Related
So,
Just compared most of the versions found here, before I start on my own work, I thought stuff it, do it. Here is the outcome:
XXJPM - Stock
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 994
OCLF - 1845
RAM - 114/304
XXJPK - Stock
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 1025
OCLF - 1917
RAM - N/A
Tayutama Edition v1.0.0 [I9000XXJPM] 14/10/2010
Lite
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 748
OCLF - Does not work
RAM - 139/304
Full
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 951
OCLF - 1830
RAM - 132/304
Doc's RomMod Froyo V1 (JP6-base / JPM-kernel) 13/10/10
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 875
OCLF - N/A
RAM - 113/304
Thanks for your work!
Doc's RomMod Froyo V1 (JP6-base / JPM-kernel) 13/10/10
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 875
A little lame, my voodoo'ed stock Eclair got sth. around 2000, gonna OCLF 2.2 now.
nitr8 said:
So,
Just compared most of the versions found here, before I start on my own work, I thought stuff it, do it. Here is the outcome:
XXJPM - Stock
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 994
OCLF - 1845
RAM - 114/304
XXJPK - Stock
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 1025
OCLF - 1917
RAM - N/A
Tayutama Edition v1.0.0 [I9000XXJPM] 14/10/2010
Lite
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 748
OCLF - Does not work
RAM - 139/304
Full
Quadrant Score:
Clean - 951
OCLF - 1830
RAM - 132/304
Doc's RomMod Froyo V1 (JP6-base / JPM-kernel) 13/10/10
Quadrant Score:
Clean - N/A
OCLF - N/A
RAM - 113/304
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Put in Sztupy's experimental ROM too the one that says NO RFS, its pretty good. I got a linpack 20+ & Quadrant 2000+ pre-rooted, NO LAGFIX.
ragin said:
Put in Sztupy's experimental ROM too the one that says NO RFS, its pretty good. I got a linpack 20+ & Quadrant 2000+ pre-rooted, NO LAGFIX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sztupy's has an experimental lagfix included. (The lagfix is the whole point of the rom)
Vanilla JPA - Quadrant - 999
RAM - 113MB
RyanZA said:
Sztupy's has an experimental lagfix included. (The lagfix is the whole point of the rom)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's strange that we call the replacement of a filesystem "lagfix"
This obsession with Quadrant scores is stupid and very misleading. We already know that loop filesystems artificially inflate Quadrant scores even though the device isn't much faster (i.e. OCLF on top of Voodoo gives you 2500 Quadrant but performance isn't truly improved).
It can be useful for doing base comparisons, but it just ends up confusing everybody and perceverating about a number instead of actual performance in the real world and smoothness.
Personally I'm waiting for Voodoo b5.
I'm currently using Doc's Mod for JPM/JP6 and I got 1030 Quadrant with no lagfix. Not sure why the OP said it wouldn't run.
with the same rom, if you run the quadrant test several times, the score varies...
all froyos are scoring about 900 - 1050 without LagFix and 1800 - 2000 with lagfix
chambo622 said:
this obsession with quadrant scores is stupid and very misleading. We already know that loop filesystems artificially inflate quadrant scores even though the device isn't much faster (i.e. Oclf on top of voodoo gives you 2500 quadrant but performance isn't truly improved).
It can be useful for doing base comparisons, but it just ends up confusing everybody and perceverating about a number instead of actual performance in the real world and smoothness.
Personally i'm waiting for voodoo b5.
I'm currently using doc's mod for jpm/jp6 and i got 1030 quadrant with no lagfix. Not sure why the op said it wouldn't run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+10000000 :d
Imo none of these benchmarks are able to really rate the overall perfomance of the different firmwares...
Reminds me a bit of DirectX-Benchmarks, same show but different artists
chambo622 said:
This obsession with Quadrant scores is stupid and very misleading. We already know that loop filesystems artificially inflate Quadrant scores even though the device isn't much faster (i.e. OCLF on top of Voodoo gives you 2500 Quadrant but performance isn't truly improved).
It can be useful for doing base comparisons, but it just ends up confusing everybody and perceverating about a number instead of actual performance in the real world and smoothness.
Personally I'm waiting for Voodoo b5.
I'm currently using Doc's Mod for JPM/JP6 and I got 1030 Quadrant with no lagfix. Not sure why the OP said it wouldn't run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well it actually does give what it says and it's no quadrant error. It's just that probably no app other than a badly coded touch wiz launcher will ever need a faster memory.
