Database Users

G2 benchmark... numbers sucked!

Just flashed enoms g2 rom and I cleared up what I can, tried making it efficient.I ran some benchmark tests on quadrant standard and was kinda disappointed in the numbers. My bests score was low 1100 after that it was 850,900, 835... very basic stuff any suggestions???
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App

If you ran the benchmark on battery power, try plugging the phone in. Sometimes the CPU will underclock itself to save power. If that doesn't work, download SetCPU (google it) and make sure that the max speed is set above 800 MHz.

On the stock G2 ROM I was getting 1600-1800... maybe it's the ROM your using

omarsalmin said:
On the stock G2 ROM I was getting 1600-1800... maybe it's the ROM your using
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah this is the typical range for a stock G2.
Those scores in the OP are so low, its almost like hes underclocking or something. Or possibly a running application using a ton of resources?

i got 2064. but i was running virtuous.

im running enom's rom and i had it underclocked at 768 and i was still able to get 1609

Stargazer418 said:
If you ran the benchmark on battery power, try plugging the phone in. Sometimes the CPU will underclock itself to save power. If that doesn't work, download SetCPU (google it) and make sure that the max speed is set above 800 MHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm... No... The CPU doesn't underclock to save power...

gravis86 said:
Umm... No... The CPU doesn't underclock to save power...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps the kernel has an undervolting profile built in and it's triggered by a < battery percentage?
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App

What should I have my phone clocked at with enoms rom?? I dnt have much running at all I dnt understand why its so slow, I was gunna flash the latest kernal and try that... clock settings please anyone
Edit: jus tweaked my clock on spareparts. I switched cpu governor from ondemand to performance and the clock setting. I put underclock at the lowest and overclock at the max highest... benchmark test put up a 2200... I feel as if this will drain battery like crazy only time will tell... what do u think, should I drop the overclock? Is it safe at that high number???
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App

If I run with Flippy's kernel, CM 6.1.1 Stable and OC my phone to 1.8 GHz, I can get a Quadrant score of 3037 (screenshot below). With it OC'd to 1.4 GHz (my normal OC setting) I can get around 2500.
{
"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"
}

If I'm averging 2500 I'm fine wit that my current settings are Enoms Rom
Using enoms cpu controls
Cpu governor: performance
Max frequency: 1,516,800
Min frequency 245,760
I dropped 3 percent in battery writing this message.... my main concern is battery and overworking the cpu.... I'm thinking about downloading set cpu and clocking the performance settings then set it for power save after a certain drop point........ does this sound logical?
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App

When you set your cpu to performance it means your cpu will stay at max all the time and it never goes down which is why you are getting bad battery life.
There is no need for that.
Yes you can do that with setcpu
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App

Maybe you tested your Samsung Galaxy s by mistake?..lol..just joking.

I score around 2500 on quadrant:
OC'd to 1.4 (normally run 1.2)
SetCpu On Demand
CyanogenMod 6.1

fablife said:
Maybe you tested your Samsung Galaxy s by mistake?..lol..just joking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey! Not funny! My vibrant gets 2035 in the quadrant! But I'm going to get myself a g2 because I miss the hardware keyboard

Got me 2813 with Virtous 0.9 <---- (sense rom btw) and eVil's latest Glacier based kernel @ 1.5ghz... life is good
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA App

[Q] Low Quadrant Scores

I know that this tool isn't a good indicator of performance... but when I see other people with the EVO getting 1200+ and I am at 800-900, I am starting to wonder if there is a setting wrong. My phone occasionally feels sluggish. Any idea's what the cause could be? using an AOSP rom with Tiamat Kernel
- Just realized I wasn't in Q&A forums Sorry! - please delete if needed

Stuke00 said:
I know that this tool isn't a good indicator of performance... but when I see other people with the EVO getting 1200+ and I am at 800-900, I am starting to wonder if there is a setting wrong. My phone occasionally feels sluggish. Any idea's what the cause could be? using an AOSP rom with Tiamat Kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good question!
Ive always wondered why some score so low on good combos.
I'm on CM nightly rc3 build 18 with savgzen 1.0.0 cfs-havs and scoring very well
{
"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"
}

new quad you will get low scores
imho quad and all the other benchmark test mean nothing

CheesyNutz said:
new quad you will get low scores
imho quad and all the other benchmark test mean nothing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree when comparing to other phones... but 2 phones of the same model should get similar scores right?

Stuke00 said:
I agree when comparing to other phones... but 2 phones of the same model should get similar scores right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you ran it off of a fresh reboot?
I find my best scores were when I rebooted let it sit for 3-5 min after reboot, and then fire it up.

