Database Users

Quadrant benchmark for Android on HD2 compared to SGS (What's in a score)

Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.

appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.

Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

appelflap said:
Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can tell, the HD2 got a decent score 'cos it was running Froyo. When we get bumped up to an official froyo build with JIT fully optimized, We should be top of the pile.

don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.

woops dbl post

alovell83 said:
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even then though, it's possible to write a benchmark which wins constantly for any phone.
In regards to "terrible I/O", that might even be due to a bug in the FAT32 drivers. Yes you can benchmark it, but it wont mean much. The best way is to actually TEST the applications you need, rather than select a phone based on benchmarks. However, you are possibly best off looking at the component specs, because they ignore software bugs.

scrizz said:
don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.

You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score

appelflap said:
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read in a post that the Galaxy S gets a 0 on the 2D score:
"JIT isn't fully enabled in the current froyo versions, and quadrant, frankly, is bull**** (for exmple, 2d acceleration gets the same weight in the final result as 3D. Due to the fact that the SGS doesn't have a dedicated 2D accelerator, quadrant doesn't try to use the cpu- it just gives a round zero in that part)"
I can't confirm this, but that definitely seems like a terrible set-up, seeing as how I'm pretty sure I have games run in 2D, so to say that it can't do it just seems wrong regardless of if the SGS has a dedicated 2D accelerator or not (so if you aren't testing the way it performs in real-world, why are you testing?)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=737787&page=3

Qazz~ said:
You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device

RyanZA said:
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want to speak for the other poster, and I agree with your premise, however, it isn't actually solving the issue at hand. Better FPS wouldn't be noticed, however, it would give a better score and, more importantly, indicate it's potential. So, getting 56FPS isn't doing the phone any justice within the score, which is what reviews are using, giving it an artificially low score, and putting it more in line with units that can't compete on higher end games. So, when a site like anand pushes 150FPS on a game, I know that means that their rig is entirely too powerful for the game in question, but it still means something when you compare it to the lower end graphics card that only gets 90...then when they run Crisis you see these results play out more with differences that we can notice with the eye.

I think the HD2 gets that score because, as I can see in the video, the CPU tests run faster compared to my SGS, probably because of Froyo, and I know, from the time I had the Diamond and the HD2, that the internal memory and RAM are very fast. Sadly SGS has a slow internal memory, atleast when used by the phone`s software, when copying from PC is faster than my class 6 microSD. Luckily, we have mimocan`s fix. Hope this will be fixed in future FW`s.

NexusHD2 with-FRG83D V1.7 with hastarin r8.5.1 On my HD2 got 1920 in quadrant,31.5 on neocore, and 37 on linmark.

The lag might be because you are using launcher pro, I use launcher pro and sometimes it makes the the lock lag on my phone but it doesn't happen when I use the default lock also if you have alot of Widgets on your screen it will cause lag also

appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same galaxy s scores 6000+ in quadrant with custem roms

The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not. Comparing apples to orenges in an apple juice contest doesn't really prove much. Use real life feel. If you care about the scores a rom can be made to get you over 3000 quad score but is laggy as hell. Don't believe me? Look at my sig

interesting... I was using quadrant to see how a stock xxjvo and gingerreal compared. Surely that would indicate a real speed difference and not just be some kind of "hack" ?

zelendel said:
The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right.
HD2 uses two android OS :
- Cyanogenmod, that is faster than our samsung os..
- Nexus one's port to HD2, greatly optimized by google...
It's really fast. I upgraded my father's HD2 last month, replacing windows in the NAND with CM7. It really makes a big change, the phone is like brand new ^^

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1012556
Quadrant is pretty flawed. And I say that being someone who had a phone (before modifications) that was mid-range in Quadrant (Galaxy S), and having a phone that's right top of the heap (Galaxy S II)

SG3 vs SG5

I made some test with my wifes phone - a galaxy 5 - and I was impressed with the performance. My wifes phone is totally stock (froyo), no root or deodex or other stuff but it has a Quadrant score of 520. My stock SG3 has a score of 321 and 607 with G3Mod and Kyrillos 8. So I did another test (Antutu) and checked the 2D and 3D performance. The stock SG5 has a 3D score of 450 while my SG3 only has 250. The RAM and CPU scores of the SG5 are lower than my scores. So I guess the reason for the high SG5 scores is the 3D grafics. But why is that? Is it because of the lower screen resolution, or the lower density, or the fewer colors, or ...? Maybe somebody can enlighten me.
Another issue. I put my old SD card in the SG5 and it has a reading speed of 9MB/s. When the card was in my phone I only had a reading speed of 4 MB/sec? Why is that?

The G3 has a CPU speed advantage (667MHz vs. 600Mhz) but the G5 has a lower-res screen (QVGA, vs. WQVGA) as an advantage....thats one of the main reason

To fix the reading speed of sdcard apply sdcardreadingspeedfix script
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App

@raja no that doesn't affect much
@op
G3 got a damn good processor (Samsung s5p6442) while g5 has a qualcomm
But g3 has a fimg gpu compared to the adreno200 in g5
And yea these scores are just scores, if we want we can even get 1000+, real life performance matters

ronnie735 said:
To fix the reading speed of sdcard apply sdcardreadingspeedfix script
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tryed - doesn't do a thing for me
@cedeai: thanx

this sdcardreadingspeedfix script did'nt work for me too

my sister has a sg5, compared to our phone is really fast, and also plays games better, like angry birds, without overclocking, and their port of cm7 is amazing

What's wrong with my G2?

Hello, so I bought this Korean version G2 LG-F320L and first of all what's the difference between F320S, F320K and F320L? Secondly,
What could help increase performance of my device? Because I was kinda disappointed of results in antutu benchmark: it was lower than Samsung Galaxy S4 I9505... I'm not telling I'm disappointed by overall performance, but I think it could work faster and how could I boost the performance? And there's only ~700mb free even if all programs are closed out of 2gb RAM.
tinypic.com/r/10rintk/8
tinypic.com/r/24g9bme/8

First things first. Free ram in android is wasted ram. Read this thread to get more information about it.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1966571
Second thing: benchmarks are nothing you should really worry about. Is your phone slow? Are there some games that are stuttering? I don't think so. Don't worry about benchmark results. On a side note: Samsung is known to enter a special performance mode that's only available when you're running a benchmark thus cheating the results.

olokos said:
First things first. Free ram in android is wasted ram. Read this thread to get more information about it.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1966571
Second thing: benchmarks are nothing you should really worry about. Is your phone slow? Are there some games that are stuttering? I don't think so. Don't worry about benchmark results. On a side note: Samsung is known to enter a special performance mode that's only available when you're running a benchmark thus cheating the results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have tried GTA Vice City on max resolution, textures, and draw distance and it was just unplayable. Is it so on any high-end smartphone?

I can't say for sure, but I actually think it didn't ran perfectly smooth on my z1 either.
If you have a friend with G2 or any other G2 around then just test it side by side. You could also try to find some YouTube video of your phone running vice city on similar settings.

Need buying advice - N910C of N910F ?

Which one should I buy if I'm after longer battery life / performance / XDA support?
I'm not a gamer.
Thanks in advance

search...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/note-4/general/to-snapdragon-805-to-exynos-5433-t2868247

Doesn't really matter. The N910F apparently gives better battery life, but some try dispute that. If LTE Cat.6 is implemented in your country then get the N910F as it supports LTE Cat.6. With latest Android 5.1.1 now out for the USA Snapdragons and Exynos Polish, apparently both no longer have Recent Apps lag and they perform much better than before.
Either way youre getting a beastly device.

go for 910c and dont even think about it unless you are cm user.

tmac31 said:
go for 910c and dont even think about it unless you are cm user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and why is that? it's simple, both run and will run 32bit, and if you want more processing power, then the C if you want graphics power, then the F.. simple as that, nothing more nothing less..

thejunkie said:
and why is that? it's simple, both run and will run 32bit, and if you want more processing power, then the C if you want graphics power, then the F.. simple as that, nothing more nothing less..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
910f barelys has any more graphics power. not a single game runs better on s805 version(atleast the ones i tried) benchmarks almost same aswell. but on the other hand cpu difference is big. when you use them side by side speed difference is very noticable.
and whatever they are on 32 or 64 bit doesnt mean anything.

I got a N910C, because I never did like Quadcomm SOCs. They tend to run a little hotter than other SOCs. I barely felt any heat of my N910C even when playing Asphalt 8 or Street Fighter IV HD. The only time I felt any heat from my N910C was when it had developed a hardware fault and I had to send it back to the retailer for repairs. Which I'm still waiting for them to finish the repairs.
Other than that I had a great experience with my N910C.