Try noticing differences on your system with a 5600RPM HDD and a 7200HDD.
You won't feel any difference and only benchmarking software will be able to tell.
However if it's possible (because rfs is a crappy file system) why not replace it?
It's like going from FAT32 to NTFS, it's there, it's better so why not use it?
^^ welcome after, there's like three mods trying to accomplish right now..
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
A while back I posted about how I managed to get a ridiculous score of 2597 on Quadrant using Dameon87 and noobnl's ramdrive hack, and achieved the highest (and it's still standing) stock clock Quadrant score on SmartphoneBenchmarks.com.
After I posted the score, I complained about it on SmartphoneBenchmark's forums, and was informed by an admin that they were aware of the skewed scores in Quadrant and working on a benchmark tool of their own.
Well that tool was released and today I gave it a spin. Its called Smartbench 2010 and is currently free on the Android Market. It runs a series of tests and splits the results into a Productivity Index (CPU) and a Games Index (GPU). The Epic performs VERY well on this benchmark; I scored 1178 and 2610 in Productivity and Games respectfully, while the HTC G2 scores 1045 and 1396.
But here's the real test; we all know that phones with the RFS file system perform very poorly on Quadrant... the benchmark doesn't get along with the file system well and the result is bad scores. I had a couple guys in the freenode #samsung-epic IRC chat run scores, and DRockstar with RFS got 1133 and 2521. It looks like this benchmark actually scores I/O on RFS accurately!
However, I'm still skeptical, and I'd like to see some more scores first. So download it, run some benchmarks, and post back here with your results.
Be sure to post what ROM you're running and if you're on EXT4 or RFS. Don't forget to kill your background apps before testing, I forgot to and got a pretty bad score the first time.
I'd recommend running the benchmark at least twice to be sure your phone is running at its best.
Me: Quantum ROM 2.7, EXT4
Productivity Index: 1178
Games Index: 2610
EDIT - I'd also like to give a shout out to a couple other benchmark apps that I think are pretty good. GLBenchmark (not on market, has to be downloaded from their website and installed) and 0xbench, which the guys in IRC introduced me to, a very comprehensive benchmark tool.
EDIT2 - I also would like to make it clear that I don't condone the use of any benchmark score as "proof" of any piece of hardware or ROM as being better than any other. Every phone is different and will perform slightly differently depending upon dozens of different reasons. In addition, ALL benchmark tools are susceptible to error and manipulation, particularly when you consider that our OS is running on top of a VM over the hardware and thus the hardware is not being natively tested by the benchmark tool (AFAIK). Lastly, what a benchmark cannot test is your own experience with the phone or ROM, how well it "feels" to perform for you, how much you enjoy using it, etc. Employ common sense when citing benchmarks!
UPDATE - 1/13 - An update is available for the application with more devices in the scores comparison list.
Bonsai 1.1.3 , EXT4 , No-Journal mod
Prod. Index: 947
Games Index: 2207
Stock DI18 Rom unrooted. Why is my game index so high?
tphillips78 said:
Stock DI18 Rom unrooted. Why is my game index so high?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because our GPU is currently the best available in current smartphones.
Thanks for posting a stock score BTW, I was really hoping to see one.
EXT4 Quantum Rom
1178 Productivity
2715 Games
Ran it again:
1182 Productivity
2719 Games
And again:
1190 Productivity
2736 Games
Electrofreak said:
Because our GPU is currently the best available in current smartphones.
Thanks for posting a stock score BTW, I was really hoping to see one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I thought I just needed someone else to say it so I could believe it more lol. Thanks
1001 and 2304
Running supernova 1.04 dk28
Rfs filesystem
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
My Epic running Bonsai 1.1.3 ext4
1139 productivity
2689 gaming
My wife's Epic stock di18
700 productivity
2297 gaming
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
tphillips78 said:
That's what I thought I just needed someone else to say it so I could believe it more lol. Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No probs, if you're interested in hardware, I wrote an article last April that goes into some detail about the Galaxy S hardware and compares to other modern smartphone hardware. The article is getting a little old but most of it is still relevant: http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
1053 and 2484 using ext4 running Midnight 2.7
Electrofreak said:
No probs, if you're interested in hardware, I wrote an article last April that goes into some detail about the Galaxy S hardware and compares to other modern smartphone hardware. The article is getting a little old but most of it is still relevant: http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am definitely going to check that out thank you.
