Database Users

Benchmark Tests on Legend 2.1 vs 2.2

Hi All,
Updated my missus's Legend to 2.2 today and ran a Quadrant Benchmark test on it..
best of 3 was 903 (avg is about 860)..
What are you getting on 2.1... and what sort of scores are you getting on the custom ROM's out there?
Post your scores stating which ROM you're running..

Clean Eclair, 2.1 = 4XX-5XX
Azure, 2.2 = 8XX-9XX
Cyanogenmod RC2, 2.2.1 = 8XX-9XX
Never benchmark a Sense ROM before so I cannot provide such information.

Best of 3 was 365 on unbranded 2.1 update 1
Sent from my HTC Legend using XDA App

Constantly above 1xxx with CM RC1/RC2 and OC787 kernel...but that's normal since it's overclocked
Sent from my Legend using XDA App

My result was 387 on 2.1 update 1 official Rom
Sent from my HTC Legend using XDA App

im_iceman said:
Hi All,
Updated my missus's Legend to 2.2 today and ran a Quadrant Benchmark test on it..
best of 3 was 903 (avg is about 860)..
What are you getting on 2.1... and what sort of scores are you getting on the custom ROM's out there?
Post your scores stating which ROM you're running..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using a normal 2.1 legend, benchmarked three times... 377, 332 and 361. Even more anxious to get froyo now then!

rajasyaitan said:
Azure, 2.2 = 4XX-5XX
Cyanogenmod RC2, 2.2.1 = 8XX-11XX
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed....
Sense 2.1 was 3XX (4XX with OC)
However, even going from 3XX to 8XX (CM6.1) I did not see any speed improvements in games. OC DID improve the speed

Skardy said:
Fixed....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You cannot get 11XX without OC'ing.

rajasyaitan said:
You cannot get 11XX without OC'ing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right I forgot to specify

First run on rooted Sense Froyo was 915. Second run was 870. Third was 927.

rajasyaitan said:
Clean Eclair, 2.1 = 4XX-5XX
Azure, 2.2 = 8XX-9XX
Cyanogenmod RC2, 2.2.1 = 8XX-9XX
Never benchmark a Sense ROM before so I cannot provide such information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry Sir, but are you ****ing-kidding-me? With almost stock 2.1 i had ~380. With azure 1.0.x now i have ~460.

I have not programmed anything in android yet, but I know programming java for some years and I think that I can tell you why those spectacular benchmarks doesn't apply in most games.
The improvements have been made in the dalvik virtual machine, which is responsible for executing the java code of the applications.
But if programmes want more performance, they can write part of the program directly in native code, developed in C or C++. This code cannot be optimized (more), thus applicacions using JNI massively don't see any improvement.
I suppose many games should be using JNI because of the advantages in performance, so they're already 'optimized'.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong
--Edu

no0neX said:
I'm sorry Sir, but are you ****ing-kidding-me? With almost stock 2.1 i had ~380. With azure 1.0.x now i have ~460.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry Sir, but are you a ****ing kid? Let me try to be as nice as possible here. Do your homework before you bash other people. Go to the respected ROM's thread, or the OC thread and look around for other peoples results. That is the average result. 4XX on Azure? Seriously? Throw your phone to the wall and maybe that'll boost the Quadrant scores.

I'm with you my friend. Some people are just ignorant.
rajasyaitan said:
I'm sorry Sir, but are you a ****ing kid? Let me try to be as nice as possible here. Do your homework before you bash other people. Go to the respected ROM's thread, or the OC thread and look around for other peoples results. That is the average result. 4XX on Azure? Seriously? Throw your phone to the wall and maybe that'll boost the Quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Legend using XDA App

rajasyaitan said:
I'm sorry Sir, but are you a ****ing kid? Let me try to be as nice as possible here. Do your homework before you bash other people. Go to the respected ROM's thread, or the OC thread and look around for other peoples results. That is the average result. 4XX on Azure? Seriously? Throw your phone to the wall and maybe that'll boost the Quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Raja, the avarage Azure scores are 4XX because JIT is actually disabled in that rom, even though the option present and checked.

Skardy said:
Raja, the avarage Azure scores are 4XX because JIT is actually disabled in that rom, even though the option present and checked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it is enabled. I asked Ali about it before. But then again that was few months ago, I might be wrong.

rajasyaitan said:
Actually it is enabled. I asked Ali about it before. But then again that was few months ago, I might be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry my bad.
Seems like JIT was disabled only until Azure 0.6.
However I can confirm that my Azure 1.0.1 quadrant score was 4XX (which is kind of low...), and as I now have 1095 with CM6.1 I don't think theres a problem with my legend's performance.

Sorry for the newbie question, but.. how do I run a Quadrant Benchmark ?
I know these numbers refer to the performance, and that the 2.2 scores a lot better, but in actual everyday usage - battery life, speed etc. what does this practically mean?

Skardy said:
Sorry my bad.
Seems like JIT was disabled only until Azure 0.6.
However I can confirm that my Azure 1.0.1 quadrant score was 4XX (which is kind of low...), and as I now have 1095 with CM6.1 I don't think theres a problem with my legend's performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries mate. Seriously? The last time I used Azure I got around 8XX. That was version 1.0 I think.
versifier said:
Sorry for the newbie question, but.. how do I run a Quadrant Benchmark ?
I know these numbers refer to the performance, and that the 2.2 scores a lot better, but in actual everyday usage - battery life, speed etc. what does this practically mean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Install Quadrant and run it. Well, technically it is just numbers. But most of the benchmarkers do admit feeling the difference between lower and higher scores. Some say those are placebo effect, but meh. I don't buy that ****.

2.1 Stock
1st test
380
2nd test
381
3rd test
383
/T

Making my Evo any faster?

So I've been messing around with different roms and kernels for the past few weeks and finally settled on CM6 6.1.1, and the snap 7.6 bfs kernel, for stability and speed. I turned on the turbo mode with snap, OC'd to 1152mhz (freezes at 1192), killed all apps, and ran quadrant.
[Picture of a 2330 benchmark screencap was supposed to go here, but I don't have eight post haha]
I know thats pretty good, my scores average from 2100-2350, but I'm looking to make it even quicker. What can I do?
Thanks!

Move to gingerbread.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

sultan.of.swing said:
Move to gingerbread.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which ROM and which kernel?
weehooherod said:
Don't use Snap 7.6 on CM6.1.1, just use the stock kernel. The new kernel built in with CM6.1.1 is much better, Snap 7.6 is pretty old.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had 6.1.2 flashed, but snap wouldn't work on it and I was only benching around 1400 with the stock kernel.. Even with an OC

xsaqzw said:
Which ROM and which kernel?
I had 6.1.2 flashed, but snap wouldn't work on it and I was only benching around 1400 with the stock kernel.. Even with an OC
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmark scores don't matter. I don't even check them anymore. Wether I get a 1400 or 2200 its still gonna dial a number at the same speed. Im not playing call of duty on my phone or anything. I want efficiency.

A benchmark does not actually show how fast your phone is....
Cyanogen himself stated this.

quadrant scores =/= to your phone being 'fast'.
But if you care about synthetic benchmarks then you could trick your file system into giving you quadrant scores in the 3000+ range.
by the way thanks for posting this in the relevant subsection of the evo forum dedicated to development this will absolutely further the development of android.

Yeah man, don't worry about benches. If you want to brag about how high it is just PhotoShop it. It's all about smoothness and real world performance/battery life for me. Just find what setup works best on your phone
Edit: and this goes in the q and a section

Lol okay then guys, so which gingerbread ROM and which kernel for the best efficiency and speed?

david279 said:
Benchmark scores don't matter. I don't even check them anymore. Wether I get a 1400 or 2200 its still gonna dial a number at the same speed. Im not playing call of duty on my phone or anything. I want efficiency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I couldn't agree more, how instant can a phone get? Theres a point where speed wont be relevant anymore and its pretty damn close to it already. In my eyes efficiency is the future, doing more with less is something im looking forward to.
Sent from my Warm TwoPointTwo RLS5 Beta'd out Evo

lexusmike said:
Yeah man, don't worry about benches. If you want to brag about how high it is just PhotoShop it. It's all about smoothness and real world performance/battery life for me. Just find what setup works best on your phone
Edit: and this goes in the q and a section
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
**** man I'm sorry I'm new to this forum.
Mods: Please move to the correct section.

Thread moved to General.

Also keep in mind that the EVO's Snapdragon CPU was never a problem, it's still competitive even with the newer CPUs (with the exception of the upcoming A9's both single and especially dual core). Most of the "hacks" that raise the Quandrant score over 2000 are just that, hacks. They manipulate the other tests (non-CPU specific ones) to raise the score and make you think that you've just achieved some kind of new level of performance when in fact you'll see pretty much no difference.
Over clocking will help a little but like I said the problem isn't the CPU; a lot of the lag you may see on the EVO is because of the GPU. Nobody has figured out out how to overclock the GPU so over clocking the CPU will make no difference with the GPU. There have been some improvements in the drivers and if you're running CM or MIUI, you already have them. Gingerbread slightly improves some of the core graphics in Android so you'll see a boost over pre-Gingerbread Android but I think what we should all be waiting on is for the new Adreno 200 GPU drivers that Google will release when the OTA 2.3 update for the N1 drops. It wont magically make our EVO's into Nexus S' or anything but I wouldn't be surprised to see a noticeable boost in performance.

Oddly enough, I'd rather have the transition animations that come with some of the custom ROMs, even if they take longer. They provide a much more "fluid" experience. I don't like the jarring, speed-driven, animation-free transitions that come with stock ROMs, because they lack polish. As soon as I saw videos of those animations, I was in love. LOL. Seriously though, lag and lack of animations (which consequently actually help hide lag and load times) are the two things I see holding back the polish of Android. Just as an example (not trying start a flame war here, people), look at the animation when going from portrait to landscape in iOS. Then look at Android's lack thereof. THAT is what Android needs-to actually FEEL faster, not necessarily BE faster. So try something like that if you want the phone to feel more fluid instead of just achieving raw benchmark speed. Again, just my opinion (kind of sad that I feel the need to put that disclaimer in every post lately).

Award Tour said:
Also keep in mind that the EVO's Snapdragon CPU was never a problem, it's still competitive even with the newer CPUs (with the exception of the upcoming A9's both single and especially dual core). Most of the "hacks" that raise the Quandrant score over 2000 are just that, hacks. They manipulate the other tests (non-CPU specific ones) to raise the score and make you think that you've just achieved some kind of new level of performance when in fact you'll see pretty much no difference.
Over clocking will help a little but like I said the problem isn't the CPU; a lot of the lag you may see on the EVO is because of the GPU. Nobody has figured out out how to overclock the GPU so over clocking the CPU will make no difference with the GPU. There have been some improvements in the drivers and if you're running CM or MIUI, you already have them. Gingerbread slightly improves some of the core graphics in Android so you'll see a boost over pre-Gingerbread Android but I think what we should all be waiting on is for the new Adreno 200 GPU drivers that Google will release when the OTA 2.3 update for the N1 drops. It wont magically make our EVO's into Nexus S' or anything but I wouldn't be surprised to see a noticeable boost in performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that is interesting.. thanks for the info.
I hope it does open some more performance and maybe a way to overclock the GPU

Im not playing call of duty on my phone or anything. I want efficiency.[/QUOTE said:
Lmao
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Accurate benchmarking.

Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.

OmegaRED^ said:
Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, will give it a try but it'd been better if you post this in themes & apps I guess
by the way what scores do you get with this rom in quadrant?

Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market

i've got 1973 on CM6 006 at 1.1Ghz

benchmarking
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.

kryptoner said:
Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2232 hmm right behind the nexus s
Cm6 wb bb67 custom kernel z
Sent from my X10i using XDA App

Try smartbench 2011. That's the best one
Sent from my x10 on gingerbread

All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App

pepy_24 said:
All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it's a good comparison between phones after having a average score for each phone. But like you say, the numbers don't mean anything. Everything is personal.

zodiac100 said:
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True about benchmark apps but I don't think I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see. What the OP is saying that with this app the difference between each time's score is not much hence why calling it accurate.

To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously

maddes1402 said:
To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It comes down to what you have happening in the background.
If your phone suddenly "for example" decides to fetch data off of 3G or suddenly refreshes the media midway thru the bench then it can effect your score. this is why it's best to do tests when the rom is clean and gone silent. "no background activity" with data disabled.
Benchmarking is used to place the current performance of a device in a certain category.
It's no different from benchmarking PC's.
A whole profession has been built around PC benchmarking with people competing for a first place.
If your score is higher than everyone else you win the competition.

i got 2232 on custom kernel at 1113 mhz processor
Sent from my X10 TripNMiUI-IRIS

CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?

Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF Bench (full version) has the most stable results, and IMO its the best out there.
Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia™ phone

Linpack is perfect

kantk20111 said:
Linpack is perfect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linpack only tests the cpu.
I haven't checked how CF bench works yet.
will report.

Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF bench 101%

Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chainfire one!
that thing is scale-able across cores (single/multi-cores) and fairly accurate

Stock I9100G Quadrant Scored 4171! Beat stock I9100's Score!

Stock I9100G Quadrant Scored beat stock I9100's Score! i think it will get more score than mod i9100 once have mod with kernel oc to higher clock speed! so OMAP is powerful than Exynos
My I9100G scored 4171

The picture redirects to another picture. If you want to do sth, do it correctly... ffs What's the number? I've scored 4004 on stock i9100...

update already.. sorry for the mistake image link.. i score at 4171 at stock i9100G!

updated already.. sorry for the mistaked image link.. i score at 4171 at stock i9100G!

Quadrant score means nothing. It means less then incorrectly posted pic and double posts.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

MS. said:
Quadrant score means nothing. It means less then incorrectly posted pic and double posts.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, that is cause i am not familiar to make posting... i can swear that is 100% real! Or you not satisfied that your i9100 lose? i can make a video if you want to see...

well my i9100 is cleverer than you. i think you didn't get it. quadrant sucks and nobody cares about quadrant scores.

rauschkugl said:
well my i9100 is cleverer than you. i think you didn't get it. quadrant sucks and nobody cares about quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
are you saying stupid? then you how to measure the performance on one phone... you think u is god can measure yourself? Please be manner while using your word.. TQ

well then don't spam the forum with stupid threads. quadrant wasn't updated for ages, it's not meant for testing dualcore chips and you always get completely different scores when running it different times. only noobs care about quadrant scores.

All stock so you are noob?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

donmarkon said:
All stock so you are noob?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your one already modded bro... see your battery icon also know... =.=

Can I be noob too?

rauschkugl said:
well then don't spam the forum with stupid threads. quadrant wasn't updated for ages, it's not meant for testing dualcore chips and you always get completely different scores when running it different times. only noobs care about quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, i know that is different score on Quadrant... but let say why old Android phone like one year ago Xperia x10 always got lower score than samsung s2? tat y in fact samsung S2 is powerful than before phone... If you think this is Stupid thread, why not you just ignore and keep your mouth shut.. and please be manner while using word... what the religion you have? so rude are you!

TheSaw said:
Can I be noob too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
are you hiding a meaning behind?

i was able to score more than 4000 points with my old hd2. and the builds in that time weren't even running stable. so my old hd2 is as good as your s2?

rauschkugl said:
i was able to score more than 4000 points with my old hd2. and the builds in that time weren't even running stable. so my old hd2 is as good as your s2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, please provide your Evidence brother thank you because be manner

these were the first builds that were running from sd card. i don't have these versions anymore because they were not stable and lot of things didn't work and i don't have my hd2 anymore. this should just show you that quadrant isn't reliable. the gpu isn't tested at all.
and who the hell does care about stock settings on xda? nobody here has a stock phone. antutu or smartbench if you care about numbers. they're at least able to test dualcore cpus. but a higher score still doesn't mean that your phone is better.

rauschkugl said:
these were the first builds that were running from sd card. i don't have these versions anymore because they were not stable and lot of things didn't work and i don't have my hd2 anymore. this should just show you that quadrant isn't reliable. the gpu isn't tested at all.
and who the hell does care about stock settings on xda? nobody here has a stock phone. antutu or smartbench if you care about numbers. they're at least able to test dualcore cpus. but a higher score still doesn't mean that your phone is better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
okok. Bro.. so, do you plan to move to Galaxy Note? or waiting New Galaxy S3?

serge327 said:
No, that is cause i am not familiar to make posting... i can swear that is 100% real! Or you not satisfied that your i9100 lose? i can make a video if you want to see...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope your happy with your dev community
Sent from my GT-I9100

serge327 said:
Stock I9100G Quadrant Scored beat stock I9100's Score! i think it will get more score than mod i9100 once have mod with kernel oc to higher clock speed! so OMAP is powerful than Exynos
My I9100G scored 4171
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first of all, you are using a wrong benchmark to test. secondly, you are not comparing apple to apple. what i meant was your G version is most likely running on update3 source code. when i flash a kernel with update3 source code, my stock rom is able to hit more than 4300+

[Q] Banchmarks and reality

Hi. I have my HD2 with android 4.0.4 with HWA. My friend has Galaxy mini with 2.3.7 (CM7 rom). And he has better 2D and 3D score in all benchmarks. Why? I don't think Galaxy is so new and so better than HWA HD2... So are the benchmarks lying or I have really worse performance?
And questions to devs or people who understand it: why I have 5000 points in I/O on Dorimanx's CM7 rom and on 4.0.4 HWA I have 1000?

Galaxy mini has only 320x240 resolution, so it has a better score.

OK, but shouldn't I have better CPU and GPU (I mean Adreno) to process more stuff? But ok, I am not grumbling, I was just curious.
And what with that I/O speed? Because in HWA roms write and read is very very slow.

kubekpop said:
OK, but shouldn't I have better CPU and GPU (I mean Adreno) to process more stuff? But ok, I am not grumbling, I was just curious.
And what with that I/O speed? Because in HWA roms write and read is very very slow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With dorimanxs ROM you must of had data 2 ext enabled so the io scores were that high because of your memory card and on ics you are using your internal memory which is slower than ext4 partitions
Sent from my HTC HD2 using Tapatalk

kubekpop said:
OK, but shouldn't I have better CPU and GPU (I mean Adreno) to process more stuff? But ok, I am not grumbling, I was just curious.
And what with that I/O speed? Because in HWA roms write and read is very very slow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TBH, benchmarks mean nothing. All that really matters is the end user experience. If you're satisfied with the performance then it really couldn't matter less what you get in benchmarks. Think about it this way, a Galaxy mini might get a higher benchmark but could you really live with a tiny low res screen and TouchWiz (vs almost ANYTHING on the HD2)?

Thank you guys. I am happy about your answers. That's right. Mini has too small screen.
And one more thing: people (like Rick_1995) can play GTA 3 smoothly. I have still lags. I am not requiering 60fps, but ability of playing it comfortable Am I doing something wrong?

kubekpop said:
Thank you guys. I am happy about your answers. That's right. Mini has too small screen.
And one more thing: people (like Rick_1995) can play GTA 3 smoothly. I have still lags. I am not requiering 60fps, but ability of playing it comfortable Am I doing something wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Possibly that he is overclocking and you arent?

elesbb said:
Possibly that he is overclocking and you arent?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been trying to get GTA3 running too. Even after setting the governor to performance and details to minimum driving wasn't possible. Does anyone know how to do it? Should we increase volts?

I cannot overclock above 1.2GHz (I don't know why won't they add 1.6GHz from Dorimanx kernel).

kubekpop said:
I cannot overclock above 1.2GHz (I don't know why won't they add 1.6GHz from Dorimanx kernel).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dunno why but for me on Typhoon CM7 there was no difference between 1.2GHz and 1.6GHz so I doubt there will be for CM9 either. I can give a +1 to GTA running poorly despite what others say.

kubekpop said:
Thank you guys. I am happy about your answers. That's right. Mini has too small screen.
And one more thing: people (like Rick_1995) can play GTA 3 smoothly. I have still lags. I am not requiering 60fps, but ability of playing it comfortable Am I doing something wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nigeldg said:
Dunno why but for me on Typhoon CM7 there was no difference between 1.2GHz and 1.6GHz so I doubt there will be for CM9 either. I can give a +1 to GTA running poorly despite what others say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GTA3 on my phone:
elesbb said:
Possibly that he is overclocking and you arent?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CPU running at 998MHz (no OC), I'm using unreleased drivers so it could be them.
Daycrawler said:
I've been trying to get GTA3 running too. Even after setting the governor to performance and details to minimum driving wasn't possible. Does anyone know how to do it? Should we increase volts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
voltage wouldn't make a difference.
kubekpop said:
I cannot overclock above 1.2GHz (I don't know why won't they add 1.6GHz from Dorimanx kernel).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you tell that the cpu is really running at 1.6GHz and the kernel is just not faking it ? Qualcomm, the company which made the cpu never released any info about how cpu is clocked in hardware, or the pll limits, the multiplier limits, what internal clock logic checks for etc..

Are they going to be released?

Rick_1995 said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's how it runs on my phone as well. I definitely don't define that as smooth. I've played it on my Mum's Desire S and it was far better, with a much higher framerate and better resolution (although that's probably due to the smaller screen) so I personally expect more from the game. Also, what about Real Racing? Happen to have a video of that? Because I've heard that's supposed to work without lag but it most certainly doesn't (Raging Thunder and NFS: Shift do but Real Racing doesn't). On a side note, thanks so much for all of the work you've been doing to keep this phone alive, without people like you in the community this phone would be completely dead