Database Users

Desire z processor is not that power

All people calming that desire z processor @800mhz scores better in benchmarks than overlooked snapdragon ,this is not true when Iam on desire z Rom I underclocked my hd2 to 806.4 mhz (same as dz) and I got 1512 score from the first time same as Dz with its perfect GPU , SO OUR CPU PERFORMS BETTER ( you can try it yourself ) Iam not a liar ,I think the improved performance is in THE ROM itself not in the processor
Sent from my HTC HD2 T8585 using XDA App

You have to remember that the benchmarks (quadrant, linpack etc) are all synthetic, like 3dmark back in the day for pc graphics cards. There are so many things that can affect your scores both adversely and positively that they should only be used as a very rough guideline and nothing more. Direct comparisons are all but pointless.

Reno_79 said:
You have to remember that the benchmarks (quadrant, linpack etc) are all synthetic, like 3dmark back in the day for pc graphics cards. There are so many things that can affect your scores both adversely and positively that they should only be used as a very rough guideline and nothing more. Direct comparisons are all but pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Iam talking to people who take quadrant as a prove for performance , I know that its results are not accurate
Sent from my HTC HD2 T8585 using XDA App

I think you should use Quadrant Advanced to compare cpu scores, I know I/O scores help our HD2 a lot.

Even software affects quadrant cpu scores so it is not reliable. Quadrant benchmarks h264 decoding performance as part of cpu benchmark and for example having stagefright driver enabled inflates cpu score by double! Disable stagefright and your cpu will score 400 instead of 800. (in quadrant "advanced") if you use better software decoder it will affect cpu score by large amount. And rebenchmarking produces higher results because of caching. Mips calculating benchmarks are better (like the one in setcpu)
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App

That might be true but the Desire Z/G2 has a co-processor for apps that we don't have.
Sent from my HTC HD2 T8585 using XDA App

psykick5 said:
That might be true but the Desire Z/G2 has a co-processor for apps that we don't have.
what is the coprocessor , desire z have same scorpion core like hd2 only with 45n.m tech
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

I'd say it has a better processor... it just got overclocked to 1.4 Ghz.
http://www.androidcentral.com/t-mobile-g2-overclock-gets-even-better-and-released

wow that makes me want it

RobertsDF said:
I'd say it has a better processor... it just got overclocked to 1.4 Ghz.
http://www.androidcentral.com/t-mobile-g2-overclock-gets-even-better-and-released
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your battey will say thank you. Your chipset too. This phone is not made for such things. That won't last very long I think. But it is quite impressive, seems to be veeeeery fast

JanssoN said:
Your battey will say thank you. Your chipset too. This phone is not made for such things. That won't last very long I think. But it is quite impressive, seems to be veeeeery fast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1.. imagine, a 75% overclock?? i wonder if the carpet has any burn marks on them when he lifts the phone up, or if his face has any burn marks that's why he's not showing it up on the cam.. lol.. because a 75% OC on a very small device where there is not enough room to breathe, the whole phone would be like a big heatsink if used for a period of time.. and i guess that's also the reason why HTC slapped the 800mhz cpu instead of the 1ghz.. i'm our HD2 can achieve such high of an OC, but it wouldn't be adviceable as it would melt/crack the solder joints on the GPU and/or processor of the phone at that kind of heat.. and i believe that the GPU and apllication coprocessor that they're talking about on the G2 is just a marketing ploy to justify it's price tag.. maybe to cope up with the build price since there are moving parts (hinge) and the hard keyboard.. even the guy at the tmobile store told me that the G2 isn't fast at all.. he said it's nothing close to evo or the nexus one as some people and websites claims.. funny when he asked my what kind of phone do i have.. i pulled my HD2 and showed it to him.. he was surprised to see Android on it and asked me if he could play with it.. so i let him.. and after playing with it for a while, he advised me to wait for the new phone device that's supposed to come out before the end of the year.. he even told me that getting a G2 would be the same as downgrading as he feels that my HD2 is way way faster than the G2.. i told him i'm thinking about getting the vibrant because the port for our HD2 is nothing close to being perfect and that it's still running from the SD card.. again he discouraged me and told me to wait for the next phone device to come.. so i guess that's what i will do..

