Hi
I have just used the Nexus Toolkit for force no-encrypt of the device. Of course that required a factory reset, but i have to admit, that it feels way snappier now, than before. That might be related to the fact, that i performed a fatory reset, but maybe others have tried it too ?
I used the WugFresh toolkit, and tried to run AnTuTu after the unit was restored from the last backup through Google. The score is now 61002. Perhaps others could try on their Nexus 9 - both encrypted and decrypted, to get a picture of a possible improvement ?
I will use the unit for a week, and see if the lags return. For now they are gone, and im smiling big time !
Well I got almost the same score with encrypted one...
{
"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"
}
Placebo effect
It seems that AnTuTu cannot see any difference between encryption or not. That could be true. I have to say though, that before i decrypted the device, my nexus 9 had quite some lag when switching between apps. That is not present now. I hop it does not come back over time
Encryption must have some sort of overhead, although I suppose if this device was using some form of hardware acceleration for the encryption and decryption it might be pretty minimal in most situations. Not sure if the N9 has that capability or not. I changed mine to be non-encrypted as soon as I got it (didn't want to deal with wiping it later) so I have no frame of reference...but it sure seems very snappy and lag free with everything I have used it for. Very pleased with its performance.
I agree. Just did a factory reset on mine and it's snappier. I've owned the 7, 10 and now the 9 and have to day I'm liking it so far. Although the 10 was nice, it seems that was the slowest of all for me especially the WiFi connection. Haven't unlocked the 9 yet but will be doing it soon. I just wanted to make sure all bugs were worked out before I jumped in.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Free mobile app
linuxsense said:
Encryption must have some sort of overhead, although I suppose if this device was using some form of hardware acceleration for the encryption and decryption it might be pretty minimal in most situations. Not sure if the N9 has that capability or not. I changed mine to be non-encrypted as soon as I got it (didn't want to deal with wiping it later) so I have no frame of reference...but it sure seems very snappy and lag free with everything I have used it for. Very pleased with its performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The nexus 9 does have hardware accelerated encryption/decryption. Based on my experience, having no encryption will help a little in some specific situations, and ive noticed hurts some in specific situation's. My nexus 9 while encrypted is faster with sqlite, database reads/writes than when unencrypted. Most if not all of the nexus 9 lag problems are related to memory leaks IMO, and rebooting/factory resetting are largely gonna be the source of your performance improvements. I've left my nexus 9 encrypted for a while now, but purposefully have been rebooting more than I usually do, and performance has been LOADS better than when I left it unencrypted and had long periods of uptime. Nvidia Denver is VERY efficient/fast with encryption/decryption being fully hardware accelerated. On this specific device, encryption is not causing lag and running without encryption won't fix lag. When they fix memory leaks(main source of lag) and the memory cgroup kernel regression(mem cgroups were disabled by google) performance will improve. I'm betting the next few updates will greatly help.
Good info, thanks for sharing. Do they use any compression with the encryption? With hardware acceleration I could imagine you could gain a fair amount of IO performance that way, assuming its accelerated enough.
Care to elaborate on the memory cgroup kernal regression issue? Thanks.
Isn't encryption and decryption faster on 64 bit processors that the Nexus 9 has? It doesn't surprise me that it has little impact on the performance and may have to do why Google has mentioned in Help that encryption cannot be disabled for the Nexus 9.
di11igaf said:
The nexus 9 does have hardware accelerated encryption/decryption. Based on my experience, having no encryption will help a little in some specific situations, and ive noticed hurts some in specific situation's. My nexus 9 while encrypted is faster with sqlite, database reads/writes than when unencrypted. Most if not all of the nexus 9 lag problems are related to memory leaks IMO, and rebooting/factory resetting are largely gonna be the source of your performance improvements. I've left my nexus 9 encrypted for a while now, but purposefully have been rebooting more than I usually do, and performance has been LOADS better than when I left it unencrypted and had long periods of uptime. Nvidia Denver is VERY efficient/fast with encryption/decryption being fully hardware accelerated. On this specific device, encryption is not causing lag and running without encryption won't fix lag. When they fix memory leaks(main source of lag) and the memory cgroup kernel regression(mem cgroups were disabled by google) performance will improve. I'm betting the next few updates will greatly help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is 100% correct. Even on Non accelerated devices its still 50/50. On my Nexus 6 and 7 I benched multiple benchmarks while encrypted and decrypted.
