Hi all. I just wanna share my research about two gingerbread firmwares: KPN and KPH. Everybody says KPN much more stable, no SODs, smooth, and etc. and KPH not stable enough, and have much SODs. but how about the benchmark result?
Sorry, I was forget to take a screenshot of the benchmark results.
First: KPN (2.3.3)
Score: 500 - 600 (stock, without any modification applied)
Score: 600 - 1200 (with CF-Root)
When you've applied CF-Root, you will get random SOD issue. I'm trying to play Angry Birds, I can see the lags. And the battery will drain faster than KPH. On the benchmark reading & writing database the process was so slow, but on the graphic test it has greater fps.
Second: KPH (2.3.4)
Score: 1000 - 1500 (stock, without any modification applied)
Score: 1600 - 1900 (with CF-Root)
Wow, it's shocking. Even it has random SOD issue (stock or cf-root) but the performance is great. Angry birds, lags there are only small lags. On the benchmark reading & writing database it's really fast, graphic test fps almost same as KPN. And I think it has better battery, depends on the ussage.
Conclusion
In my opinion, KPN is stable enough but slow. And KPH is fair, the performance was great. About my ROM, fla.sh it's ready for packaging. But now, I will start over again and use KPH as base. How about you?
What was it about 2.3.4 showing up anomalous results on quadrant? Rumour or fact?
Edit: just ran quadrant on 2.3.3 kpn 1500+
Anyways kpn has a shorter wake time but slightly longer time for screen off.
consegregate said:
What was it about 2.3.4 showing up anomalous results on quadrant? Rumour or fact?
Edit: just ran quadrant on 2.3.3 kpn 1500+
Anyways kpn has a shorter wake time but slightly longer time for screen off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow.. CF-Root? MicroSD high class? I just flash KPN and ran bencmark with result 500 -600. KPH will show high result (and getting higher after you run benchmark again).
Isnt kph showing weird benchmark results that's why some people kept saying that it's irrelevant?
Anyway, good luck!
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA Premium App
chinoyray said:
Isnt kph showing weird benchmark results that's why some people kept saying that it's irrelevant?
Anyway, good luck!
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? But how about performance? I think KPH is better.
fla.sh said:
Wow.. CF-Root? MicroSD high class? I just flash KPN and ran bencmark with result 500 -600. KPH will show high result (and getting higher after you run benchmark again).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On ext4 with both KPN/KPH gives me benchmarks of around 1500, no difference.
Playing games, no difference.
So it comes to stability plus bln support
chinoyray said:
Isnt kph showing weird benchmark results that's why some people kept saying that it's irrelevant?
Anyway, good luck!
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree for this. Benchmark on KPH just to good to be true.
From my experience, KPN is better than KPH, KPN more smooth than KPH. But i don't try it on game. IMHO, the real benchmark is game.
First: KPN (2.3.3)
Score: 500 - 600 (stock, without any modification applied)
Score: 600 - 1200 (with CF-Root)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use KPN, and the results of my benchmark 1600 + +, and has not happened SOD. ...
KPN play game more better than KPH
sorry my bad english. .
my KPN benchmark is 1734. with cfroot of course. when i installed gingerreal RC1 (KPN as base), my benchmark became 1819. everything is so smooth. except for the android keyboard which is btw still bugged with gingerreal. but it doesn't matter since gingerbread keyboardis so much better. so legit. )
Wow! Thoose values are greater than expected... Now I'm packaging my ROM
Waiting for fla.sh's package now....
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App
fla.sh said:
Hi all. I just wanna share my research about two gingerbread firmwares: KPN and KPH. Everybody says KPN much more stable, no SODs, smooth, and etc. and KPH not stable enough, and have much SODs. but how about the benchmark result?
Sorry, I was forget to take a screenshot of the benchmark results.
First: KPN (2.3.3)
Score: 500 - 600 (stock, without any modification applied)
Score: 600 - 1200 (with CF-Root)
When you've applied CF-Root, you will get random SOD issue. I'm trying to play Angry Birds, I can see the lags. And the battery will drain faster than KPH. On the benchmark reading & writing database the process was so slow, but on the graphic test it has greater fps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey fla.sh,
my Quadrant standard benchmark results for stock KPN and only a few tweaks in build.prop are 1000-1200 everytime. And for me KPN looks better then KPH, althoug i didn't try KPH for a long time now.