I'm surprised that you were in store and didn't test drive G2 for yourself, are you sure he is sale person?, he didn't sound like one.

justwonder said:
I'm surprised that you were in store and didn't test drive G2 for yourself, are you sure he is sale person?, he didn't sound like one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as a matter of fact i did.. that's actually one of the main reason why i went to the store, as i've been reading a lot of good things on G2.. i went there to compare the G2 with the samsung vibrant.. but through the end, i didn't like the G2's performance despite the fact that it's the only phone right now on TMo that supports the HSPA+.. and yes he's a sales person.. i was surprised as well when he told me about the upcoming desire HD.. but that didn't happen until i showed my HD2 to him and let him play with it for a while.. maybe he knows that i'm a phone enthusiast and that i might just end up returning the phone within the 30 days period after playing with the G2.. who knows?? i think the G2 is wayyy overrated.. it performs within it's specs, nothing special..

RobertsDF said:
I'd say it has a better processor... it just got overclocked to 1.4 Ghz.
http://www.androidcentral.com/t-mobile-g2-overclock-gets-even-better-and-released
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Desire Z overclocks to exactly same speeds. Record OC is 1470MHz.
So they are same CPUs, clocked at different speeds. Bigger screen = higher clock to handle bigger screen.
EDIT: Desire Z overclocks to 1.7GHz at 1400mv
EDIT: Desire Z overclocks to 1.9GHz at 1500mv

Lower Quadrant Score With New ROM

So I flashed Skyraider today, and my quadrant score dropped 100 points from stock sense. What the hell is going on here....

The Black Droid said:
So I flashed Skyraider today, and my quadrant score dropped 100 points from stock sense. What the hell is going on here....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sitting at 1032. With the stock ROM, I was getting around 1120.
Why are these scores so low???

Q scores || ROMs
Quadrant scores vary by ROM and kernel, and by different kernels in the same ROM.
Those scores are expected to vary.

Quadrant scores, don't take those to heart... It's all about feel. I've run roms where they might score low, but feel and move quick.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

I just don't understand how some of these guys have anywhere from 2700-3300 as their quad score. I would imagine their phones are running insanely fast

Maybe, they are most likely overclocking. Some phones don't like going too high. Like on mine, I can't go over 1.113, or my phone slows to a crawl and locks up/reboots.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

The Black Droid said:
I just don't understand how some of these guys have anywhere from 2700-3300 as their quad score. I would imagine their phones are running insanely fast
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where have you seen people post these scores for their Inc?
I'm willing to bet good money that if you are seeing people post scores that high, they are either:
A. Not running Quadrant from an Inc but a much more powerful device (like an Android tablet)
B. Faking the results in Photoshop (or just lying about the number if no screenshot is provided)
C. Running a setup that doesn't actually run through the Quadrant test properly. For example, Quadrant didn't run properly on Gingerbread roms at first, and the scores that it would produce were extremely erratic. Sometimes they would be extremely low, sometimes they would be extremely high, but they weren't accurate or repeatable.
D. Running some sort of insane setup that is only stable enough to finish a Quadrant run, and will never actually be used for anything
Frankly, even D is far-fetched.
I would be inclined to call a 100 point fluctuation in Quadrant scores insignificant.
If you really want to chase the highest benchmark scores, you'll need to overclock your CPU and run the system as lean as possible. That means uninstalling or disabling a lot of the things that make your life easier day-to-day.
Also, in case you haven't already seen it in your own testing, Quadrant scores are always lowest on the first run. If you press the back button and immediately start a new Quadrant run, you'll get a much higher score.
Like any unit of measurement, Quadrant scores do serve a useful purpose. But as is often the case when the score itself is seen by some as the end-goal, it is often misapplied.
The same can be seen in digital cameras and the megapixel arms race. Everyone wants to brag about how many megapixels their camera is capable of. Everyone wants the highest number of megapixels, assuming that more MP = better image. Few people realize what it actually means, or why it matters very little these days.

A lot of those people are overclocking to get really high scores and for all the reasons listed above (nice post!).
You really should not be looking to get that high on the incredible, you'll end up draining your battery like crazy. Around the 1,000 mark is great for playing higher-end games on the market as long as you aren't running a bunch of things in the background. Just about anything else you can think up of doing on your phone should run well, you won't have a sluggish device and you won't be killing your battery either.
If you do end up trying to overclock your phone or using a ROM or kernel combination that will give you a much higher score I don't think you'll notice any difference when doing anything on your phone, but your battery will drop much quicker.
Like other people have said, Quad scores don't matter much- take them lightly as you see them.

There is a lot that goes into that score. The highest score I could get today is 1656 but it was consistently in the Upper 1500s, I ran 5 tests.
My setup:
CM7 RC2
Incredikernel 03/06 OC to 1113Mhz/Performance Govenor
16Gb Class 2 microSD card.
If someone is using a class 4 or a class 6 card their i/o scores could be much higher than mine which would result in a much higher overall score than mine. Also keep in mind with Linux Kernels can very alot and that there are different types of task schedulers in them such as BFS or CFS which can have dramatic affect on the quadrent scores. Quadrent tends to score BFS kernels higher. So yeah I can believe people are hitting most of the score they post up. However byrong is right about it not being a setup you'd want to use on a daily basis. For me it causes random reboots, my phone gets hot and the UI becomes laggy after a little while also the battery drops like a brick.
My normal setup that I run on a daily basis is the same kernel uc to 803Mhz/smartass governor. It is extremely stable and is smooth as butter but my quadrent scores are only only in the 1100s with my high being 1244.
Its really not all about the score, if your happy with the performance who cares about the score.

Low Benchmarks scores

I know about the differences in benchmarks and how they arent set up for dual core, but I just ran smartbench 2011 and my gaming score is off by 1000 points on a stock xoom, I am rooted and running stock kernel. I am not sure why, maybe something is wrong with it.

My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App

Off from what? A phone? Synthetic benchmarks say almost nothing about real world performance, and they will always be different with devices at different resolutions.
A 1280x800 tablet will always score unusually low on a graphics benchmark that scales to resolution compared to a phone.

Usmc7356 said:
My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant also places a lot of weight on the filesystem, and my Xoom always hangs quite a while during database writes.
Also I think that getting ~6 FPS on their first 2D animation test can't help.
The Xoom is really zippy, take the benchmarks with many, many grains of salt.

I was just talking about smart bench, everything else is working fine, but the smartbench 2011 shows a galaxy s as being more powerful than my xoom, and the half the speed of a stock xoom. I am just wondering if other people were showing that they are below what a stock xoom should be too.

you have to make sure that these benchmarks are compatible with dual core processors. otherwise the results are moot.

I know that, but it is shows below the average xoom, thats the problem I am seeing, average xoom gets like 2k I get 1k

I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.

joepfalzgraf said:
I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Confirmed that is it, thanks for this I guess I was overlooking it and thinking my xoom wasnt up to par.

3.1 Quadrant drop

After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it

so i guess that begs the question: is your TF's performance lower?

Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed this too... BUT... the system seems a lot faster and more responsive, so i guess scores arent everything.

For sure score isn't everything, even more with quadrant.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu

Vellamo is a web browser benchmark IIRC, where as Quadrant is a CPU/GPU benchmark. I dont know about the other one you mentioned.
15xx is pretty damn low, I'm getting around 35xx with Quadrant at 1.5 GHz. Check your clockspeed in setcpu to make sure nothing is out of wack.

mrevankyle said:
quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or CF Bench
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA Premium App

Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated

quadrant is a horrible benchmark. there are hacks and tweaks to get you stupid high scores.

Wierd i get2 2600

Tortel1210 said:
Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras

My quadrant is 1.7 not rooted or anything. I must say this tab runs extremely fast and I have no problems with it minus apps crashing once in a blue moon. If quadrant ment something my vibrant has 2.2k and it still doesn't run as smooth as my tab
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too used to be quadrant this or that using it as a gauge...then after I owned a few android devices...I came to the conclusion...its a piece of ****... First its inaccurate...my EVO. 3d is way faster then my color nookut yet I get better scores with the nook...same with the tf...second...it uses testing methods that can be cheated by some settings...hardware stuff..3rd...if you run it 3 times...you will usually get 3 different darn scores that range widely. To me using is the best test...not benchmarks..however if you need to use this as a guage...do it...but be warned...for real life...it don't mean anything

sassafras_ said:
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.

life64x said:
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras

sassafras_ said:
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.

life64x said:
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he wasn't accusing you if being sarcastic, he was being sarcastic.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

Thanks, my bad. I am a optimist and thought my pessimist came out... With only a couple hours sleep my mind plays tricks on me. Oh well, go back to watching dune...I would have used my gom jabber( watch dune to know what I mean).