ROM: quantium 2.7 ext4
productivity 742
games index 2505
I ran the test again after i cleared all running apps "no reboot"
productivity 1130
games index 2631
That just shows how much the phone boggs down after a day of normal usage.
737 productivity
2698 games
Devoid Angel ROM
Ran again
755 p
2732 g
Runnin CM6 with ext4 and got...
Productivity - 1151
Games - 2643
Sent from my Samsung-SPH-D700 using XDA App
Midnight Rom 2.4 ext4
Productivity :1081
Game :2383
My scores
ROM: quantium 2.7 ext4
productivity 1193
games index 2692
This is a full day booted phone just held down home and cleared all apps then ran Smartbench
Another stock DI18 not rooted.
First run....
Productivity Index: 714
Games Index: 2468
Second run....
Productivity Index: 719
Games Index: 2403
Stock DI18 not rooted 736 and 2585.
Second run, without killing any background apps:
Productivity - 1195
Games - 2694
Running Nebula ROM 1.0.6 (Twin Jets) with EXT4.
Interestingly, successive tests gave lower and lower scores.
1132 and 2750. On bonsai with no journal mod
Sent from my Evo Killer!
Please refer to my post yesterday when comparing I/O schedulers on Galaxian V1.8 running at 1Ghz using the Androbench storage benchmark tool.
I came to the conclusion that there is actually not much in it and that I would use the noop I/O scheduler.
I decided (whilst on the train) to compare these results to RFS mountred file systems using the Androbench storage benchmarking tool.
Androbench runs sequential reads, sequential writes, random reads and random writes and displays MB/s throughput for sequential I/O operations, and IOPS for random IO opertions.
Typical average I/O benchmark results using /data mounted as EXT4 (noop)
Sequential Reads: 19 MB/s
Sequential Writes: 9 MB/s
Random Reads: 1161 IOPS
Random writes: 45 IOPS
I then converted all file systems to rfs and re-ran Androbench @1Ghz
Typical average I/O benchmark results using /data mounted as RFS (noop)
Sequential Reads: 19 MB/s
Sequential Writes: 9 MB/s
Random Reads: 1150 IOPS
Random writes: 91 IOPS
The results are the same except random writes are at least twice as fast on RFS than they are on EXT4 - WTF!!!
I then ran some Quadrant tests and guess what, I got a score of approx
1750 on RFS against a score of 2200+ on EXT4 - WTF!
Hang on, the only thing I have changed is the file system and I've changed it for a faster file system, yet Quadrant returns a lower score??????
Guess I could run the tests using a different benchmark but I've stuck with Quadrant as this is the standard test everyone uses....
If RFS is faster, why does quadrant return lower scores?
Is ext4 only needed to get a reasonable quadrant score?
Comments Folks !!!!!
Try a benchmark for database operations - as quadrant also measures this and they depend on the filesystem too - maybe the difference pops up there ...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
RFS IS Faster then EXT4 !!
Used RL benchmark which uses SQLite database to perform :-
1000 inserts
25000 inserts within transaction
25000 inserts into indexed table in a transaction
100 selects with no index
1000 selects on string comparison
create index
5000 selecsts with index
1000 updates without index
drop table
This obviously uses CPU and RAM but the greatest influence will be I/O.
Note that RFS and EXT4 tests were both performed after a fresh file system conversion.
RFS RESULTS (1Ghz CFQ I/O scheduler)
=============================
Run #1 42.171 secs
Run #2 55.54 secs
Run #3 53.417 secs
EXT4 RESULTS (1Ghz CFQ I/O scheduler)
===============================
1Ghz CFQ scheduler
Run #1 64.981
Run #2 74.136
Run #3 73.441
Well, there we have it, RFS is faster than EXT4 (at least after a fresh install), I did find an article stating that Quadrant doesn't cope very well with Samsung RFS file system which is why Quadrant results look lower than what they really are.
I think the logical thing to do is simply run with the RFS file system, and check the results of Androbench say weekly so see if results get worse as the FS fragments. Beats having to convert to EXT4 and proves that Quadrant is producing dodgy results when running on the Samsung RFS file system.
amazing but I had the stock firmware with RFS and now I have the lagfix with ext4, now is much faster... that's just a benchmark I think...
Would be very interesting if someone checked it after being on rfs for a while. I'm always on ext4 since i thought rfs would be slower after some time. And i think most people are on ext4 for this reason
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Why not use both fs? I have my system partition on rfs (as is should be read only anyway) and have data/dbdata on ext4 and cache on ext4nj. Latest speedmod here. Absolutely smooth.