Some apps gained 1ms advantage whille others lost 1ms.
All in all I didint see any notable usability gains.
Mine scored 59.950, but I "manually" unencrypted my Nexus 9. Is there a stock 5.1.1 unencrypted so we could flash it like that at once?
Is there any evidence that suggests Nexus 9 is non-trivially faster with encryption disabled? A single core on the Nexus 9 can do AES operations at 2 gigabyte/second, thanks to hardware-accelerated AES instructions that are part of the ARMv8-A instruction set.
Related
{
"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"
}
excited ???
it A FAKE i mounted the quadrant data folder as a tmpfs meaning ramdisk mount
Very old thread.. but some things not resolved here really as far as I can search.
first
1) Yes this is fake, because there is no "disk" writing ever going to happen. The data will be lost. Everyone agrees.
2) However, if you used an fsync violating write cache.. like loopback you can get a similar score (we all know this too) but that's NOT fake (as many people say), that's just saying that write caching improves short burst intermittant write performance which is ABSOLUTELY TRUE (and can remove lags!) but it isn't a measure of I/O throughput AND since many types of realistic writes may already be cacheing one way or another (not fsyncing), it may or may not be that relevant.
Now the problem is the logic goes that quadrant gives this "fake" score ergo quadrant is useless ergo epics low score on stock is meaningless and especially since we all know epic doesn't lag.
Problem. epic doesn't lag because it's writes are supposed to be more aproximately like zero time than like SGS time (say 1/4 SGS time at worst to make up a fake number). That means no matter what you do, force fsyncs, avoid caching etc... the score should be pretty high (closer to 2400 than to 900 one would think).
None of this explains why epic gets a low score on unmodified stock roms. I'd expect 1500 at the very least. Something is still missing in the understanding here. Yes I know, one should look at full quadrant, ok but that argument implies something else in the epic is holding the score back alot edit: and that theory doesn't hold up either because then the "fixed" score should not be as high as it is. It's funny that both the low and high scores are almost identical to the SGS.
The answer may still be quadrant is garbage, but it would have to be garbage in a new way, not just in that it gets fooled by ram disk way (edit: which isn't really its fault anyway, although if it wrote a larger file it might not get "fooled" by a cache, but that argument depends on what you want to measure).
appagom said:
Very old thread.. but some things not resolved here really as far as I can search.
first
1) Yes this is fake, because there is no "disk" writing ever going to happen. The data will be lost. Everyone agrees.
2) However, if you used an fsync violating write cache.. like loopback you can get a similar score (we all know this too) but that's NOT fake (as many people say), that's just saying that write caching improves short burst intermittant write performance which is ABSOLUTELY TRUE (and can remove lags!) but it isn't a measure of I/O throughput AND since many types of realistic writes may already be cacheing one way or another (not fsyncing), it may or may not be that relevant.
Now the problem is the logic goes that quadrant gives this "fake" score ergo quadrant is useless ergo epics low score on stock is meaningless and especially since we all know epic doesn't lag.
Problem. epic doesn't lag because it's writes are supposed to be more aproximately like zero time than like SGS time (say 1/4 SGS time at worst to make up a fake number). That means no matter what you do, force fsyncs, avoid caching etc... the score should be pretty high (closer to 2400 than to 900 one would think).
None of this explains why epic gets a low score on unmodified stock roms. I'd expect 1500 at the very least. Something is still missing in the understanding here. Yes I know, one should look at full quadrant, ok but that argument implies something else in the epic is holding the score back alot. Is that true?
The answer may still be quadrant is garbage, but it would have to be garbage in a new way, not just in that it gets fooled by ram disk way (edit: which isn't really its fault anyway, although if it wrote a larger file it might not get "fooled" by a cache, but that argument depends on what you want to measure).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll explain it right now. Benchmarks are rarely an all-encompassing number that can describe the overall performance of a device. It is impossible in a situation like this.