Only thing worst than benchmark nerds are benchmark nerds who are stupid enough to still be using quadrant software that's over a year old and is not optimized for dualcore or honeycomb.

All aboiut OVERCLOCKING thread.

I wonder if we really "need" to overclock this beastly CPU of ours? Hell, even if i underclock to 1Ghz, most task if not all are done fast, really fast. Talking about games? Modern FPS games are driven by both CPU and GPU and thus doesnt require much of horsepower of the CPU. Im confuse why numbers of people here are crying "why they are not stable @ 1.8Ghz"? ... Even if you set it @ 1.8Ghz max, our phone will barely reach this clockspeed because other cores will kick-in in less than maximum speed of the primary core (if im right?) ... Is it just for Benchmark figures? Good figures doesnt equates to good performance and we all know that... Can you really sacrifice "Stability" for the sake of some "Ego-driven faaassssstttt BM"?

I swear, some people are just so dense. Why don't we all drive Honda civics? Do we really need a car with over 200hp and can top out at 150mph when most speed limits are 65mph? Why do we bother eating at expensive restaurants when we could save a ton and eat at mcdonalds? People have preferences...it's what makes the world go 'round. If people want to overclock, let them have it.

lude219 said:
I swear, some people are just so dense. Why don't we all drive Honda civics? Do we really need a car with over 200hp and can top out at 150mph when most speed limits are 65mph? Why do we bother eating at expensive restaurants when we could save a ton and eat at mcdonalds? People have preferences...it's what makes the world go 'round. If people want to overclock, let them have it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha good one.
I drive a v8 6.0L lumina SS, my pc is o/c'd from 2.6Ghz to 3.8Ghz Quad core, ram is overclocked to 1700mhz, have crossfired 2 5870s and tested them at 900mhz, my SIII is overclocked to 1800mhz, my LG O3D is oc @ 1350mhz (1ghz original) I guess i like fast things Maybe the OP is just a laid back happy go lucky fella and if everyone is like him we would be all driving steam powered cars and flying in propeller planes

Ok, you got me Guys .. But what pissed me is that this people all points their finger to the Kernel or Dev when they have reboots and heat-ups which is obviously the effect of their Overclocking... i can remmber a post; "damn, why i cant reach 1.8Ghz without random reboot, please fix"...

I actually agree with the op personally and I have been developing on android for four years since the g1, I don't see the need to over clock this phone as it runs really well all of the time,I too had the optimus 3d and that definitely needed overclocking as that was so painstakingly sluggish without it. the only reason I would overclock is for benchmark results other than that its just another drain on the battery for no real world performance gain
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

jaytana said:
Ok, you got me Guys .. But what pissed me is that this people all points their finger to the Kernel or Dev when they have reboots and heat-ups which is obviously the effect of their Overclocking... i can remmber a post; "damn, why i cant reach 1.8Ghz without random reboot, please fix"...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you just can't fix ignorance. if someone doesn't understand the concept and risks of overclocking, let them figure it out. sometimes it irks me to encounter posts like that as well.

androidfanboi said:
I actually agree with the op personally and I have been developing on android for four years since the g1, I don't see the need to over clock this phone as it runs really well all of the time,I too had the optimus 3d and that definitely needed overclocking as that was so painstakingly sluggish without it. the only reason I would overclock is for benchmark results other than that its just another drain on the battery for no real world performance gain
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Off topic: Optimus3D ROM is one of the most poorly optimize in modern Android flagships... I too had one, running it with AOSP is buttery smooth but also have some compromises...

I am sure you are missing the main idea of overclocking. First of all people normally do it to achieve better results in benchmark. But more and more are starting to do it for better performance and so. Overclocking a phone is useful for the first mainly, I doubt that anyone would overclock their phone in order to play games with better fps for instance. The whole idea is bad, there is a large difference between a phone with minimal cooling and a big ass desktop with 50 fans. If we want our devices to last longer we needn't touch them to make them "faster".

When I can overclock to 1.6gh AND under volt to 50mv below the stock voltage for 1.4GHZ it's pretty much a no-brainer
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium