but I don't want to be stuck with the epic if either the vibrant or captivate would be better because they have enough memory to fix the lag issue..or would just simply switching roms fix it?
tpma4life said:
So this means if there is a "lag" or whatever, for those unfamilar with all the tech stuff..I'll be stuck with a broken phone? That sucks..I'm really psyched but I don't want to be stuck with the epic if either the vibrant or captivate would be better because they have enough memory to fix the lag issue..or would just simply switching roms fix it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The whole point of this thread is to say that the Epic does not suffer from this problem. Go watch the myriad of videos showing the Epic which proves this.
hydralisk said:
The whole point of this thread is to say that the Epic does not suffer from this problem. Go watch the myriad of videos showing the Epic which proves this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly! Its the not the filesystem at all thats causing the lag, its the fact that the other galaxy s phones are using slow sd cards as their internal memory and the Epic is using much faster NAND memory. File system is irrelevant here....
http://briefmobile.com/samsung-epic-4g-benchmarked
"Conclusions
The Samsung Epic 4G is the fastest Galaxy S phone to hit the market. With Samsung’s latest optimizations, this phone flies. We’d venture to say it is faster than the Google Nexus One, Motorola Droid, Motorola Droid X, or any other competing Android 2.1-sporting device. With Android 2.2 Froyo coming soon this year, this phone will undoubtedly rock the mobile world.
While other Galaxy S phones have forced users to place custom launchers (namely LauncherPro) over TouchWiz, we can say without a doubt that the Epic 4G’s Touchwiz UI runs smooth as butter. So, if you like what Samsung’s done to the user experience, you’ll be able to keep the Touchwiz interface without losing any speed advantage.
This phone won’t need a custom Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 lag fix come launch time, it is snappy and ready to go right out of the box. Overall, Samsung gets a 10/10 for getting it right with this one. Well done."
The Epic 4g was scoring in the 900's out of the box (picture shows 960) on quadrant. I don't think we'll have lag problems.
Hi everyone,
I found something strange with my note, I have tried to do benchmarking with the Antutu 3 times consecutively and keep all the setting the same, 1st time i get around 67xx for the score (with 3D graphics get around 800), 2nd time get around 71xx (with 3D graphics get around 1100), 3rd time get around 65xx (with 3D graphics get only around 600)
Why there is such a big difference? The 3D graphics point is the main part which affect the total score, because all other points are almost the same in the 3 test.
What could I do to keep a more stable result of 3D graphics?
Thanks in advance!
Anyone could test and see if u got the same problem?
normally first run of any benchmark will always produce a weak score. this is because its buffering the data into the ram whilst running the benchmark.
second runs and thirds etc. will always score higher because the data is already loaded into the ram.
not too sure what happened with your third run. maybe you had something running in the background bugging it?
Hi. I have Dorimanx rom installed, and other people have much better results in benchmark, for example I/O. I have 1000, others have 5000. And people write, they play GTA3 with no lag, but I can't. It's slow. I have 1GB EXT3 (I don't know how to make an EXT4 partition, and I don't see the reason to do it) and 256 MB swap. Rom is High end using swap. What should I do to make my phone faster? OC is max.
You have an HD2, they have different phones.
GTA 3 never ran without lag on the HD2.
The HD2 had never hit 5000 benchmark, and I doubt it will ever do.
Sorry, truth sometimes hurts.
Like Marvlesz said, nobody can run GTA3 smoothly. The processor isnt just Up 2 Date. So the benchmarks aren't so good as of the new Smartphones.
OK, I understand, but look here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1166948&page=1265 the post on the down of the site, second from down. He has 5k points I-O. I have 1k. Why? And what is this Input and output? What does it do?
And I Installed NFS Shift, in races it is fast, but in menu I can see slide show. What the....? It works on Galaxy Mini (600MHZ) - I understand, newer technology, but... it should work, especially because on WM6.5 it worked great.
[EDIT]
OK, I've installed NO ODEX version, and I have better results. Thanks for answers.
And "The HD2 had never hit 5000 benchmark, and I doubt it will ever do." I meant in I/O(just) i had 1K and others had 5K. But now it's fine.