What about CF-root for KPN and SOD's? Are you sure? You know whats the problem with it exactly? I'm testing this to and i must say that i didn't have SOD'S for a week now being on only stock KPN.
Cheers.
fla.sh said:
When you've applied CF-Root, you will get random SOD issue. I'm trying to play Angry Birds, I can see the lags. And the battery will drain faster than KPH. On the benchmark reading & writing database the process was so slow, but on the graphic test it has greater fps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i never had SOD with cf-root and KPN. i don't know about the battery drain since even with KPH, my battery drains fast.
quadrant scores are clearly not reliable. i am better off with kpn as it does not have sod problem.
Scores
There is a great difference in the scores.
But I'm just happy using KPH.
1jesper1 said:
There is a great difference in the scores.
But I'm just happy using KPH.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please don't revive dead topics
Sent from my MSM7227 with Adreno 200 using XDA App
EmoBoiix3 said:
Please don't revive dead topics
Sent from my MSM7227 with Adreno 200 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This tread just contains interesting information I had never seen before.
This goes about 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 firmware, so it's recent.
edit: Nevermind.. I wasn't aware that this is an old topic.
Sorry guys but why you use quadrant ? If you try other app like Antutu or SmarthBench i think that it willi be better. In my case the results on Smarthbench are:
498 / 982 tweak enabled; 7/09/2011 BlackHawkROM KPN
479 / 986 Tweak disabled; 7/09/2011 BlackHawkROM KPN
501 / 960 Tweak disabled; V6 supercharged enabled belaced 3; 7/09/2011 BlackHawkROM KPN
503 / 929 Tweak disabled; V6 supercharged enabled belaced 3; 97loopy_smoothness; 7/09/2011 BlackHawkROM KPN
On antutu bench i have: 1797
I know that they aren't stock firm but the base is the same....
Related
I've tried to overclock, lagfix, change roms and kernels, but I didn't see any big difference.
I would like to stay with real FPS benchmarks like GLBenchmark or others not like quadrant.
I've seen many people using ext2 instead of ext4, other say rfs is better, so I'm getting very confused. And also many people around here.
Each one of us has got a personalized SGS. Let's run each one of us GLBenchmark OpenGl 2.0 test without FSAA (The one of egypt) and see the results of each one of us.
Dlownload glbenchmark here: http://www.glbenchmark.com/download.jsp
Please specify model, rom, kernel, launcher, running apps, free mem before doing the test... Like every bit of info you can give, so we could find the best settings!
Thanks to all ! I'll run the test and post in few minutes!
Ok, here is the template 1.0 to use ;P just copy and paste and modify!
OK, got:
2438 Frames (21.6 Fps) with no fsaa.
My settings:
MODEL: European, I9000 SGS 16gb Vodafone
SPEED (GHZ): 1.0
LAUNCHER: Go Launcher
KERNEL: Lastest speed mod.
ROM: Darky's 8.0
LAGFIXES: On, System converted, on fast mount.
PROGRAMS INSTALLED: Very few, just wiped it.
FREE RAM: I forgot!
OTHER INFO: Wifi on, and overclock @ 1.2 makes worse FPS.
Lagfix will have no effect on glbench
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Bench marks do not say how responsive or laggy the phone is and unless you are obsessive with numbers are a waste of time .
jje
yes, but games performance is equal to FPS, so more FPS=More optimized system.
Just because that reason i proposed to use glbenchmark, as it is an only graphical test.
Doing the complete benchmark i only get 700, with FroyoBread 21, almost all apps closed, and no undervolt. Is this normal?
I got only 768, almost everything closed/turned off. I haven't tried quadrant since v.12, but i used to have about 1100. Don't know why.
edit: With 3G off I get 893, but still...
With data, localization, 3g off i get 800..
With wifi on ~980 with undervolt, smatass and multitouch (without OC) froyobread v021b
I now got 1038 with very good 2d and 3d results but sometimes my phone became slow and low ram and system fc all time only reboot can fix this.
With Froyobread 12 i got a quadrant score about 1100, but with 21b i got only 780~...
Any Ideas ??
Why do you guys care about quadrant scores.
What really matters it's ROM speed
but... if you want very high scores, click here
D4rKn3sSyS said:
Why do you guys care about quadrant scores.
What really matters it's ROM speed
but... if you want very high scores, click here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awesome, 1594!!
Not real but funny xD
thanx
Well I've tried xGin 5.4 after doing a full wipe and i got about 800-900, so maybe the "problem" isn't in our ROMs, maybe there are just updated statistics of quadrant, because I haven't noticed any slowdown of my phone.
1150 with gingercruzt
Actually I found that if you are using Standard's Quadrant,the score will lower than Advacned's Quadrant.
For example,I'm using Floyo v1.0,the score are:
Standard:~850
Advanced:~1100
Hi,
as i'm using my iconia a500 i noticed some heavy Performance issues. i rooted and installed several Roms but my Quadrant score keeps being low. right now i am on lightspeed 1.0.1 with Richard's Kernel and my Quadrant score is only 656!!!
i'm really curious about this any suggestions?
thanks in advance
kiark
Just a guess, but the cpu probably is not running full during the test. Might have to use a app to force to 1000 during the test.
Running 2.4 kernel? If so, the default intersctive scaling governor is borked so either use setcpu to change to on demand or flash back to 2.3. Im personally running 1.6ghz as max speed with on demand.
thank u very much, setting the cpu up with setcpu worked!
CPU really does not have much effect on quadrant score. It is the combination of the Rom and the kernel it self.
Sent from my SGS-t959 using XDA Premium App
IM using the xoom 3.2 rom
My acer is over clocked to 1.5 and here are my benchmark scores.
Useing Quadrant I got 3421 (best of three runs) and frame rates around 45
Useing Linpack I got 45.438 mflpos on single thread in 1.85 seconds and
71.53 mflops on multi-thread in 2.36 seconds again best of three runs
Useing AnTuTu Benchmark I got a score of 6159 and frame rates right at around 60 fps
Useing Vellamo (its new and a benchmark tool for a tablets browser to see how ell the browser performs does things like java and flash stress tests and load speeds of web pages) I got a score of 1072
naturallight said:
CPU really does not have much effect on quadrant score. It is the combination of the Rom and the kernel it self.
Sent from my SGS-t959 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not sure on this. if it doesnt have much effect why do you see such a huge difference between 216 Mhz and 1.5 Ghz clock speeds in quadrant?
Using Antutu benchmark, I hit 3600+ running Codenameandroid 1.3.3
OC'ed to 1300MHZ
Sent every time I hit the submit button
Mine is 4205 ! (Quadrant )MY Own Cm9-16 and CNA HYBRID ROM
Awesome, is your phone oc'ed?
My Score is so Low
Your Score is so high ,my i9000 only 32XX!
now,i flash to codenameandroid 1.3.3
Only 14xx Oc to1.2 Ghz
my english is so pool.
I am gonna try quadrant next...see how it fares.
ddrulze said:
Mine is 4205 ! (Quadrant )MY Own Cm9-16 and CNA HYBRID ROM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try the new quadrant. It seems like it doesn't vary much anymore
Here's my quadrant score, seems its at 1400+ as well
Sent every time I hit the submit key
The new quadrant sucks ...yp my phns oc.ed at 1300 mhz step with 14% live oc and uv ofcource ....and people this score is not fake ..i hav submitted my scores .!
Know where I can get the older versions?
You know that Quadrant doesn´t show real speed of a phone?
I also get values like 3000 and above with some roms and still lagy
and scores below 2000 with others which are super smooth.
So I don´t care ´bout it.
dark_knight35 said:
You know that Quadrant doesn´t show real speed of a phone?
I also get values like 3000 and above with some roms and still lagy
and scores below 2000 with others which are super smooth.
So I don´t care ´bout it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody is forcing you to post your benchmark scores mate
Samsung i9000
ICS 4.0.3 MIUI ASNET 1.3.0 with Devil kernel
Antutu Score 4249
quadrant is 4 kids
ryandabao said:
Know where I can get the older versions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
search quadrant 1.17 mediafire in google ..u.ll find it !
qrsky said:
Samsung i9000
ICS 4.0.3 MIUI ASNET 1.3.0 with Devil kernel
Antutu Score 4249
quadrant is 4 kids
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OC 1610 => hell yeah!
im currently on ICSSGS 4.0.3 RC4.2 with semaphore 0.8.1
Antutu gives me 3100 without any overclocking
its weird how different those results sometimes are but i got no lag at all running on 1000MHz and a sweeeeet battery life as well
This one on glitch 14 v3
This one on devil's kernel best thing is that cpu score is worse than one on 1610MHz :what:
My new max score:
my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
I'm on CM9 build 16 with semaphore 0.8.1 OC at 1150MHz this are my results :
So far i've only used basic overclocking on ICSSGS RC4.2 with Devil 1.1 CFS LED2 kernel. The rom works just amazingly and is super fast. I've not really tried to live oc this much because i need to manually set more voltages because the default ones crashes the phone. But i can say for example gta3 works fine with this rom without any serious issues and not many roms on sgs that game works even with oc...
i just now need to try and get the battery to live long and maybe after that i am trying to figure out how to enlarge my virtual penis with benchmark records
antutu is 3677 with oc'd to 1,4 ghz and quadrant is 1557.
ryandabao said:
Here's my quadrant score, seems its at 1400+ as well
Sent every time I hit the submit key
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i get 2.3k quadrant(latest version quadrant) using TeamIcssgs 4.2 rom with devil kernel 14.2..using smartassv2 cpu..no OC
Updated: 2289. under galaxy TAB
On ICS 4.0.4 with devil 14.2
Without anu UV or OV
Wysłane z mojego GT-I9000 za pomocą Tapatalk
I'm on ICSSGS 4.0.3 RC4.2 with devil 14.2
Sent from my GT-I9000
Previously with GB:
Browsermark - 99,857
Sunspider - 1826ms
ICS after this mornings update:
Browsermark - 124,672
Sunspider - 1488ms
Wow, roughly 25% improvement in both
Could you please try a full benchmark with Quadrant?
Quadrant standard full benchmark - 3748 (3871 on second run)
straxusii said:
Quadrant standard full benchmark - 3748
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks!
So a little bit higher than the score with ICS Stunner. Hope NeoBuddy updates it soon.
No real difference with quadrant, I think that was roughly the same as my GB score
oh ........great benchmarks .....why are people obsessed with synethetic benchmarks?
CF Bench 1.2 - Overall score 7601
Richy99 said:
oh ........great benchmarks .....why are people obsessed with synethetic benchmarks?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a geek thing methinks. Tried Quadrant on my Note running stock UK GB just now it got a score of 3977 & 3668 & 3732 which is faster than anything I ever owned...but it still lags like ****.
Quadrant Full Benchmark Results -
Stock GB 2.3.6 - 2684
Current Stock ICS 4.0.3 (German release) - 3445
Antutu?
Castellano2 said:
Antutu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bungaga
Sent from my Xoom using xda premium
I am getting around 3800 in Quadrant on ICS LiquidSmooth and I was getting about 3200 on official GB.
zen123 said:
Its a geek thing methinks. Tried Quadrant on my Note running stock UK GB just now it got a score of 3977 & 3668 & 3732 which is faster than anything I ever owned...but it still lags like ****.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep my turbo ricer pimped Honda makes 430hp on the dyno but still sucks in the 1/4 mile.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Can someone please post a Nenamark 2 and GLBenchmark Egypt or Pro offscreen?
Thank you!
Castellano2 said:
Antutu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AnTuTu 2.7.3 - 6769
MindBlank said:
Can someone please post a Nenamark 2 and GLBenchmark Egypt or Pro offscreen?
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GLBenchmark 2.1.4, Egypt 2.1 standard - 46fps (was vsync limited at times)
Can you please try the offscreen bench for Egypt?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA
MindBlank said:
Can you please try the offscreen bench for Egypt?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
60 fps
48 fps on stock GB. Very nice increase of 12 fps. I'm running an OC'ed GPU on GB (400Mhz) and it gives 68 fps. So the increase in case of ICS + 400Mhz GPU would be 85 fps. Can't wait to flash it.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA
straxusii said:
Previously with GB:
Browsermark - 99,857
Sunspider - 1826ms
ICS after this mornings update:
Browsermark - 124,672
Sunspider - 1488ms
Wow, roughly 25% improvement in both
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very, very good scores. These best everything AnandTech has ever benchmarked, with the exception of the Lava XOLO and SGS 3. Absolutely dusts the iPhone 4S, wow.