There.
That's all.
At least this isn't like the video card industry, where products are designed specifically to perform well in benchmarks, which pleases all the drooling fans but ignores the actual goal of real-life performance.
Then there's the bribery and tricks on both ends to get specific products to do better or worse.
Please don't help get us there. Ignore this stupid benchmark.
I understand this fully... which you would know if you read my post. That doesn't answer the question though.
As for the ram cheating(a separte issue from my question really) here's a question... if you have 5GB internal RAM cache attached to a painfully slow block device is that cheating? What if it has an internal battery backup so it can take all night to catch up. Is THAT cheating... On a high load server, of course it is. On a cell phone.. no way that's cheating, and in fact there are rumors it's in development (well maybe not 5GB).
Why thread necro? I posted a thread about this just the other day with a 2597 score.
[2597] This is why friends don't let friends use Quadrant.
fine.. I'll read there (think I've seen it, but maybe wasn't thinking about this at the time but thought it didn't address this) and repost there in a couple of day if it's not answered there already. I guess you can consider this one informally closed for the moment. I don't have time today to find out actually.
Edit: BTW the reason I ask is not cause I care if quadrant describes epics performance well (if it runs smooth it runs smooth of course). The reason I ask is because I'm curious about the lag fixes on other devices and understanding this might provide some useful insight or overlook.
-----------------
{
"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"
}
-----------------
-----------------
But:
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
The OS itself might be using a portion of it that's not visible, however, I always have around 600MB+ in-use, even with bare Stock and AOSP... so I doubt this.
It probably is the OS and kernel using up a chunk. Android 4.2 is pretty heavy.
Android also caches stuff in RAM that isnt even open, even right at boot. This is to help open those apps faster, but if something else needs that cached memory space then Android automatically drops the app in cache and uses it for whatever is needed.
Remember, unused RAM is wasted RAM. Looks to me like you have 600MB of waste
Part of the 2GB DRAM is probably also shared with video memory and since the resolution is so high it's a big chunk.
same problem but not with nexus 4
Hi guys,
I have the same problem with my nexus 10, about 500-600 MB RAM lost..
The strange thing is that in my nexus 4 it recognize alla 2 GB RAM.
In my nexus 10 I have 2 users, do you think that can ne the cause?
Thanks
faithjano said:
Hi guys,
I have the same problem with my nexus 10, about 500-600 MB RAM lost..
The strange thing is that in my nexus 4 it recognize alla 2 GB RAM.
In my nexus 10 I have 2 users, do you think that can ne the cause?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Multiuser doesn't have any effect; I've had about 1.6GB memory available on all custom ROM's and Kernels I've tried. The fact that the Nexus 4 displays all 2GB usable though does still raise the question as to why about 400MB is missing on the Nexus 10.
mi7chy said:
Part of the 2GB DRAM is probably also shared with video memory and since the resolution is so high it's a big chunk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This might be a possibility; but I think at this point the Kernel source might be a good place to start digging for proof of whether this is happening or not.
Some GPUs have dedicated memory and it does not share from the system RAM, our GPU shares and thus it takes a chunk of what we have available.
If it makes you feel any better on my GSIII with CM10 its a 2GB device says 1630MB is available. Sounds normal with the N10 mine is the same
The ram measurement on Android has never shown as 100% empty (I think my Nexus One had 276MB free). Same as a Desktop/Laptop, it would only be 100% unused if there were no Kernel or libraries loaded.
I'm by no means an expert on this, but I dug into android memory management quite a bit when trying to optimize Shadowgun Deadzone performance. I don't think any of the apps measure memory used by native code. There's an adb command that will show you native memory use for an app, but I never dug that far into it. Again, I'm not a developer, but I assume your missing memory is being used by used by the parts android running native code. What's not clear to me is how android handles how much native memory an app can use. I got over my gaming fixation, but I'm still curious about this. If anyone can shed some light on this, I'd love to hear it.
