Related
Hi guys I hope im just confusing myself! While reading some reviews I came across the tool spb benchmark, and thought il give it a try.
I received my xda exec today iv not installed any other 3rd party software that could cause problems
my Blueangel M2000: I have formatted it and reinstalled windows 2003 (Original ROM from orange)
IV attached a screen shot of the results table
the results are confusing the hellouta me, acording to the site(from my understanding) the higher the result the better the device has preformed- can som one just put my fears to rest please
Can anyone else substantiate this????
If this is the case I'd certainly like to know how, why what rom versions were involved, whether or not hardware used in both devices can be verified as the same hardware...
Who benchmarked the 2 devices?????
Can Anyone shed any light on this????????
The comparison is extremely unfair. If you put 8GB of RAM inside your PC, made a RAMDrive, and installed Windows XP into that, it would be far faster than if XP was installed on a hard disk. But you would lose ALL your data if the power source got interrupted.
That analogy is the same when comparing WM5 devices to WM2003SE devices. WM2003SE is installed into RAM, WM5 is installed into flash (persistent storage). Flash storage is a lot slower than RAM, but it uses a LOT less battery power than RAM, and you lose nothing if the battery dies. This is clearly a far more sensible and superior way of doing things, but at the expense of some speed.
I know which I'd rather have - more battery life and built-in NAND flash storage every time.
'disk' i/o is going to be worse because of the persistant storage. Writing to flash is much slower than to RAM.
Can't understand why the cpu rated much worse though.
Could this be partly because the Exec does NOT have a dedicated ATI chipset for GFX, hence the CPU is always worrying about the display.
Obviously a completely similar machine with ATI graphics chip would be quicker, so i expect that makes a difference even when you think all the apps are closed.
This seems to be the case, just received my exec and in comparison to my xda IIi it does seem a lot more sluggish. Even web browsing using both gprs & 3g is slower.
Is this a common issue or rom specifc?
I just ran XRick, MAN ITS SLOW!!!
I could play smooth realtime on my Himalaya (XDAII) but now? Damn, I cant play it at all. its painfull.....
Going to try Pocket Hack Master to see if that fixes it.
Damn this thing is slow.
Hi I've read some where in this forum that the galaxy S has some I/O problems which are leading to the frequent lags that the phone experiences
Frankly I do not know what I/O is but my question is whether I/O problem is a hardware or software problem. If it is software then fair and well, I'll wait for samsung to ooptimize the software
I have noticed that the benchmark software (Quadrant) runs relatively smoothly all the tests except the I/O test at which it stops for a while before moving to the next test. I dont know if this relates to the I/O problem.
Thanks for your answers
RADLOUNI said:
Hi I've read some where in this forum that the galaxy S has some I/O problems which are leading to the frequent lags that the phone experiences
Frankly I do not know what I/O is but my question is whether I/O problem is a hardware or software problem. If it is software then fair and well, I'll wait for samsung to ooptimize the software
I have noticed that the benchmark software (Quadrant) runs relatively smoothly all the tests except the I/O test at which it stops for a while before moving to the next test. I dont know if this relates to the I/O problem.
Thanks for your answers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theres still no solid proof that its a software issue.
****
EarlZ said:
Theres still no solid proof that its a software issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
****...............then you're saying its hardware ??????
He is not saying its hardware, just that there is no solid proof that its software.
However, based on the amount of working fixes, and reports of great improvements using Froyo I would put money on it being software related.
In fact...I am!
I am ordering a SGS in 3 days when my contract is up for renewal.
Actually, I think everyone's overlooking another obvious possible source of lag: clock-scaling for power conservation. If a phone slows down to 200MHz when it thinks it's inactive, and won't speed up until it sees evidence of activity lasting for 400ms, well... that's 400ms of lag you wouldn't get if the phone were running full-bore 1GHz all the time.
There's even an easy way to test the theory (on a rooted phone, at least) -- take two otherwise-identical phones, fully-charged, root one (while keeping the same rom), then install SetCPU and lock it into 'performance' mode so the phone can't slow down.
If the one locked at 100% CPU speed doesn't lag, and the one that's allowed to slow down to prolong the battery life does... well... there's the answer.