Mark_in_Tulsa said:
Have you ran it off of a fresh reboot?
I find my best scores were when I rebooted let it sit for 3-5 min after reboot, and then fire it up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trying it again after the phones been on a few minutes.
I used to use SETCPU and I thought maybe that screwed things up

If you want to increase scores why don't you put your Max frequency at 1190 and min at 1190 with setcpu. High scores are a thing of the past.
~ d3rk

dirkyd3rk said:
If you want to increase scores why don't you put your Max frequency at 1190 and min at 1190 with setcpu. High scores are a thing of the past.
~ d3rk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is with my CPU at 1190. I am not trying to get a high score, but a score my phone should be able to get, you know? I see someone with an EVO get 1500 and then I am thinking something is wrong with my phone... I have the same phone..

Stuke00 said:
That is with my CPU at 1190. I am not trying to get a high score, but a score my phone should be able to get, you know? I see someone with an EVO get 1500 and then I am thinking something is wrong with my phone... I have the same phone..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Putting stock in scores is foolish though. 936 does seem a Tad bit low for sure. My set up is cm7 #36, tiamat kernel 3.3.5, JIT on, setcpu 1113 Max, 422 min smartass governor. I just ran a linpack and got 37mflops and 1200 in benchmark. This is the same set up I usually run on any rom or kernel. I try not to clock so high because it just drains battery. My evo actually can perform flawlessly clocked at even 998mhz. The only thing I notice different is that scores change and I don't really take a performance hit. Underclocking is the new overclocking lol. My last suggestion would be to play around with different kernels to achieve what you desire. Try savage zen!
Edit: just ran these 2 test just for you right now. Same results and I'm using same kernel you are.
~ d3rk

Run, it once, and then run it again right after w/out quitting. The if you run it multiple times (at least on my phone), all subsequent scores are on par with the second one which is usually 1-300 more than the first. Won't mean anything any different, but at least you might get some higher scores.
Also, you might need to try some different kernel combinations as well as different clock speeds. Mine usually does fine at 998 sometimes even at 921, but if I go too high it will start to slow things down. If you're not getting good results at 1190, try backing it off one setting at a time and see if you can get improved scores.
As far as comparing to other phones, even of the same make/model, you can't really do that. As long as they're in the same ball park, within a couple hundred, you're probably OK. Every phone reacts differently.
It also depends on the version of quadrant. You def can't compare diff phones running diff versions. I usually don't use it to compare to other phones, just diff setups on my phone. I know if I'm getting 1200 avg and then I all of the sudden flash a ROM and kernel and can't break 800 that something is probably wrong.
The most important thing is how the phone feels though. The fact that you say it feels sluggish leads me to believe you might need to try a diff kernel or see if something is eating up your CPU. Also, when you're over clocking, the min clock speed can effect your scores just as much as the max speed.

Ya give savage a go.
Kernel CPU setting:
Ondemand governor
Min 245
Max 998
My Device scores high runs smooth battery drain not a problem.

I just tested mine and got 1326. With these settings.. CM7 Nightly 36 with 2.6.37.6-Tiamat -v3.3.5 kernal.
Governor - Conservative
Min - 384
Max 1036

[Q] Slow quadrant score?

Hi everyone!
Last night I was sitting with a friend of mine and tried to tell him that the Nexus 4 was faster than his Galaxy S3. He wanted to test it out and we both downloaded Quadrant Standard and ran the test...
Let's just say that I had to eat my words. I had a fresh install of CM10.1's latest nightly installed. The strange thing was that I was expecting the CPU to max out at 1500~MHz but it still stated 1100~ whilst the S3 was around 1400Mhz.
I went into the Performance menu and set it to PERFORMANCE but still the score was lower. My friend's S3 also had a custom ROM so was thinking that maybe the extra 1GB of RAM in the N4 may give a higher score.
What happened?

so because the s3 scores higher in quadrant, youre thinking that its a faster phone?