Mine says 1gb used and 613mb free
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
bioorganic said:
I'm by no means an expert on this, but I dug into android memory management quite a bit when trying to optimize Shadowgun Deadzone performance. I don't think any of the apps measure memory used by native code. There's an adb command that will show you native memory use for an app, but I never dug that far into it. Again, I'm not a developer, but I assume your missing memory is being used by used by the parts android running native code. What's not clear to me is how android handles how much native memory an app can use. I got over my gaming fixation, but I'm still curious about this. If anyone can shed some light on this, I'd love to hear it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've checked /proc/meminfo and it looks like even the kernel doesn't see the full 2GB (assuming it is really there). MemTotal is 1,686,380 kB. Even if they were using 2GB==2,000,000,000 B, it's still missing over 150MB. I'd really like to know what is going on, but even Google support is completely clueless.
I'll probably just return it for something that lets me use the amount of RAM advertised.
May be video ram is shared with main memory ?
About 160MB is taken by Android OS (kernel + necessary libraries). It's reserved only for the OS, so it's unavailable for the user. It's common for all Android devices I've had.
For example my i9001 (SGS+) has also missing ~160MB of RAM (should have 512MB, but has only ~350MB available for apps.
If the video memory is shared at the hardware level, the number would make sense. What irks me is that I don't see that mentioned anywhere even on 'techie' blogs/reviews and even Google support doesn't know this about their device.
From what I understand, unless the kernel was modified to report less memory than is really available, meminfo should report the full amount accurately.
I don't even get 1.6 GB of ram
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 2
thats seems to be a normal thing for 4.2.2
As an owner of a previous tablet, my Acer Iconia a500 reported (in 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 4.0, 4.1, and 4.2) that it only had 725MB of RAM (it shipped with 1GB). My guess is that the missing chunk is graphics memory. I also show 1.6GB of RAM in my Nexus 10.
prior to 4.2.2, the GPU had 400-some MB reserved. At 4.2.2, there is almost an extra 400MB (386MB I think to be exact) reserved for the GPU, so 2GB - 800MB = 1.2GB
The extra GPU memory is to prevent userspace fragmentation if I read right.
Awesome. Thanks for the explanation. I just noticed that after the CyanogenMod 4.2.2 patch, mine dropped as well. Honeycomb and Ice Cream Sandwich must've reserved around 256MB of memory.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using XDA Premium HD app
Odd, seeing as how the N7 has 975/1024 available
And my nexus 4 has 1.8 of the 2gb available.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
I found this in Android Software and Hacking General selection (all credits to Lambgx02)
Lambgx02: "So, I was experiencing significant lag as we all do from time to time, and decided I was going to get to the bottom of it.
After tracing and debugging for hours, I discovered the source of 90% of Android's lag. In a word, entropy (or lack thereof).
Google's JVM, like Sun's, reads from /dev/random. For all random data. Yes, the /dev/random that uses a very limited entropy pool.
Random data is used for all kinds of stuff.. UUID generation, session keys, SSL.. when we run out of entropy, the process blocks. That manifests itself as lag. The process cannot continue until the kernel generates more high quality random data.
So, I cross-compiled rngd, and used it to feed /dev/urandom into /dev/random at 1 second intervals.
Result? I have never used an Android device this fast.
It is literally five times faster in many cases. Chrome, maps, and other heavy applications load in about 1/2 a second, and map tiles populate as fast as I can scroll. Task switching is instantaneous. You know how sometimes when you hit the home button, it takes 5-10 seconds for the home screen to repopulate? Yeah. Blocking on read of /dev/random. Problem solved. But don't take my word for it .. give it a shot!
Update!
I've built a very simple Android app that bundles the binary, and starts/stops the service (on boot if selected). I'll be adding more instrumentation, but for now, give it a shot! This APK does not modify /system in any way, so should be perfectly safe.
This is my first userspace Android app, so bear with me!
Note that this APK is actually compatible with all Android versions, and all (armel) devices. It's not at all specific to the Captivate Glide.
Caveats
There is a (theoretical) security risk, in that seeding /dev/random with /dev/urandom decreases the quality of the random data. In practice, the odds of this being cryptographically exploited are far lower than the odds of someone attacking the OS itself (a much simpler challenge).