I mention this because I just experienced the night-and-day difference between the CDMA Hero's default power/speed (528MHz max, going down to 250MHz or less when "inactive") and with it locked to 712MHz in performance mode. Pretty much all of my lag problems vanished instantly when I locked it to performance mode. I have a hunch right now that perceived lagginess is almost entirely due to cpu scaling (particularly the time it takes to scale back up, and the criteria used for doing it).
Makes Sense
bitbang3r said:
Actually, I think everyone's overlooking another obvious possible source of lag: clock-scaling for power conservation. If a phone slows down to 200MHz when it thinks it's inactive, and won't speed up until it sees evidence of activity lasting for 400ms, well... that's 400ms of lag you wouldn't get if the phone were running full-bore 1GHz all the time.
There's even an easy way to test the theory (on a rooted phone, at least) -- take two otherwise-identical phones, fully-charged, root one (while keeping the same rom), then install SetCPU and lock it into 'performance' mode so the phone can't slow down.
If the one locked at 100% CPU speed doesn't lag, and the one that's allowed to slow down to prolong the battery life does... well... there's the answer.
I mention this because I just experienced the night-and-day difference between the CDMA Hero's default power/speed (528MHz max, going down to 250MHz or less when "inactive") and with it locked to 712MHz in performance mode. Pretty much all of my lag problems vanished instantly when I locked it to performance mode. I have a hunch right now that perceived lagginess is almost entirely due to cpu scaling (particularly the time it takes to scale back up, and the criteria used for doing it).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting theory, and it makes sense to be frank.
Are there any software out there that would enable me to lock the CPU speed to 1 GHz. I am willing to try this
RADLOUNI said:
Very interesting theory, and it makes sense to be frank.
Are there any software out there that would enable me to lock the CPU speed to 1 GHz. I am willing to try this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The guy just told you, root phone and install "Setcpu". That's the only way.
Looking at the benchmarks and the various fixes implemented I tend to lean towards the opinion that it may be hardware related.
hxxp://twitter.com/koush/status/20321413798
I'm not familiar enough with the internals of the phone. If there is faster flash memory located on the phone, then a repartition may be enough to fix the device. If not, then I'm afraid we may be stuck with some lag.
Would anyone be so kind as to explain what I/O is and why the setup in the SGS causes lagging while other android phones with similar specs don't seem to suffer from the same problems?
Thanks in advance
RADLOUNI said:
Very interesting theory, and it makes sense to be frank.
Are there any software out there that would enable me to lock the CPU speed to 1 GHz. I am willing to try this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not very interesting, as it's closer to the truth than you think.
think about it, Android OS is really Linux, the SGS is a miniature PC with phone capability.
everything else aside for the phone part, works just like a PC running Linux.
even on a Windows PC the Duo Core or Quad Core machines that has the Power Saving option enable behaves the same, when they are on iddle mode they run at 50% CPU power or less, and it takes them a fraction of a sec to speed back up, people that don't like that tiny lag, they always set the PC on performance mode, or always on, or simply not install the power saving software that comes with the PC.
we can do the same on the SGS phones, the only downside is that your battery will be out of juice faster than you think.
not to mention the Screen is the most power hungry part in the phone, just like most other phones with large LCD displays
did the install and...
Hi
I just did the install of setcpu and i will monitor the device for sometime before i give some feedback. My initiall impression is that the performance got better.
i set the software to performance mode and kept the limits between 100Mhz and 1000Mhz
i will also try to set the min limit to 800Mhz
Actually, that reminds me... the other thing I've seen cited a lot for causing lag is the way Android manages memory by terminating apps instead of using a swapfile. This can cause lag, because it simply takes time to call onPause()/onStop() and wait for it to finish, compared to unceremoniously just suspending the app and dumping a few megs to the microSD card.
Apparently, manufacturers don't use swapfile because most/all Android phones ship with class 2 microSD flash, in which case it would hurt performance more than it helped.
With that in mind, I'd say the following two things should be tried:
1) Buy a class 6 (or better) microSD card, format a swap partition, and use a rom on a rooted phone that supports it. For the record, swap with class 2 would be detrimental; swap with class 4 would be of minimal benefit; swap with class 6 is a big improvement; class 8 basically doesn't exist, and class 10 in real-world use -- with small, scattered files and random read-writes -- is only a little bit faster than class 6, because at that point the time it takes to deal with protocol matters becomes huge relative to the time it takes to actually DO the flash write (the SD card SPI and 4-bit protocols are *really* ugly, and overwhelmingly optimized for sequential reading and writing of bulk data. The moment you start doing random-access rewrites, their performance -- regardless of class -- goes to hell. That's part of the reason why pro gear still tends to use CompactFlash... it still has to deal with flash a page at a time, but it can access arbitrary tiny chunks of data scattered all over the place a lot faster and with a lot less ceremony than (micro)SD).
