I've been trying different Roms lately, such as cm10.1, slim bean, liquid smooth. They were all fine except liquid smooth. But I was just wondering in general, is there a ROM that enhances or makes gaming better on?
No. Your question is silly, it's like asking. What is the best operating system for gaming? Is it windows 7? Mac? Or Linux?
... What you're asking for are kernels, not roms. And there is no best rom or kernel. Just look around and try for yourself
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
As zephix mentioned, you should be looking at kernels, not roms, to improve gaming performance. You would want to look into kernels that overclock the GPU by default, or give you the option to overclock it yourself. Compare the different kernels out there, matrix, faux, motley,harsh, etc and see which one benefits the GPU the most.
For example the Matrix kernel has a GPU overclocked version that boost the gpu up to 487mhz. This should help improve game performance but will also negatively affect battery life when gaming.
Trinity kernel, its the BOOM
Trinity kernel forces gpu over clocking all the time though, with no option to set it back.
You can try the RasBeanJelly ROM + Trinity kernel combo. RasBean has new bionic patches while Trinity bumps up GPU. I'm running that right now. There was a nice jump in my Antutu score (20,000+), but we all know benchmark numbers mean nothing.
Like zephiK and Raider said: it's up to you to try out a bunch of different ROMs/kernels and see which ones you like best. Since I'm answering, I say check out RasBeanJelly and Trinity.
Faux' kernel gives me quite good 3D performance.
franco r53 has quite bad 3D performance for me. r61 seems to be really good, but somehow uses more battery while gaming, at least for me.
Every ROM is okay, I play games with vsync off and 128mhz CPU and they run good. Dead trigger, most wanted, temple run 2, and riptide are smooth. Games that aren't tolerable are basically not optimized and most likely lag on every device it can run on. Long story short, every ROM is apt, the GPU is a beast and isn't necessary for things out now. And HD YouTube even works in this mode.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
All roms have bionic. Rom won't do anything to your game. Kernel probably won't either. Games on the stock nexus 4 run great. If it weren't for washed out colors I'd say kernels are a waste of time. But anyone saying that stock android on the nexus 4 is slow or unfit for gaming is a liar. Just stop worrying about this performance bs, enjoy your nexus.
hello everybody , i would like to see what kernels and roms people have been using for games?
i wanna play MC4, nova 3, n64 emulators with no lag and not getting too hot as well.
thanks!
ROM should usually be something that uses good linaro -O3 throughout the ROM, and possibly Bionic stuff in it, as well as things that advertise "PUB" optimizations. usually those are limited to AOKP PUB ROMs, but others also cherry pick certain PUB things. These types of ROMs give the smoothest experience and best FPS. Avoid anything with a "hybrid engine" such as Paranoid Android and PAC, those get much worse FPS in games.
for a kernel, if you want the smoothest gameplay go with KTManta kernel and use some customizations to get some overclocks going. I have a few pre-made setting files in my sig you can try. If you do not want to do any customization yourself or get too much into overclocking for additional GPU speeds then Trinity is your best choice for that, although it too uses a small GPU overclock that is hardcoded in.
With the KTManta kernel people have gotten 59.8 average frames per second (basically the highest because of vsync) in Epic Citadel benchmark, an have almost broken 20,000 in AnTuTu score. Trinity can do a good job as well, it usually gets around 17,500 in AnTuTu and tends to average about 55-56 frames per second in Epic Citadel.
I have been playing diablo 2 on my note 3 (sm-n900a) with dosbox using roland deschains method, and was wondering if using a debloated, or custom rom would give any better performance in dosbox.
conman56ace said:
I have been playing diablo 2 on my note 3 (sm-n900a) with dosbox using roland deschains method, and was wondering if using a debloated, or custom rom would give any better performance in dosbox.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is possible you will get better performance, then again, its possible your performance will drop. Does the custom ROM use an optimized dalvik (Qualcomm's custom dalvik seems to be the fastest)? I'd say the biggest chance of performance gains come from custom ROMs that utilize NEON optimized libc (memcpy, etc) and bionic (math functions). Another big source of performance will be what governor your kernel is using. Some governors are optimized for power saving, while others are optimized for speed.
As a CM13 osprey user I found myself a little confused about the usefulness of custom kernels compared to the kernel bundled with cyanogenmod releases. There are many custom kernels available for the osprey, compatible with CM13. They mainly boast better performance & battery life and usually a lot of other features.
The purpose of this test is to measure the performance benefits and battery life benefits of the most popular custom kernels, if any. I want to find out if I should bother to use them myself, since the bundled kernel comes with the natural advantages of an easier install, better testing by the cyanogenmod devs and is updated, or has the potential to be updated, in line with the nightly releases. Perhaps some others will find the results interesting.
Setup
I'm testing on my 1 year old well used osprey running cyanogenmod 13.0-20160901-NIGHTLY-osprey.
All tests are single runs unless stated otherwise, phone in airplane mode. No special configuration is done to any kernel, so we're looking at their default settings.
Kernels
CM Bundled kernel
Squid r17
AGNi pureMOTO 3.2
FireKernel 5.6
Optimus R14
Shield r4
Explosion Reborn R24
Features
Custom kernels invariably come with many new features, sometimes a dizzying amount of stated improvements. I've highlighted some of the interesting differences that could affect performance, and a count of the bullet point features the kernels advertise.
{
"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"
}
Only Squid & Explosion (based on Squid) deviate from the linux base version of 3.10.49. All custom kernels except Squid & Shield provide higher max CPU clock states. AGNi pureMOTO, Explosion and FireKernel provide a higher GPU max clock.
FireKernel boasts an impressive 91 feature worth bullet pointing, while AGNi pureMOTO doesn't feel the need to advertise any feature or even a mission objective. Well I'm assuming better performance, battery life and stability is at least a concern of all kernels.
Tests
PCMark emulates real phone usage, and is the performance test I'm most interested in to indicate general performance.
AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel and Shield perform noticably worse than the bundled kernel. The other kernels are roughly in-line or a little lower than the bundled kernel, with only Explosion providing a hint of better performance.
It seems the kernels are providing higher max CPU clocks don't appear to be using them by default.
I didn't expect much difference in internel nand performance, but wanted to check for regressions. No kernels provide real storage i/o performance benefit. AGNi pureMOTO and Optimus have small performance regressions on sequential writes.
With 2D graphics mostly covered by PCMark, I'm simply checking 3D performance with a test provided by PassMark. Running at around 20fps on the bundled kernel, it seemed a good performance to spot any differences.
I was surprised to see poor performance from AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel & Explosion. The other kernels are in-line with the bundled kernel. Kernel GPU clock differences seem to have no effect, certainly no good one.
To isolate processing performance I used a blend of multicore tests provided by Vellamo. All custom kernels performed worse than the bundled kernel, although Squid, Optimus and Explosion are very close. It's a disappointing showing from AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel and Shield. As before higher CPU clock states do not seem to be used.
Looking at the figures I can't help but conclude that no custom kernel provides a worthwhile performance improvement over the bundled cyanogenmod kernel at their default settings. While this is somewhat disappointing, performance stats have little meaning without looking at battery life. This brings me to the most important and time consuming test, do custom kernels improve battery life?
Update: Battery tests completed 6-Sep-2016
Finally, after many hours of testing I have the battery test results. I used PCMark's battery test which runs the work usage test continuously until the battery reaches 20%. The test includes lots of emulated real world usage & lots of idle time. It also provides a geometric mean score for the entire run.
From the results we can see all kernels performing roughly similarly, but no custom kernel convincingly surpasses the bundled kernel for performance and battery life. Only Squid actually ends up with better average performance over the run, and at a small battery life cost.
Interestingly on viewing the CPU clock stats I saw the bundled, Squid, Optimus & Shield clocked between 800-1363MHz, whilst AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel & Explosion clocked between 400-1363Mhz, and made more use of intermediate clock states. However, the lower clocks just haven't translated into battery life increases.
Concluding thoughts
All the kernels have performed decently, and without any stability issues during my testing. But it's the CyanogenMod bundled kernel that has surprised me by being front runner in speed & battery life.
For those of you enjoying unique features offered by custom kernels, you can take heart that the custom kernels aren't that much worse. But for me, considering the natural advantages of using the CyanogenMod's kernel, I'll be switching back to the bundled.
nice research its weird that firekernel isn't #1
HelpMeruth said:
nice research its weird that firekernel isn't #1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no its not weird
Great work @alexheretic
alexheretic said:
Kernel GPU clock differences seem to have no effect, certainly no good one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So this really does mean that going from 465 MHz to 720 MHz makes 0 difference, when it should considering it's supposed to be delivering a 50% performance boost.
sticktornado said:
So this really does mean that going from 465 MHz to 720 MHz makes 0 difference, when it should considering it's supposed to be delivering a 50% performance boost.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is the case for me yes. The higher clocks are stated as features, and max gpu clock is observable as a setting using Kernel Adiutor. However, looking at the results I'd guess the gpu & cpu just aren't actually being clocked to max.
great work.. waiting for battery life...i think some other roms gives good battery life other than cm13
alexheretic said:
That is the case for me yes. The higher clocks are stated as features, and max gpu clock is observable as a setting using Kernel Adiutor. However, looking at the results I'd guess the gpu & cpu just aren't actually being clocked to max.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2765469
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/26tqck/overclocking_possibly_dead_for_currentpast_gen/
It might be just a placebo
I think best kernel was Chriszuma Kernel. It was the first OC kernel. I also had make some test in antutu benchmark app.
Cm 13 kernel 28000 score
Firekernel 31000 score
Chriszuma Kernel 35000 score
@alexheretic can you also try Chriszuna kernel please (forum.xda-developers.com/2015-moto-g/orig-development/osprey-chriszuma-kernel-v4-t3400303)
Sorry for bad english
Nikos dima said:
@alexheretic can you also try Chriszuna kernel please (forum.xda-developers.com/2015-moto-g/orig-development/osprey-chriszuma-kernel-v4-t3400303)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm going to test the battery life performance of these kernels over the next few days, after that I can take a look at more kernels.
Nikos dima said:
I think best kernel was Chriszuma Kernel. It was the first OC kernel. I also had make some test in antutu benchmark app.
Cm 13 kernel 28000 score
Firekernel 31000 score
Chriszuma Kernel 35000 score
@alexheretic can you also try Chriszuna kernel please (forum.xda-developers.com/2015-moto-g/orig-development/osprey-chriszuma-kernel-v4-t3400303)
Sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you had 31000 with firekernel ? that's strange i tested yesterday an got 34897
pmjferreira said:
you had 31000 with firekernel ? that's strange i tested yesterday an got 34897
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the new version of firekernel 5.6 is beter.
Very interesting. Overall it seems stock cm kernel is a better choice. Would be interesting to see how stock Moto stacks against stock cm on these tests.
I'm onto the 3rd kernel battery test. The good news is PCMark provides a nice geometic mean performance score of the entire run, so I should end up with pretty good figures for performance vs battery life.
so whats the best kernel right now
alexheretic said:
As a CM13 osprey user I found myself a little confused about the usefulness of custom kernels compared to the kernel bundled with cyanogenmod releases. There are many custom kernels available for the osprey, compatible with CM13. They mainly boast better performance & battery life and usually a lot of other features.
The purpose of this test is to measure the performance benefits and battery life benefits of the most popular custom kernels, if any. I want to find out if I should bother to use them myself, since the bundled kernel comes with the natural advantages of an easier install, better testing by the cyanogenmod devs and is updated, or has the potential to be updated, in line with the nightly releases. Perhaps some others will find the results interesting.
Setup
I'm testing on my 1 year old well used osprey running cyanogenmod 13.0-20160901-NIGHTLY-osprey.
All tests are single runs unless stated otherwise, phone in airplane mode. No special configuration is done to any kernel, so we're looking at their default settings.
Kernels
CM Bundled kernel
Squid r17
AGNi pureMOTO 3.2
FireKernel 5.6
Optimus R14
Shield r4
Explosion Reborn R24
Features
Custom kernels invariably come with many new features, sometimes a dizzying amount of stated improvements. I've highlighted some of the interesting differences that could affect performance, and a count of the bullet point features the kernels advertise.
Only Squid & Explosion (based on Squid) deviate from the linux base version of 3.10.49. All custom kernels except Squid & Shield provide higher max CPU clock states. AGNi pureMOTO, Explosion and FireKernel provide a higher GPU max clock.
FireKernel boasts an impressive 91 feature worth bullet pointing, while AGNi pureMOTO doesn't feel the need to advertise any feature or even a mission objective. Well I'm assuming better performance, battery life and stability is at least a concern of all kernels.
Tests
PCMark emulates real phone usage, and is the performance test I'm most interested in to indicate general performance.
AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel and Shield perform noticably worse than the bundled kernel. The other kernels are roughly in-line or a little lower than the bundled kernel, with only Explosion providing a hint of better performance.
It seems the kernels are providing higher max CPU clocks don't appear to be using them by default.
I didn't expect much difference in internel nand performance, but wanted to check for regressions. No kernels provide real storage i/o performance benefit. AGNi pureMOTO and Optimus have small performance regressions on sequential writes.
With 2D graphics mostly covered by PCMark, I'm simply checking 3D performance with a test provided by PassMark. Running at around 20fps on the bundled kernel, it seemed a good performance to spot any differences.
I was surprised to see poor performance from AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel & Explosion. The other kernels are in-line with the bundled kernel. Kernel GPU clock differences seem to have no effect, certainly no good one.
To isolate processing performance I used a blend of multicore tests provided by Vellamo. All custom kernels performed worse than the bundled kernel, although Squid, Optimus and Explosion are very close. It's a disappointing showing from AGNi pureMOTO, FireKernel and Shield. As before higher CPU clock states do not seem to be used.
Looking at the figures I can't help but conclude that no custom kernel provides a worthwhile performance improvement over the bundled cyanogenmod kernel at their default settings. While this is somewhat disappointing, performance stats have little meaning without looking at battery life. This brings me to the most important and time consuming test, do custom kernels improve battery life?
Battery Life - In Progress: 4/7 kernels tested
I'm currently testing battery life using PCMark, since these test take hours and I have 7 kernels to test and 1 phone, this could take some time...
While we're waiting for the battery tests, please let me know if I'm missing out any important tests.
Performance tests conducted: 3-Sep-2016
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it really matters how the kernel is set up.
i have conducted similar tests, (but more real world tests) and have concluded differently.
Acidfire.TM said:
it really matters how the kernel is set up.
i have conducted similar tests, (but more real world tests) and have concluded differently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great reply, no not just great, stunningly epic reply mate backed with nothing. Nice, you totally dismissed all evidence here, great job.
here the backing on my statement.
it's just some simple benchmark etiquette
don't benchmark kernels using their max oc frequency as not everyones device Will be able to perform well on the specific custom kernels defaults
(due to minor cpu/gpu quality inconsistency)
also custom kernels usually have different io,
cpu, hotplugging and zram settings and parameters set by default.
it's better practice to set the cpu and gpu to the same frequency and governor, Same Io scheduler
and readahead etc. same zram settings.
then test these settings across the kernels to see which kernel has more efficient system management+ Performance
otherwise it's just a case of which kernel has the best default parameters and settings.
Hey Guys I Have A Big Issue With Custom Kernels Every Time I Flash Any Custom Kernel My Phone Gets So Laggy
youssef0789 said:
Hey Guys I Have A Big Issue With Custom Kernels Every Time I Flash Any Custom Kernel My Phone Gets So Laggy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
can you be more specific
: technique used for flashing (clean flash? etc)
: your kernel adiutor settings
: any extras you have installed (eg. xposed)
and then what do you mean exactly by laggy, what s the situation in which this happens
it will be great if u add the best rom too. like performance and battery life withits stock kernal