This may adversely affect battery life, since it wakes every second. It does not hold a wakelock, so it shouldn't have a big impact, but let me know if you think it's causing problems. I can add a blocking read to the code so that it only executes while the screen is on. On the other hand, many of us attribute lag to lacking CPU power. Since this hack eliminates almost all lag, there is less of a need to overclock, potentially reducing battery consumption."
atomic339:
Download from here
Flash in recovery...it installs an init.d script to launch at boot, rngd and entropy_watch binaries amd also am extended menu by me....after flashing, just go into terminal and type:
-su (enter)
-seeder (enter)
(The apk from OP does not work for every phone, but this init.d method will work as long as your phone supports init.d...)
My opinion:
-my gallery pictures loading "instantly". wtf!
-browser loading faster
-Maps loading much faster
-settings menu scrolling smoothly.
Working great here
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app
is the difference v. noticeable? i tried apk and it was hard to say about difference. i'm on stock rom and stock bootloader (rooted though) will flash the zip affect warranty (i.e the flash count / will it show custom) ?
radii said:
is the difference v. noticeable? i tried apk and it was hard to say about difference. i'm on stock rom and stock bootloader (rooted though) will flash the zip affect warranty (i.e the flash count / will it show custom) ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im sorry this is not for you if you worry about warranty.
Umm.. i can't found anu differences after flashing the zip file.. maybe there is something i should do after i type seeder on terminal mate? And where is the apk?
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2
if you do it the APK way make sure to exit the app using the home button not the back button because pressing back will turn it off
So is this basically just holding a partial wakelock forever and therefore increasing performance and killing battery life? Do we really know what's being accomplished here?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Do I need root for this?
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app
rmagruder said:
So is this basically just holding a partial wakelock forever and therefore increasing performance and killing battery life? Do we really know what's being accomplished here?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. This. Just keeps phone more active. Its more like project non stutter.
Sent from my GT-N7100
rmagruder said:
So is this basically just holding a partial wakelock forever and therefore increasing performance and killing battery life? Do we really know what's being accomplished here?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything I have seen indicates that the smoothness is coming from the CPU being held out of sleep. My "proof" is a user of the original Note saying it fixed his home button wake lag. That ONLY disappears when the phone ain't sleeping...
I don't think there are any major performance gains to be had from the ACTUAL fix, maybe as a side effect of holding the CPU up - but you can adjust the governor to do that.
vash_h said:
Do I need root for this?
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes buddy u require root for this
Hit Thanks If I Helped You
{
"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"
}
That's a pretty ridiculous solution.
Create a symbolic link for /dev/random pointing to /dev/urandom. Done.
So, as some one earlier said, this is just keeping our phones awake all the time right?
If so, thats bad, isnt it ?
Laynee1 said:
So, as some one earlier said, this is just keeping our phones awake all the time right?
If so, thats bad, isnt it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
exactly. just trading battery life for less stutter. or in our case, just killing our own batteries since the gn2 has pretty much no stutter anyways.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=36274506&postcount=1014
Hmmm so it is almost same as lowering cpu up threshold. Hmmm for low end phones ofc there will be performance boost for note 2 no difference while we have good software+hardware
so i test it my self and i don't see any difference :silly::silly:
edit : dose the app need init.d support ?? i'm testing with stock kernel :banghead:
Hello everyone, I'm new to xda, so I'm sorry if I messed anything about this thread up.
I have my European Axon 7 for a few weeks already and, besides a few rather tiny complaints, am generally quite happy with it. Would still be nice if there were any known fixes or at least some assurance that ZTE does know about these:
First, I noticed small artifacts when taking pictures of bright, yellow objects. Artifacts are reproducible but idk if any other colours are affected. (looking a bit like tiny infinite-symbols, pic link:
{
"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 fix from ZTE would be quite nice, fortunately it isn't that bad unless one pixel peeps or looks at a pic on his TV screen.
Then, second, if I have the option activated that wifi is to go into standby when the screen is off, it does deconnect, but never reconnects unless I turn it off and on again. Issue has been on the last OS version afaik.
Third, I've had three random reboots so far, Idk if there are any apps known for causing instability on this device, but rn I have no hints as to what might be causing this. (also many apps crash the first time I start them after installing, running just fine afterwards.
Any help and/or advice is highly appreciated.
SoulChoir said:
Hello everyone, I'm new to xda, so I'm sorry if I messed anything about this thread up.
I have my European Axon 7 for a few weeks already and, besides a few rather tiny complaints, am generally quite happy with it. Would still be nice if there were any known fixes or at least some assurance that ZTE does know about these:
First, I noticed small artifacts when taking pictures of bright, yellow objects. Artifacts are reproducible but idk if any other colours are affected. (looking a bit like tiny infinite-symbols, pic link: )
A fix from ZTE would be quite nice, fortunately it isn't that bad unless one pixel peeps or looks at a pic on his TV screen.
Any help and/or advice is highly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To me that and the random reboots sounds like you have a device with Bad Memory. If you have NOT rooted your phone and applied any third party tweaking apps such as "L Speed Mod" or "Fly-on Mod". If you have. Then these tools tend to create those random reboots.
I'm running my A2017G with average usage and heavy stress testing since a week without any of those affects.
celoxocis said:
To me that and the random reboots sounds like you have a device with Bad Memory. If you have NOT rooted your phone and applied any third party tweaking apps such as "L Speed Mod" or "Fly-on Mod". If you have. Then these tools tend to create those random reboots.
I'm running my A2017G with average usage and heavy stress testing since a week without any of those affects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh dang, I hope not, dont wanna have to send it in.
I don't have any such mods applied. Also I have had my phone for maybe a month and only had 3 of these reboots, so idk but maybe a heavy rare bug?
SoulChoir said:
Oh dang, I hope not, dont wanna have to send it in.
I don't have any such mods applied. Also I have had my phone for maybe a month and only had 3 of these reboots, so idk but maybe a heavy rare bug?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In your case I would run a stress test. Use any of the heavy benchmark apps (Antutu, CPU Benchmark, etc) and run them multiple times.
Don't worry about the score or the phone getting warmer (CPU will be throttled at some point).
But look out for a sudden reboot or crash.
Those are usually caused by bad RAM.
celoxocis said:
In your case I would run a stress test. Use any of the heavy benchmark apps (Antutu, CPU Benchmark, etc) and run them multiple times.
Don't worry about the score or the phone getting warmer (CPU will be throttled at some point).
But look out for a sudden reboot or crash.
Those are usually caused by bad RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will Vellamo do? And multiple times as in 5x+?
Sorry for nit picking but can't charge too much today so am trying to preserve as much battery as I can.
SoulChoir said:
Will Vellamo do? And multiple times as in 5x+?
Sorry for nit picking but can't charge too much today so am trying to preserve as much battery as I can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't really matter what benchmark test as anyone of them will go hard on RAM.
celoxocis said:
It doesn't really matter what benchmark test as anyone of them will go hard on RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sooo reporting back, I've done 9 runs, 5 browser ones, single core and multi core twice each as well. No crashs, no lags, nothing.
I downloaded an app called Visions of Chaos which does nothing but render Fractals and OpenGl shaders. If anyone could test on his device if e.g. the performance tanking shader "Sample Long Slender Flexible" (among the first 20 OpenGl Shaders) at max resolution(0.5) makes the Axon 7 crash or not that'd be great as I don't know if that's the normal behaviour(mine crashes everytime).
SoulChoir said:
Hello everyone, I'm new to xda, so I'm sorry if I messed anything about this thread up.
I have my European Axon 7 for a few weeks already and, besides a few rather tiny complaints, am generally quite happy with it. Would still be nice if there were any known fixes or at least some assurance that ZTE does know about these:
First, I noticed small artifacts when taking pictures of bright, yellow objects. Artifacts are reproducible but idk if any other colours are affected. (looking a bit like tiny infinite-symbols, pic link:
)
A fix from ZTE would be quite nice, fortunately it isn't that bad unless one pixel peeps or looks at a pic on his TV screen.
Then, second, if I have the option activated that wifi is to go into standby when the screen is off, it does deconnect, but never reconnects unless I turn it off and on again. Issue has been on the last OS version afaik.
Third, I've had three random reboots so far, Idk if there are any apps known for causing instability on this device, but rn I have no hints as to what might be causing this. (also many apps crash the first time I start them after installing, running just fine afterwards.
Any help and/or advice is highly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi do you have other pictures available？ thanks！and about the raboot issue,you can try this update your device!Iface the same issue before and it works！
I want to jump on and add this issue that many users have been experiencing with OIS
avipars said:
I want to jump on and add this issue that many users have been experiencing with OIS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Necropost much?
Sorry.
I'm just curious if anyone has performed benchmarks recently? I never bothered, but was curious if my phone had slowed down at all in the 15 months I've used it without any wipes. It feels just as fast to me but sometimes things can slowly degrade and not be noticeable to us.
Anyways my benchmark scores basically all came out much higher than the scores reported for the OnePlus 5 when it was new. So I'm assuming maybe updates have done something to improve that? My phone is 100% stock and never even rooted.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
350Rocket said:
I'm just curious if anyone has performed benchmarks recently? I never bothered, but was curious if my phone had slowed down at all in the 15 months I've used it without any wipes. It feels just as fast to me but sometimes things can slowly degrade and not be noticeable to us.
Anyways my benchmark scores basically all came out much higher than the scores reported for the OnePlus 5 when it was new. So I'm assuming maybe updates have done something to improve that? My phone is 100% stock and never even rooted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks aren't representative cause manufacturers can cheat like op did. If your real life performance decreases, a wipe of caches can be help in the first time otherwise a factory reset.
As I said I haven't noticed a performance drop but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't notice a big improvement if I wiped everything tomorrow and started fresh (which I don't want to because obviously it's a big hassle. Also I'm not sure that I am on the "OnePlus cheated" bandwagon if the device was running maxed out for games also (not just bench marks) than I can't personally see how it's cheating. But lots of people will disagree on that.
What I'm trying to see is if other phones are also scoring over 200k on AnTuTu on the latest software because that would make it seem like my phone is in line with others. If they're getting 220k on a fresh install than maybe my phone could benefit from a full wipe. Does that not at least make some sense?
I never ran a benchmark on it before but I'm getting 203k now and when it first came out others were getting 170k according to my Google search.
350Rocket said:
As I said I haven't noticed a performance drop but that doesn't mean that I wouldn't notice a big improvement if I wiped everything tomorrow and started fresh (which I don't want to because obviously it's a big hassle. Also I'm not sure that I am on the "OnePlus cheated" bandwagon if the device was running maxed out for games also (not just bench marks) than I can't personally see how it's cheating. But lots of people will disagree on that.
What I'm trying to see is if other phones are also scoring over 200k on AnTuTu on the latest software because that would make it seem like my phone is in line with others. If they're getting 220k on a fresh install than maybe my phone could benefit from a full wipe. Does that not at least make some sense?
I never ran a benchmark on it before but I'm getting 203k now and when it first came out others were getting 170k according to my Google search.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What rom and version you're running exactly?
strongst said:
What rom and version you're running exactly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bone stock. Out of the box. This phone cured my need to root and ROM. I still have a custom ROM on my HTC one m8 and flashed a different one today but that's just because it had a problem I was trying to fix, just like half the custom ROMs I ever ran.
{
"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 ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
350Rocket said:
Bone stock. Out of the box. This phone cured my need to root and ROM. I still have a custom ROM on my HTC one m8 and flashed a different one today but that's just because it had a problem I was trying to fix, just like half the custom ROMs I ever ran.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a op5 open beta 21, 6/64GB and get 205637
strongst said:
I have a op5 6/64GB and get 205637
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So yours scored almost the same just slightly higher than mine did. Can you tell me what you're running and how long since it was installed? I'm guessing now they're going to be pretty close together and probably all getting higher scores than when new for whatever reason but I'm still curious.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
350Rocket said:
So yours scored almost the same just slightly higher than mine did. Can you tell me what you're running and how long since it was installed? I'm guessing now they're going to be pretty close together and probably all getting higher scores than when new for whatever reason but I'm still curious.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's running oos open beta 21 dirty flashed from open beta 19(clean flashed) all with stock kernel.