Bavaria85 said:
Would be very interesting if someone checked it after being on rfs for a while. I'm always on ext4 since i thought rfs would be slower after some time. And i think most people are on ext4 for this reason
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
even i thought et4 is fast but i saw afta installin plenty apps its the same as stock ,no diff....so i am on rfs ,no lagfix anything,only rooted thts it...well the benchmark is less compard to et4 but i think rfs works fine for me on gb....
I don't know if it's just me but I do find RFS faster than EXT4.
Used to be on speedmod ext4 but I found apps such as worms, PvsZ ran considerably laggy on EXT4.
Converted back to RFS and lagging seems to be gone.
(sometimes still lags a bit but not as bad as on EXT4)
In my experience, RFS has come a long way and it is just as good as EXT4 now.
From now I'm going to stay with stock RFS.
Will check out speed in a week to see how well rfs is running to see if fragmentation slows it down. Perhaps we need to look at a new file system like btrfs which ubuntu are thinking about using as new default!
Sent using geek power
gsw5700 said:
Will check out speed in a week to see how well rfs is running to see if fragmentation slows it down. Perhaps we need to look at a new file system like btrfs which ubuntu are thinking about using as new default!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RFS is a FAT based filesystem, right? Fragmentation will definitely slow it down with the time. And that is something that does not happen with more advanced filesystems like xfs, ext4 or btrfs.
Using btrfs is a very good idea. This is especially true, as it also has some enhancements for flash based storage. But not as long as it is still not considered stable by kernel developers....
BTW. don't trust any benchmark that you have not falsified yourself
Try damiens latest ext4 and no jounals. I'm getting quadrant score 3300+.
Sent via ET and he phoned it in
me_ashman said:
Try damiens latest ext4 and no jounals. I'm getting quadrant score 3300+.
Sent via ET and he phoned it in
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thread is actually exactly NOT about quadrant scores because they don't tell anything. I hear people getting 5000+ by just setting up things that quadrant likes. This doesn't tell you anything about the actual performance of your phone.
The only reason I use quadrant or other benchmarks is to see 2d/3d performance. Although this doesn't tell you everything since framerate is often capped at 56/67 hz.
Is this possible with SGS stock-based ROMs?
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/enter-godmode/
No idea if it is possible but i think it is since partition is not that much device related.
Would be cool if some Dev took a look at this...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Hybrid Core said:
amazing but I had the stock firmware with RFS and now I have the lagfix with ext4, now is much faster... that's just a benchmark I think...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 my sgs is definitely faster with ext4 than with stock RFS.
Inviato dal mio GT-I9000 usando Tapatalk
Been using rfs for a while now and can't really feel any difference.
Sent using geek power
Bavaria85 said:
This thread is actually exactly NOT about quadrant scores because they don't tell anything. I hear people getting 5000+ by just setting up things that quadrant likes. This doesn't tell you anything about the actual performance of your phone.
The only reason I use quadrant or other benchmarks is to see 2d/3d performance. Although this doesn't tell you everything since framerate is often capped at 56/67 hz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool no probs
Sent via ET and he phoned it in
Found it!
Usefull thread...thanks!!
Subscribing
Posted you some questions on the Galaxian thread
You can answer them here if you like
Thanks again!
elhennig said:
.............knip............
BTW. don't trust any benchmark that you have not falsified yourself
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RIGHT! :
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
My quadrant is bigger than yours:::
http://androidspin.com/2010/08/23/my-quadrant-is-bigger-than-your-quadrant/
The only filesystem that I've felt significantly faster than rfs is ext2. ext 4 feels a tad SLOWER than rfs and can fragmentation affect flash devices? I believe fragmentation is only an issue with magnetic drives...
Anyway, ext2 should be great since you rarely have a power outage (even if the battery runs out, the phone shuts down...) I used all ext2 with damian's kernel (back a while ago when I used it) and you could tell apps were snappier and started much faster, while on ext4 I even felt that the phone slowed down. I blame journaling (which imho isn't really needed)
Alright thought I would create this thread to let others people help which ROM/Kernel to choose and is most stable and smooth. And what things can make our phone laggy. Here are mine-
ROM - Kyrillos 7.5 beta
Kernel - G3Mod 1.9 Performance
Performance - Bit Laggy and FC's..
Memory Card - 8GB 4 Class
Partition and Apps Installed - 1GB Ex4, 128 Apps, 430MB free
Benchmark Score - 328
Battery Life - Didn't tested
----------------------
Currently I am using these with new kernel-
ROM - Kyrillos 7.5 beta
Kernel - FuguMod 1.3Ghz
Performance - Smooth, Stable and Fast
Memory Card - 8GB 4 Class
Partiton and Apps Installed - 1GB Ex4, 128 Apps, 430MB free
Benchmark Score - 569
Battery Life - Good
current-
(basicaly for best performance, games)
ROM- cm7 alpha 4
kernel - cm7 ultra oc 1.36 ghz
performance - fastest and best performance as of now
memory card- 8gb class 4
no data2sd or swap settings...
quadrant - upto 950!! (the highest as of now i think)(with 1.36ghz oc)
battery life - GREAT!! (set at about 700-900mhz , on-demand)
all partitions rfs, if we convert them, quadrent would reach 1100!)
before-
rom- cm7 alpha 6
kernel- cm7 ultra
performance - no lags, butter smooth!
memory card- same
quadrant- roughly 750....
battery life - again great with the same settings
all partitions rfs
That's beast speed. I will try CM7 once bluetooth gets fixed. BTW do 3d games works on CM Alpha?
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App
ROM - Kyrillos 7.0
Kernel - G3Mod 1.9 Ultimate
Performance - Good, but drags the **** out of my battery
Memory Card - 2GB 4 Class
Partition and Apps Installed - 1 :/
Benchmark Score - Donno why wifi not working..
Battery Life - 4+ hours
ROM - Indroid 5.2
Kernel - FuguMod Ultra release
Performance - extreme fast with no FC
Memory Card - 4GB 4 Class
Partition and Apps Installed - 1GB Ext4
Benchmark Score - 833
Battery Life - I'm very satisfied with the battery life
friend863 said:
That's beast speed. I will try CM7 once bluetooth gets fixed. BTW do 3d games works on CM Alpha?
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
fpse games show amazing improvment ...definitly more playable ...... having trouble with gangstar though....
getting white textures....dont know y...
ROM - Kyrillos 7.1
Kernel - G3MOD 1.9 Performance
Performance - no FC, fast, stable
Memory Card - 8GB 4 Class
Partition and Apps Installed - 256 MB Ext4, 128 Swap, 50 apps
Benchmark Score - 435
Battery Life - About 12 Hours with data connection constantly on, have to measure without it
ROM - Kyrillos 7.1(Personalized)
Kernel - FuguMod Ultra 1.3Ghz
Performance - Smooth, Stable and Fast
Memory Card - 2GB Class4
Partiton and Apps Installed - 512 MB Ext4, 128 MB Swap
Benchmark Score - 657
Battery Life - Excellent
ROM - Kyrillos 7.1
Kernel - FuguMod Ultra 1366 Mhz
Performance - Smooth, Stable and Fast
Memory Card - 4GB 6 Class
Partiton and Apps Installed - 1GB Ex4, 128 or 256 swap(don't remember) , 60 apps
Benchmark Score - 575
Battery Life - Good
I just bought a used Note II GT-N7105 so before I sell my GT-N7000 I decided to take advantage of it not being needed and run a quick comparison between the Samsung Jelly Bean 4.1.2 firmware and the latest CM11 (20150419). In each case it is absolutely stock except for the installation of Quadrant apk. The stock firmware is really stock (no 3rd party recovery) and CM runs with the CWM version it ships with. No accounts set up, no SIM, nothing removed or added except a 16GB microSD containing no media except a signed recovery and a modern kernel (to enable installing cm) and a cm11 nightly zip. The only additional change from set up is to connect to my wifi.
I ran the test several times on each OS and below are the best results from each:
Samsung 4.1.2
Code:
Overall: 4505
CPU: 6730
Mem: 5003
I/O :8669
2D: 321
3D: 1803
CM11
Code:
Overall: 4030
CPU: 7581
Mem: 3265
I/O: 6865
2D: 243
3D: 2196
Although not every run of the benchmark produces identical numbers the same differences between each firmware are reliably apparent in every test - CM11 has much poorer 2D performance but slightly better 3D. CM has better CPU score but worse Mem and slightly worse I/O scores.
CM 10.1.3 benchmark
Same benchmark, same conditions but this time it's CM 10.1.3 which is the last official stable CM release for the GT-N7000. This time I installed Lanchon's FPBug fix kernel so as to avoid bricking the device right before I sell it... http://forum.xda-developers.com/gal...ernel-fpbug-stable-4-x-kernel-galaxy-t2978107
Code:
Overall: 3765
CPU: 7135
Mem: 2324
I/O : 6094
2D: 314
3D: 2147
These were the best results of 5 runs, all were similar.
The most striking thing is that in CM 10.1.3 2D and 3D performance are excellent, comparable to or even marginally better than stock. CPU score is great. I/O not great but not terrible. Memory score ...oh dear - really bad every time, even worse than CM11 and that was poor already.
Probably in real use the most visible difference to us users is that 2D performance is excellent - no lagging, no jerkiness, no stutters - a really snappy feel. KitKat was a giant leap backwards in this respect.
10.1.3 feels nice and usable so my next post will be one more set of benchmarks in 10.1.3 with JB gapps installed, my google account set up and all my usual apps installed, and everything up to date, as far as is possible.
CM 10.1.3 + Gapps benchmark
CM 10.1.3 with Gapps and Rekey patch. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=io.rekey.rekey
Code:
Overall: 3599
CPU: 7161
Mem: 2368
I/O : 6004
2D: 317
3D: 2147
The undisputed best performer is Samsung Touch Wiz JB 4.1.2, and by a very long way.
Lollipop Benchmarks
I noticed Bauner's NightOwl LP 5.1 (unofficial CM 12.1) got an update this week so I installed it and benchmarked it. As above, totally default except Quadrant installed and my wifi connected. No Gapps:
Code:
Overall: 4577
CPU: 11438
Mem: 3206
I/O : 5853
2D: 235
3D: 2152
This is the only ROM, so far, whose overall benchmark score is better than stock Samsung Jelly Bean. The 2D performance and Mem scores are still poor and the CPU score seems remarkably high and I wonder if it is reliable or credible. I will try Antutu next to see if it produces similar remarkable differences.
julian67 said:
I noticed Bauner's NightOwl LP 5.1 (unofficial CM 12.1) got an update this week so I installed it and benchmarked it. As above, totally default except Quadrant installed and my wifi connected. No Gapps:
Code:
Overall: 4577
CPU: 11438
Mem: 3206
I/O : 5853
2D: 235
3D: 2152
This is the only ROM, so far, whose overall benchmark score is better than stock Samsung Jelly Bean. The 2D performance and Mem scores are still poor and the CPU score seems remarkably high and I wonder if it is reliable or credible. I will try Antutu next to see if it produces similar remarkable differences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The cpu scores can be higher, because my higher thermal throttling values.
With the stock values the cpu is running very fast into thermal throttling.
The differences in I/O and memory scores can be come because lollipop is much more complex and there are running much more services in the background.
It would be very interesting to see the results with the raw kernel.
If there the scores for I/O and mem are higher I should check which changes in my kernel are causing the regression
OK the thermal throttling explains a lot.
Last night I ran antutu on JB and on NightOwl. My Note actually became so hot after these benchmarks on LP that I shut it down immedaitely afterwards. Not warm, but actually hot (this in a room at about 15 C). Running Samsung JB it is usally cool to the touch and occasionally gets slightly warm. Perhaps there is a happy medium range that doesn't lead to such experiences? I would hate to run this in a hot climate (I once killed a £1300 laptop by trying to save a few pennies on AC in Bangkok... ha ha lesson learned).
I will do some more tests this evening or tomorrow (family day out today) and will include raw kernel.
julian67 said:
OK the thermal throttling explains a lot.
Last night I ran antutu on JB and on NightOwl. My Note actually became so hot after these benchmarks on LP that I shut it down immedaitely afterwards. Not warm, but actually hot (this in a room at about 15 C). Running Samsung JB it is usally cool to the touch and occasionally gets slightly warm. Perhaps there is a happy medium range that doesn't lead to such experiences? I would hate to run this in a hot climate (I once killed a £1300 laptop by trying to save a few pennies on AC in Bangkok... ha ha lesson learned).
I will do some more tests this evening or tomorrow (family day out today) and will include raw kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This values should not harm your device. I'm using it for a long time, and also with many hours of cpu stress testing. The overheat protection values are not changed.
see http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-note/general/antutu-benchmarks-nightowl-lp-12-1-vs-t3093720 for antutu benchmarks (ongoing).