2) Install SetCPU and lock the CPU to max speed in "performance" mode.
SetCPU alone seemed to make the biggest difference with regard to keyboard input lag. My guess is that Android (or HTC's modifications for the Hero, Evo, etc... and quite possibly Samsung's too) slow the phone WAY down whenever an input area is displayed, on the theory that "most" apps at that point are just displaying the picture of a keyboard and waiting for the user to mash the screen with his finger. Without SetCPU, Graffiti is almost unusable and makes weird errors. With SetCPU locked to performance mode, Graffiti is almost flawless. It's literally a night-and-day difference.
Kpkpkpkp said:
Would anyone be so kind as to explain what I/O is and why the setup in the SGS causes lagging while other android phones with similar specs don't seem to suffer from the same problems?
Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Input/Output -data communication to/from the phone and other devices/networks
It's like when you are writing information to the system that comes from downloads, so whether you are syncing files, downloading from the marketplace or uploading...you are doing I/O....
"In computing, input/output, or I/O, refers to the communication between an information processing system (such as a computer), and the outside world possibly a human, or another information processing system. Inputs are the signals or data received by the system, and outputs are the signals or data sent from it. "
Wiki
bitbang3r said:
Actually, that reminds me... the other thing I've seen cited a lot for causing lag is the way Android manages memory by terminating apps instead of using a swapfile. This can cause lag, because it simply takes time to call onPause()/onStop() and wait for it to finish, compared to unceremoniously just suspending the app and dumping a few megs to the microSD card.
Apparently, manufacturers don't use swapfile because most/all Android phones ship with class 2 microSD flash, in which case it would hurt performance more than it helped.
With that in mind, I'd say the following two things should be tried:
1) Buy a class 6 (or better) microSD card, format a swap partition, and use a rom on a rooted phone that supports it. For the record, swap with class 2 would be detrimental; swap with class 4 would be of minimal benefit; swap with class 6 is a big improvement; class 8 basically doesn't exist, and class 10 in real-world use -- with small, scattered files and random read-writes -- is only a little bit faster than class 6, because at that point the time it takes to deal with protocol matters becomes huge relative to the time it takes to actually DO the flash write (the SD card SPI and 4-bit protocols are *really* ugly, and overwhelmingly optimized for sequential reading and writing of bulk data. The moment you start doing random-access rewrites, their performance -- regardless of class -- goes to hell. That's part of the reason why pro gear still tends to use CompactFlash... it still has to deal with flash a page at a time, but it can access arbitrary tiny chunks of data scattered all over the place a lot faster and with a lot less ceremony than (micro)SD).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To ask a question and summarize, if you were given a choice of any class card to put in your phone you'd chose a class 6 because of the performance benefit here? Or would you maybe go with a higher class because it'd get greater benefits in other areas? Thanks for the help, again, don't consider money as a factor for the main issue, just trying to learn a bit.
result
bitbang3r said:
Actually, that reminds me... the other thing I've seen cited a lot for causing lag is the way Android manages memory by terminating apps instead of using a swapfile. This can cause lag, because it simply takes time to call onPause()/onStop() and wait for it to finish, compared to unceremoniously just suspending the app and dumping a few megs to the microSD card.
Apparently, manufacturers don't use swapfile because most/all Android phones ship with class 2 microSD flash, in which case it would hurt performance more than it helped.
With that in mind, I'd say the following two things should be tried:
1) Buy a class 6 (or better) microSD card, format a swap partition, and use a rom on a rooted phone that supports it. For the record, swap with class 2 would be detrimental; swap with class 4 would be of minimal benefit; swap with class 6 is a big improvement; class 8 basically doesn't exist, and class 10 in real-world use -- with small, scattered files and random read-writes -- is only a little bit faster than class 6, because at that point the time it takes to deal with protocol matters becomes huge relative to the time it takes to actually DO the flash write (the SD card SPI and 4-bit protocols are *really* ugly, and overwhelmingly optimized for sequential reading and writing of bulk data. The moment you start doing random-access rewrites, their performance -- regardless of class -- goes to hell. That's part of the reason why pro gear still tends to use CompactFlash... it still has to deal with flash a page at a time, but it can access arbitrary tiny chunks of data scattered all over the place a lot faster and with a lot less ceremony than (micro)SD).