Quadrant scores literally mean nothing. You can't compare scores from different hardware on different versions of android running different rooms.
The s3 is a great all around performer that scores above average in all categories. The Nexus 4 scores higher in some categories (mostly hardware and software) but scores lower in others (camera, speaker)

thermal throttling

ZAnwar said:
Hi everyone!
Last night I was sitting with a friend of mine and tried to tell him that the Nexus 4 was faster than his Galaxy S3. He wanted to test it out and we both downloaded Quadrant Standard and ran the test...
Let's just say that I had to eat my words. I had a fresh install of CM10.1's latest nightly installed. The strange thing was that I was expecting the CPU to max out at 1500~MHz but it still stated 1100~ whilst the S3 was around 1400Mhz.
I went into the Performance menu and set it to PERFORMANCE but still the score was lower. My friend's S3 also had a custom ROM so was thinking that maybe the extra 1GB of RAM in the N4 may give a higher score.
What happened?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus 4 has got some heavy thermal throttling problems, search for this term on these forums and you'll find plenty of info about it. Basically, the Nexus 4 is the only phone that is unable to keep running at the stated max clock frequenzy for more than ~5-10 minutes, because it would overheat. After a few minutes, it will throttle the performance. This is also the reason it sucks so hard on benchmarks, compared to other phones with exactly the same hardware.

IINexusII said:
so because the s3 scores higher in quadrant, youre thinking that its a faster phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all. I was just wondering what would cause the large discrepancy in the score.
jb91 said:
The Nexus 4 has got some heavy thermal throttling problems, search for this term on these forums and you'll find plenty of info about it. Basically, the Nexus 4 is the only phone that is unable to keep running at the stated max clock frequenzy for more than ~5-10 minutes, because it would overheat. After a few minutes, it will throttle the performance. This is also the reason it sucks so hard on benchmarks, compared to other phones with exactly the same hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read a little bit about the throttling but didn't think that it was that prevalent.
Thanks for the info!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6440/google-nexus-4-review/3
check out the benchmarks here when anandtech put the N4 in a freezer. It tops every android phone on almost every test(and it still suffered from thermal throttling ). Any benchmark done for the browser will be slow bc chrome sucks for mobile phones. The AOSP browser will have higher results

jeff5891 said:
thermal throttling
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does NOT throttle in quadrant ... It just sucks on android 4.2
{
"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"
}
I watched it throughout the test ... It did NOT throttle and scored 4641
I noticed that it didn't use cores 3-4 in graphics tests however
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

italia0101 said:
It does NOT throttle in quadrant ... It just sucks on android 4.2
I watched it throughout the test ... It did NOT throttle and scored 4641
I noticed that it didn't use cores 3-4 in graphics tests however
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not necessary to use CPU at full power for graphics tests. The GPU is what is put under stress.

How do you say
throughout the test ... It did NOT throttle and scored 4641
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and then say
it didn't use cores 3-4 in graphics tests however
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats called throttling

jeff5891 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6440/google-nexus-4-review/3
check out the benchmarks here when anandtech put the N4 in a freezer. It tops every android phone on almost every test(and it still suffered from thermal throttling ). Any benchmark done for the browser will be slow bc chrome sucks for mobile phones. The AOSP browser will have higher results
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy ****. That's incredibly... worrying. Like someone added a .5 to reference volts or something. It really shouldn't get that hot.
But also incredibly nice cause the scores as so tasty. For 2 minutes at a time. Imagine what its doing to the battery as well!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

jeff5891 said:
How do you say
and then say
thats called throttling
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it isn't .. It doesn't use all the cores all the time for everything..
even if I fire up GTA 3 , straight away it isn't using all the cores, and in fact doesn't use cores 3 and 4 at any time in GTA3 , it isnt throttling here,
The only benchmark iv seen the Nexus 4 throttle on is glbenchmark when ALL the tests are ticked, which is like a 15-20 min test at full load
Dsmboost was correct in the previous post as well , hence why not all the cores are being used when in games.
Can pretty much bet anything that its not throttling in 1 run of quadrant ...
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

italia0101 said:
No it isn't .. It doesn't use all the cores all the time for everything..
even if I fire up GTA 3 , straight away it isn't using all the cores, and in fact doesn't use cores 3 and 4 at any time in GTA3 , it isnt throttling here,
The only benchmark iv seen the Nexus 4 throttle on is glbenchmark when ALL the tests are ticked, which is like a 15-20 min test at full load
Dsmboost was correct in the previous post as well , hence why not all the cores are being used when in games.
Can pretty much bet anything that its not throttling in 1 run of quadrant ...
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As further evidence, I see no difference in frame rate when limiting my gs2's cpu at 800mhz vs 1.2ghz when playing graphically intense games.

Should I undervolt?

After reading this:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2052496
I found I got the "faster" type. As I understand it, this means my cpu has less power/frequency needs, and so, because the stock kernel is configured to manage any of the possible cpu binnings, the settings are probably not the optimal ones for my particular unit. So, does this mean my phone is running at a higher voltage than it needs? Should I undervolt it? How?

While faster CPU binning does mean that you CPU can run more stable at a lower voltage, UV doesn't save you that much of battery.
Most of the battery goes to the screen. The least I have seen around is 50%. Then the next culprit is the radio. And you also have RAM, storage, etc. UV might give you around 1% more battery or so.
You can try UV if you want, but I don't think you need, or should do it.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

KyraOfFire said:
While faster CPU binning does mean that you CPU can run more stable at a lower voltage, UV doesn't save you that much of battery.
Most of the battery goes to the screen. The least I have seen around is 50%. Then the next culprit is the radio. And you also have RAM, storage, etc. UV might give you around 1% more battery or so.
You can try UV if you want, but I don't think you need, or should do it.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually that's not the in my phone. I don't know what I'm doing wrong but AndroidOS, Google Services or MediaServer usually show up as the battery top drains. I have to say I'm on wifi most of the time and the screen time is usually around 1 hour per day. I'm using all the sync features, google now etc, so I I thought reducing the 384Mhz voltage would have some impact

hallucynogenyc said:
Actually that's not the in my phone. I don't know what I'm doing wrong but AndroidOS, Google Services or MediaServer usually show up as the battery top drains. I have to say I'm on wifi most of the time and the screen time is usually around 1 hour per day. I'm using all the sync features, google now etc, so I I thought reducing the 384Mhz voltage would have some impact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Presumably you're not talking about under volting, but under clocking?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium

No, I'm not. Looking at my cpu modes graph, it makes sense to me that reducing the voltage at which the cpu runs at 384mhz would reduce the consumption:
{
"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"
}
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

While it is debatable whether you will save any noticeable amount of battery by undervolting, I have found it to significantly reduce the heat produced by the CPU. Our SOC's are great undervolters, so I don't see any reason NOT to undervolt.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

heat = energy, I highly doubt you can feel a difference in temperature but not in battery lol. How are you guys undervolting? I tried setCPU but it doesn't work, is a custom kernel needed?

KyraOfFire said:
While faster CPU binning does mean that you CPU can run more stable at a lower voltage, UV doesn't save you that much of battery.
Most of the battery goes to the screen. The least I have seen around is 50%. Then the next culprit is the radio. And you also have RAM, storage, etc. UV might give you around 1% more battery or so.
You can try UV if you want, but I don't think you need, or should do it.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the battery usage by the screen that is being reported includes more than just the amount of battery used to power the screen. Due to project butter, touching the screen ramps up the CPU to high frequencies, like 1026 - 1512 GHz, making the phone buttery smooth yet sucking the life out of it's battery. In other words, the screen usage includes its touch boost processing usage as well, which in its self is allot of usage. Basically, UV should improve battery life significantly.

Still noone tells me how to do it xD

hallucynogenyc said:
Still noone tells me how to do it xD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to install a custom kernel that allows undervolting then use an app such as system tuner to undervolt.
Mine shows as a nominal CPU and I could under volt quite a bit. Makes a nice difference to heat and battery life is noticeably better.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Okay, I thought rooting would be enough Honestly, I'm liking the stock kernel overall, what's the closest to stock kernel that allows undervolting I can find? If there's no such thing, what do you recommend me?
Thanks in advance

The easiest way, with the minimun amount of work, would be flashing motley kernel. UV by default and you faster binning CPU is fully accounted for.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2021437
Trinity kernel also UV by default. He has his own website here
http://forums.derkernel.com/index.php/topic,47.0.html
Download the zip file, flash it in recovery, wipe cache/dalvik and you're good to go.
You can also try other kernel/ROM that support UV. Most likely you will need a control app.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

What's a good level to undervolt to I'm on faux's 001 have a nominal cpu and right now I'm -100 MV should I UV more? My phone is still completely stable at this level

mbucks911 said:
What's a good level to undervolt to I'm on faux's 001 have a nominal cpu and right now I'm -100 MV should I UV more? My phone is still completely stable at this level
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every phone can handle different uv levels, mine seems to be -150, and I have "fast" cpu. You can try higher but don't set the voltage to be "on boot" or else you'll get the bootloop or freeze.

Q : what is a stable kernel to overclock my N7 to 1.8 GHz ?

: what is a stable kernel to overclock my N7 to 1.8 GHz or 2.0 ghz and will work well with my stock kernel .
I am using now motley v3+ kernel but the maximum frequency is 1.6 ghz
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app

With the trinity kernel you can over clock up to 1.7, also there's a faux kernel that you can go up to 1.7 but its useless anyway, your tablet won't perform better because you over clock it.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app

I guess you just really want to kill the tablet, huh? Even if it could clock that high without permanently damaging the silicon, you'd be looking at it being extremely unstable.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

On 4.1 there was a kernel that let you OC to 2.1GHz but that hasn't been updated to 4.2 and proally never will. On 4.1.2 with CNC and That kernel I got like 7000 in quadrant
Sent from my Nexus 4 @1.72 GHz on Stock 4.2.2

It performs better already since I oc to 1.6 ghz!
Why you say that
Sent from my Xperia Z using xda app-developers app

fish droid said:
It performs better already since I oc to 1.6 ghz!
Why you say that
Sent from my Xperia Z using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better in performance of course. Over clocking the tablet can deplete it's life span. Battery life will take a huge hit too.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

For me overclocking is totally useless. You won´t recognise a difference between no oc and oc... only in benchmarks, but your battery is draining faster and it´s getting hot

Curlie said:
For me overclocking is totally useless. You won´t recognise a difference between no oc and oc... only in benchmarks, but your battery is draining faster and it´s getting hot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
overclocking to higher frequencies will make the battery drain faster and it will get it hot but I only overclocked 300 MHz to reach 1.6 ghz and it's perfect ,it operates normally and it never got hot . I also changed the GPU frequency to 533 by trickster mod .

scream4cheese said:
Better in performance of course. Over clocking the tablet can deplete it's life span. Battery life will take a huge hit too.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this is partially right I think it will effect the battery when the kernel request those extra 300 MHZ but it will also save the battery since I made the minimum frequency to 100 MHZ .

But why do you do it? For me there´s no notieceable difference.. only in benchmarks and i don´t care about benchmarks. For me franco kernel is best

fish droid said:
It performs better already since I oc to 1.6 ghz!
Why you say that
Sent from my Xperia Z using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a principle called the law of diminishing returns and it applies perfectly to this situation. The reason that kernel devs don't include higher frequency steps is that there is no real benefit. At higher frequencies, you introduce lag, random reboots, boot loops and general instability. Performance and frequency are not a linear corollary. Additionally, you exponentially shorten the life of the hardware by clocking too high. 1.6 is safe for most, 1.7 for some, and 1.8 for very few.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

najaboy said:
There's a principle called the law of diminishing returns and it applies perfectly to this situation. The reason that kernel devs don't include higher frequency steps is that there is no real benefit. At higher frequencies, you introduce lag, random reboots, boot loops and general instability. Performance and frequency are not a linear corollary. Additionally, you exponentially shorten the life of the hardware by clocking too high. 1.6 is safe for most, 1.7 for some, and 1.8 for very few.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your reply is the most logical one since everyone does not know what they are talking about but I was I just asking for experimental purpose not for permanent use .
what are the kernels that will allow me to reach 1.9GHZ or 2.0GHZ on stock rom 4.2.2?

Curlie said:
But why do you do it? For me there´s no notieceable difference.. only in benchmarks and i don´t care about benchmarks. For me franco kernel is best
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
franco kernel is stable . and also motley very safe and stable . and ofcource there is a difference "curlie" there is no lagging at all even when I customize my nexus with a different launcher . I don't care about benchmark also its irrelevant with the actual performance but sure there is a big difference .
but why do you choose franco kernel ?

IRX120 said:
On 4.1 there was a kernel that let you OC to 2.1GHz but that hasn't been updated to 4.2 and proally never will. On 4.1.2 with CNC and That kernel I got like 7000 in quadrant
Sent from my Nexus 4 @1.72 GHz on Stock 4.2.2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get on 4.2.2 7000 scores.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app

My man, you seem hell bent on frying your n7! Lol
Sent from my cell phone telephone....

Tommy-Geenexus said:
I get on 4.2.2 7000 scores.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"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"
}
A bit over 7000 Quadrant score on 4.2.2 here too, OC to 1.6 and still able to UV about 100 across the board and no different in stability, maybe i'm lucky one who got variant 3 of Tegra 3 here.
What I got from OC my device? It's run much more smother than when i'm at 1.3 like in facebook app for example at 1.3 I'm not able to scroll through feed really smooth but at 1.6 it's really smooth.
Concern about negative hit to battery life? I'm notice a little hit here as i'm get about 7 hours screen-time at 1.3 and about 6.5 hours at 1.6 and to me that acceptable, maybe due to UV that make it not much different.
Heat? A little lower if not the same temperature as when it's running at 1.3 again due to under voltage I think.
But however this is just my personal experience.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium

If you can build from source, just add in the frequencies to the tegra3_dvfs.c and other related files. But due to several obvious reasons mentioned already in this thread, I would never do that ever.

Franco Kernel FTW!