The N910F doesn't run hot, the Snapdragon 805 CPU has to be the coolest of the Qualcomm chips. The only time the phone got hot for me is when upgrading to Lollipop, it got very hot while optimising apps, then calmed down after the update was all done.
As for performance, on 5.1.1 both the C and USA Snapdragons that are basically US N910Fs are running with no Recent Apps lag, so one can't really say there is much of a difference, both run much better than they did on 5.0.1.
Get the variant that has warranty in your country, and if both do, then get the one that best suits your network e.g. if the network supports the newer and faster LTE Cat.6 then get the F, also for slightly better battery life get the F, as well as if you plan on getting the GearVR by Oculus, get the F.
If you want the Exynos CPU and Wolfson DAC, get the C.

I've just sold my 910f and bought the 910c. Two reasons first I just prefer exynos maybe because my last device was exynos. Second the snapdragon does run fairly hot and tended to overheat when using gear vr
Sent from my SM-N910C using Tapatalk

Dont do that mistake and buy note 4 it's crap

Exynos 5433 is around ~30% faster at the CPU department, while it has a weaker GPU.
Honestly, it doesn't make much of a difference. But if you can choose, the 910C has better performance.
Weaker GPU matter less than weaker CPU because both are going to run any game exceptionally regardless.
Edit: Exynos 5433 is apparently ~50% ahead of the SD805 at geekbench, difference is bigger than I thought.

Go for C and don't look back.

910C.

I've just got the C & I have noticed it runs smoother than my F & also when I play music via Bluetooth it don't get ant skips, blips etc like i did with the F.
I dunno if it's the 5.1.1 update that has fixed that or its a Snapdragon fault.
So far I'm really happy with the C & just looking at the F & wonder if I should sell it.

The 5.1.1 update seems to have done wonders for both N910F and N910C.
Sent from my Note 4 +64GB MicroSDXC via Tapatalk

Get the C

Hehehe again a 910C/910F thread, let's see how quickly this one gets closed due to members fighting (cause that's where thread like these are always bound to end up in).
Anyway my personal opinion: if you want to stay stock, then go for the 910C. If you want AOSP then 910F. Yes, CM is currently also available for 910C but they're about 8-12 months behind. Realistically the Note 6 will be out before a 'perfect' stable version will be available for the 910C. These things just take a lot of time to develop.
Quick pro's and cons of stock vs AOSP:
Pro stock:
* Everything just works.
Pro AOSP:
* Quick updates, no need to wait till august 2016 for Android M, you will have it 2 weeks after google releases it
* Blazing fast GUI, everything just works so much smoother.
* Additional features and control over your phone.
Con AOSP:
* Not everything works as of yet, I think currently still missing (although will be worked upon) are AudioFX, MMS, Compass in google maps. And then there's of course the fingerprint scanner but that should be coming with Android M. And then if you flash nightlies every time, you will run into some problems every now and then of course.
Previously camera quality was also a factor but that's solved now, photo quality is now equal.
All in all a personal choice, but I think this is what it boils down to.

TMO HTC Desire 626s Antutu Results

Hey guys. I have really put this phone through the paces. Something isnt reallly making sense for me. I tested a lot of phones in this category and price range. On paper, it seems to be more powerful than the rest but im not noticing this. I had my deviced rooted etc but I have reverted back to stock reruud and tried to use the phone normally for a week or so with just the internal memory being used. I wanted to get the most realistic use case benchmarks possible.. Here are my results.. I just ran the test. Then I ran it again. Then I enable CPU high performance mode through dev options and ran it one more time. ANNNNNDDD one more time with CPU HP Mode Enabled with Airplane mode on. FYI.. this did nothign. Here are my ANTUTU RESULTS (P.S. I am using v6.1.4 on android 5.1)
Run 1
Overall Score 20734
3D 898
UX 7984
CPU 7799
RAM 4053
Run 2
Overall Score 20159
3D 894
UX 7611
CPU 7830
RAM 3824
Run 3 (CPU high performance mode)
Overall Score 20734
3D 898
UX 7926
CPU 7810
RAM 4025
Run 4 (CPU high perf mode x airplane mode)
Overall Score 20845
3D 903
UX 8111
CPU 7780
RAM 4051
CAN ANYONE POST THERE RESULTS and THE DEVICE VARIANT? Thanks!

Here's a pic with results from all four, I used quadrant because my phone wasn't compatible with the 3d app that AtTuTu needed for there test. I'm am the sprint variant and I'm on stock marshmallow 6.0.1