2) Install SetCPU and lock the CPU to max speed in "performance" mode.
SetCPU alone seemed to make the biggest difference with regard to keyboard input lag. My guess is that Android (or HTC's modifications for the Hero, Evo, etc... and quite possibly Samsung's too) slow the phone WAY down whenever an input area is displayed, on the theory that "most" apps at that point are just displaying the picture of a keyboard and waiting for the user to mash the screen with his finger. Without SetCPU, Graffiti is almost unusable and makes weird errors. With SetCPU locked to performance mode, Graffiti is almost flawless. It's literally a night-and-day difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HI I tried setCPU at performance mode , and i have to say that it improved the perofrmance A BIT. But i would not say that much has improved.
I guess that the class6 SD card option has more bearing on this issue than CPU speed scaling
RADLOUNI said:
HI I tried setCPU at performance mode , and i have to say that it improved the perofrmance A BIT. But i would not say that much has improved.
I guess that the class6 SD card option has more bearing on this issue than CPU speed scaling
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the SD card lag fix option REQUIRE a class 6 card? That limits the size a bit, doesn't it? What is the biggest class 6 card available?
borchgrevink said:
Does the SD card lag fix option REQUIRE a class 6 card? That limits the size a bit, doesn't it? What is the biggest class 6 card available?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
16GB
no, it does not need to be Class 6, it depends on the SD card build quality, some Class 2 performs as good as a Class 6
but it's a luck of the draw, if you have a known good Class 2 or Class 4 microSD card, then use it, no need to buy a new one
i suggest you to test the speed of the SD card before you do the mimocan thing
use this app, it's pretty accurate
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=739083
The CPU theory doesn't really explain why symlinking the /dbdata/data folder to /data/data eliminates lag.
hxxp://android.modaco.com/content/samsung-galaxy-s-s-modaco-com/312298/got-the-stalling-problem-rooted-try-this/
It also seems that a 32gb class2 SanDisk card is OK.
http://android.modaco.com/content/s...rt-microsd-cards-that-work-with-mimocans-fix/
borchgrevink said:
It also seems that a 32gb class2 SanDisk card is OK.
http://android.modaco.com/content/s...rt-microsd-cards-that-work-with-mimocans-fix/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kinda pricey at the moment, aprox $135 for real non fake ones
Hello to all Streak owners
I've just bought a Streak that requires a new screen, and whilst replacing that I will be looking into replacing / upgrading the 2gb internal Micro SD card.
Now I've read some threads on here and believe you have to set it up correctly as it only recognises 2gb at a time, but thats not my query now, I'll find the info and if not then I'll post for help.
Q)
My question is with Micro SD cards getting ever cheaper, and faster, higher performance ones dropping also in price, is it worth going in for these faster, higher performance cards???
Either for general Micro SD storage or internal storage, replacing the 2gb.
I know it seems common sense, by putting a faster or higher performance card in, should make it faster. But...
???)
Can the Streak make full use of the higher performance, faster cards?
When do you reach the point of overkill, or diminishing returns?
Can the streak support higher speed technology? (I believe I read somewhere that in fact the lower class cards were faster, although I don't understand this) If this is correct, someone please explain...
Ideally I'd like to know what is the fastest card the Streak can make use of? And what Micro SD technologies it can support?
Also if anyone has real world speeds for cards, (as I understand, often the numbers, classes manufacturers quote often mean nothing, compared to how they actually perform) or preferred manufacturers they could recommend, or links to tests, benchmarks, reviews etc.
Many, Many, Many thanks to this site and all its contributors,
I've used this site for many years, back when I had an XDA II from O2, lost / forgot that username, then again when got MDA Tmobile, AKA (Blueangel), but I don't post much as usually I'm able to find what I want, buy searching on the site or by xyz or whatever I want site:xda-developers.com in a popular search engine.
Best wishes and Seasons Greetings to you all,
John
Keep this in mind: at a certian point even if the card is compatable, the controller on the device itself will eventually be the bottleneck. Would this be the case? I have no idea, but adding in a faster card then the stock one has shown benefits.
For those who wonder whether the complete encryption of TF300TG leads to performance loss: It does. (of course :laugh: )
Antutu without encryption: 12430. With enryption 10353.
Thanks for the comparison!
However, you can't really say the performance is much worse referring to just one benchmark. For instance, with encryption (depending on the implementation), some files are cached in RAM leading to better performance (as seems to be the case with Truecrypt on PC).
Then again, the TF300 already has solid state storage leading to better access times, so the benefit of better caching may be drowned in the extra CPU juice required to encrypt and decrypt. On the other hand Tegra3 might have hardware accelerated AES en/decryption.
Many variables and no solid conclusion yet
After using this Verizon S7 edge for over a week I concluded the following.
1. Cpu speed is limited to 1.6GHz - Maybe to keep heat issues down.
2. Apps. can not be moved to SD. Yes, it says it did but it's only moves cache.
3. Verizon has left off some of the software others have.
4. Ram is limited to 3.5G to start and after OS and Samsung and Verizon stuff, user has
maybe 1.6G to 1.8G to use.
5. Phone does stop and stutters at times.
6. Screen slow to respond on the edges at times.
Given all that, I do like this phone but I believe that work is need by Samsung and Verizon.
Some apps but not all can be moved to SD card. I have moved apps.
Download Samsung pay from app store. It works.
No stutters on my end so that is always phone specific: very fluid and fast for me. My iPhone 6s plus also stopped and lagged so that myth of fluidity was just that.
Edge works well for me but again maybe phone specific.
Yes, VZW did remove some things which is typical and this is not surprising or new.
Not bashing or defending Samsung, but I am impressed with this phone even owning a Nexus 6p. There, I said it. Let the bashing begin.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
mmariani said:
After using this Verizon S7 edge for over a week I concluded the following.
1. Cpu speed is limited to 1.6GHz - Maybe to keep heat issues down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I do agree that Verizon went overboard with its meddling on this device. My biggest complaints so far are
* the assinine removal of the Samsung internet browser app which offered, among other things, an optimized experience on the device's specific chipset, website authentication using fingerprint, and the optional ability to use an ad-blocking add-on
* a completely unnecessary Verizon tramp stamp on the back of this beautiful device
I am not seeing your claimed clock throttle on the CPU, however. If I keep a floating CPU usage monitor (I used the paid version of System Monitor from the Play store) on while running, for example, the Geekbench benchmark, I have seen both high speed cores ramp up to 2.2ghz, which is very close to the rated max of 2.3ghz, and that was after me using my phone almost continuously for the last several hours before running Geekbench, so a thermal throttle of 100mhz seems not all that unlikely.
Some of your other points are true for all carrier variants of the device, and possibly all devices running Android or Android Marshmallow (for example, moving apps to SD storage has never been all or nothing on Android - it is dependent on how each app is designed by its programmers as to what actually gets stored on the SD - the app may be hard coded to use primary storage for things like cache and even documents, and the reported memory on all my previous Android devices has always been less than what the manufacturer specifies as the hardware spec - I've read different explanations for this and I don't really understand why it's true, but the S7 is far from alone in this).
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
TJCacher said:
Well I do agree that Verizon went overboard with its meddling on this device. My biggest complaints so far are
* the assinine removal of the Samsung internet browser app which offered, among other things, an optimized experience on the device's specific chipset, website authentication using fingerprint, and the optional ability to use an ad-blocking add-on
* a completely unnecessary Verizon tramp stamp on the back of this beautiful device
I am not seeing your claimed clock throttle on the CPU, however. If I keep a floating CPU usage monitor (I used the paid version of System Monitor from the Play store) on while running, for example, the Geekbench benchmark, I have seen both high speed cores ramp up to 2.2ghz, which is very close to the rated max of 2.3ghz, and that was after me using my phone almost continuously for the last several hours before running Geekbench, so a thermal throttle of 100mhz seems not all that unlikely.
Some of your other points are true for all carrier variants of the device, and possibly all devices running Android or Android Marshmallow (for example, moving apps to SD storage has never been all or nothing on Android - it is dependent on how each app is designed by its programmers as to what actually gets stored on the SD - the app may be hard coded to use primary storage for things like cache and even documents, and the reported memory on all my previous Android devices has always been less than what the manufacturer specifies as the hardware spec - I've read different explanations for this and I don't really understand why it's true, but the S7 is far from alone in this).
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I was using System Monitor so I tried Geekbench 3 and they both report 1.6 GHz.
Geekbench also reports 2222 Single Core and 5227 Multi Core. Also I stand by my statement that Apps do not move to SD. I have moved more than 20 apps. and the SD shows them listed under Android/Data on the SD card but after moving over a gig of apps, the dir shows less than 20 megs of data. They are mostly empty program name folders. And yes I know how to move them. So either my phone is diff from yours or...... Thank you for your input.
markwebb said:
Some apps but not all can be moved to SD card. I have moved apps.
Download Samsung pay from app store. It works.
No stutters on my end so that is always phone specific: very fluid and fast for me. My iPhone 6s plus also stopped and lagged so that myth of fluidity was just that.
Edge works well for me but again maybe phone specific.
Yes, VZW did remove some things which is typical and this is not surprising or new.
Not bashing or defending Samsung, but I am impressed with this phone even owning a Nexus 6p. There, I said it. Let the bashing begin.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I want to know if anyone else is seeing these problems. As for the apps. they don't really move. Just a name dir. is created on the SD.
Ans to apps not moving to SD
Well folks I found the ans. on a diff. thread:
Samsung disabled the adaptive storage option. Here is the response I got from Samsung on the app data issue. I looks like they know the data isn't moving.
"I have checked our resources and found that whenever an app is moved to the SD card, only the app and the dependencies of the application for the Operating System to identify the app on the SD card are only moved. Data associated with the app is not moved to the SD card.
Let’s hope that our future updates should allow the user to move the apps data to the SD card along with the app.
I would have surely helped you if there was any other option to move the apps data to the SD card.
I appreciate your time in writing to us. "
So Samsung maybe aware and I hope they do fix this.
TJCacher said:
the assinine removal of the Samsung internet browser app which offered, among other things, an optimized experience on the device's specific chipset, website authentication using fingerprint, and the optional ability to use an ad-blocking add-on
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love that browser so much I'm willing to pay someone to mod the app so that we Verizon users can sideload it onto our phones.
mmariani said:
Well I was using System Monitor so I tried Geekbench 3 and they both report 1.6 GHz.
Geekbench also reports 2222 Single Core and 5227 Multi Core. Also I stand by my statement that Apps do not move to SD. I have moved more than 20 apps. and the SD shows them listed under Android/Data on the SD card but after moving over a gig of apps, the dir shows less than 20 megs of data. They are mostly empty program name folders. And yes I know how to move them. So either my phone is diff from yours or...... Thank you for your input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Geekbench reports, in its initial pre-test display, the max clock rate of cores 1 & 2, which are the cpu's 2 low power cores, and that is the correct clock rate as designed and specified by the manufacturer.
However when the benchmark is actually run, the system correctly detects the need for high power processing and the high power cores kick in, and can ramp all the way up to their maximum clock rating, assuming they do not thermally limit.
The scores you are reporting would not be obtained were all the cores being limited to 1.6ghz. You would probably be seeing well below 2000 in the single core benchmark if the high power cores were being limited to a maximum clock speed of 1.6ghz.
The score you are reporting definitely doesn't support an assertion that Verizon has set a more conservative limit to the max CPU clocks on this device, and, as I've said, if you use System Monitor's floating CPU window feature to watch the cpu clock speeds in real time as the test actually runs, you will see clock rates at or near the max speed of 2.3ghz on the two high power cores (nos. 3 & 4).
Your reply post seemed to indicate I thought you didn't know how to move apps correctly, and that I did. Not true. I haven't tried moving any apps on this phone actually, and expect I would see similar results to yours if I did so.
But as far as moving apps to SD goes, I also stand by my previous statements. Your app-moving issues have nothing to do specifically with the S7 models in any variant by any carrier including Verizon, nor for that matter, Samsung itself, but instead are due to a multitude of complicating factors, some because of Android itself, and some by the makers of the specific apps.
If you do a bit of searching on Google for discussions about having problems moving an app to SD storage, you will quickly see that it is a long-standing problem reported for many apps by many people on many different versions of Android running on many different brands and types of devices, and there are about as many reasons for it not working as there are instances of it not working right.
It's just that it seems to me like blaming app-moving problems on Verizon for mucking it up on the S7 is like blaming your vehicle's poor gas mileage on the owner of the dealership you bought your new car from. Verizon did plenty to be irritated about on this device, as well as others, but this particular issue isn't their fault. Android's app-moving feature has had problems since long before the S7 model was ever designed or built.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
TJCacher said:
Geekbench reports, in its initial pre-test display, the max clock rate of cores 1 & 2, which are the cpu's 2 low power cores, and that is the correct clock rate as designed and specified by the manufacturer.
However when the benchmark is actually run, the system correctly detects the need for high power processing and the high power cores kick in, and can ramp all the way up to their maximum clock rating, assuming they do not thermally limit.
The scores you are reporting would not be obtained were all the cores being limited to 1.6ghz. You would probably be seeing well below 2000 in the single core benchmark if the high power cores were being limited to a maximum clock speed of 1.6ghz.
The score you are reporting definitely doesn't support an assertion that Verizon has set a more conservative limit to the max CPU clocks on this device, and, as I've said, if you use System Monitor's floating CPU window feature to watch the cpu clock speeds in real time as the test actually runs, you will see clock rates at or near the max speed of 2.3ghz on the two high power cores (nos. 3 & 4).
Your reply post seemed to indicate I thought you didn't know how to move apps correctly, and that I did. Not true. I haven't tried moving any apps on this phone actually, and expect I would see similar results to yours if I did so.
But as far as moving apps to SD goes, I also stand by my previous statements. Your app-moving issues have nothing to do specifically with the S7 models in any variant by any carrier including Verizon, nor for that matter, Samsung itself, but instead are due to a multitude of complicating factors, some because of Android itself, and some by the makers of the specific apps.
If you do a bit of searching on Google for discussions about having problems moving an app to SD storage, you will quickly see that it is a long-standing problem reported for many apps by many people on many different versions of Android running on many different brands and types of devices, and there are about as many reasons for it not working as there are instances of it not working right.
It's just that it seems to me like blaming app-moving problems on Verizon for mucking it up on the S7 is like blaming your vehicle's poor gas mileage on the owner of the dealership you bought your new car from. Verizon did plenty to be irritated about on this device, as well as others, but this particular issue isn't their fault. Android's app-moving feature has had problems since long before the S7 model was ever designed or built.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry friend, I was not trying to blame anyone, just pointing out problems I found to see if it was my phone or if others noted the same. Apps don't move to me is a problem with a phone limited to 32Gigs. On my Note 3 I could move apps. to the SD but that may have been because I rooted it and mod it.
Now as for speed I agree I was wrong because the apps I used to check was not reading the correct speed.
Today I got an update to the AIDA64 app and it now notes the correct upper cpu speeds.
As I said before I do like this phone but then nothing is perfect and I want to make the best use of it.
Again just trying to get a handle on a new phone and seeing what others may have tried or worked out.
mmariani said:
Sorry friend, I was not trying to blame anyone...
...Apps don't move to me is a problem with a phone limited to 32Gigs.
...
As I said before I do like this phone but then nothing is perfect and I want to make the best use of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry if I came off as confrontational - wasn't intended.
And we are certainly in agreement that there are some issues with this otherwise very fine phone. Like you, I hope to see at least some of these issues fixed or get decent work arounds for them.
App moving is a can of worms and without root privileges there is only so much Google can do with Android to fix it (adoptable storage probably being the most thorough approach, although I would argue that it's just substituting one can of worms for another [emoji1]).
There are a *lot* of apps that refuse to be moved without elevated permissions to do it. Other apps may allow you to move the executable image and related runtime files, but stubbornly don't allow you to pick where they store data and/or other types of resources, so the paltry savings on moving the runtime stuff doesn't help all that much.
And on a related note, I would certainly add to your observation about 32gigs that it was a mistake for Samsung not to offer carrier-branded phones in a larger memory size. I'm sure most if not all of the s7 owners who participate on XDA would have really appreciated at least a 64gig option.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Have you tried this for adoptable storage?
http://www.modaco.com/news/android/...e-adoptable-storage-on-your-s7-s7-edge-r1632/
There's a thread all about this mod right here in the Verizon S7E forum.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
mwshows said:
Have you tried this for adoptable storage?
http://www.modaco.com/news/android/...e-adoptable-storage-on-your-s7-s7-edge-r1632/
There's a thread all about this mod right here in the Verizon S7E forum.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm thinking about doing it. But I'm still checking out the phone and what others are noting. Thanks for the tip.
I'm using the Samsung browser on mine. Just downloaded it from the Play Store. I linked to it through a Chrome search and it worked.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk