Database Develop

Tuma 1.3 FATFS Cache Reg Tweak

I've recently been reading up on and testing different values for the following registry key :-
HKLM\System\StorageManager\FATFS\CacheSize
By default in Tuma 1.3 this key is set to 4096, which agrees nicely with the maximum value in the following MS document on FATFS registry keys.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...tml/wce50confatfilesystemregistrysettings.asp
Having read this I decided to try some higher power-of-2 values to see if 4096 really was a hard limit on cachesize. To my surprise, setting a value of 32768 does work, and shows an increase in memory use after boot. (~37mb with 32768 cachesize, versus ~23mb with 4096 cachesize)
NOTE The next highest power-of-2 (65536) caused corruption of the today screen, so that should obviously be avoided.
Does anyone know if the extra space is likely to be actually used as cache? Or does this just allocate memory that is never used?
My Qtek 9090 does seem to respond faster, once the cache is loaded with recent apps, but I also know it's easy to delude youself that such "tweaks" are having a real effect.
Could someone else confirm this for me?
Obvious disclaimer - don't edit your registry if you're worried about turning your phone into a useless hunk of plastic.

thingonaspring said:
I've recently been reading up on and testing different values for the following registry key :-
HKLM\System\StorageManager\FATFS\CacheSize
By default in Tuma 1.3 this key is set to 4096, which agrees nicely ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, this is delibrately done to not 'push the device into undocumented territory.
Does anyone know if the extra space is likely to be actually used as cache? Or does this just allocate memory that is never used?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The extra space is allocated, and it would be used - albeit rather slowly:
4096 = 2Mb, 8192 = 4Mb, 16384 = 8Mb, 32768 = 16Mb cache size. Applications (and data) need to fill this space to make it useful. Also, it's proven by your memory change from 23Mb to 37Mb = 14Mb ... exactly the difference between 16Mb and 2Mb (by coincidence? ;-))
Using more than 2Mb of cache space will in the short term possibly make your device run faster, however when the compaction thread needs to run (and stuff needs to get written back to flash), it will attempt to buffer as much as possible, and then take it's time while it 'locks up your device' and flushes 16Mb (possible) of data ... instead of 2Mb. Multiple smaller blocks will have less impact on the usability of the device - so there's been a careful balance done between performance and continuous usability. Sure you could make it faster in the short term ... but long term you'll hit those 10 second pauses.
In testing I've found 2Mb to be a good upper limit. Try 4Mb if you've got a lot of data intensive applications, but otherwise I can't see too much benefit in going larger. Also - the chance of losing something is greater ... a reset while things haven't been written to flash, and *poof* it's gone.

Excellent info Tuatara, that explains a lot about why my device was running in stops-and-starts ;-)

This is very interesting. I own a hx4700 device and rescently upgraded it to wm 5.0 (the nightmare begun). The information I found here is totaly oposite of what some wise heads are suggesting on other forums.. and this works. Lowering the cache (setting DataCacheSize to 0x100) made my device more responsitive when compaction runs (20 minutes every few hours!)
I have few questions about the compaction thread - Is the compaction process always taking constant time (depending on the size of the files on the device)?
Compaction always takes long time to finish - about 20-25 minutes on a 35megs free flash. Is this normal ? Block size of the flash reported by some hp utility is 128kb, in registry (and bootloader after lnb) shows 256kb. Could someone explain the exact logic of the compaction thread ?
I have another question - the msdn mentions that CacheSize is deprecated and should the folowing keys be used: FatCacheSize and DataCacheSize. Why are you still using the old reg key ?
If the compaction problem is solved in the hx4700 (and probably on the dell x50v) the device will be worth it's money.
Thank you for the great forums and the great community.

Performance ... what matters? The 'NOW', or the 'ALWAYS'?
orcish said:
This is very interesting. I own a hx4700 device and rescently upgraded it to wm 5.0 (the nightmare begun). The information I found here is totaly oposite of what some wise heads are suggesting on other forums.. and this works. Lowering the cache (setting DataCacheSize to 0x100) made my device more responsitive when compaction runs (20 minutes every few hours!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a trade-off really. The total time required for the compaction is still going to be the same. For example, using up blocks of the flash memory is going to 'fragment' the space. When you need that space, the issue is: 'is it ALREADY available'?
By running the thread more often (to clear unused blocks back to being available), your device 'continuous over time' performance increases, but by doing the compaction 'all at once' your device's 'instantaenous performance' is higher.
Rant on.
Benchmarks love the latter ... users (should) love the former.
This is why in the new TuMa v1.4 ROM I'm working on, I've gone AGAINST all of the other 'benchmarks' and dumb short-term tweaks and so-called solutions, and looked at device performance overall, and over a long period of time. Performance is now 'managed' rather than 'peaked', so that things are kept at a good rate of continuous usage, rather than trying to maximize an instantaneous time. Benchmarks really should measure the device in two weeks of use ... not right after it's configured.
What good is a fast device right now, if in one weeks it's slow as mud all the time? Yes, the TuMa v1.3 is slowing down - but the degree of slowdown of that ROM isn't to the point of 'unusable' as is the case with some other WM5 versions (for very well known reasons now). Knowledge is always gained, and improvements are always made with enough time and patience.
This is the other point I raised for people trying out the "new ROMs" ... (which in truth haven't addressed ANY performance concerns when you look at the changes done). These "latest and greatest", "just released", "new and improved", and "better and faster than ever" - ROM release adopter junkies are just experiencing "new device syndrome". Of course it'll be faster - DUH - you've just given it a clean slate to start from! Your multi-week old device has just been cleaned of it's junk, and it WILL be so much faster with the new ROM. REGARDLESS. Shyeah ... think about it.
Sorry ... rant off.
I have few questions about the compaction thread - Is the compaction process always taking constant time (depending on the size of the files on the device)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The time it takes is effectively a constant. It must erase the blocks of Flash, and organize the filesystem based on this. Erasing is slow ... which is why when it 'piles up' and there's a lot of work to do, the compaction thread really can't finish and return control to the device, until it's done the job. It's akin to stopping a defragment of your hard drive ... sure, some of it is clean & organized, but the remainder is still a disaster. Update that drive in the meantime, and it needs to start all over again.
Compaction always takes long time to finish - about 20-25 minutes on a 35megs free flash. Is this normal ? Block size of the flash reported by some hp utility is 128kb, in registry (and bootloader after lnb) shows 256kb. Could someone explain the exact logic of the compaction thread?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of questions ...
1). 20-25 minutes is FAR too slow. There is definately something else taking up 'residence' or CPU time during this process. It sounds like you have an application installed, or a device driver, or you've twiddled priorities improperly, incorrectly using temporary storage, resulting in over-use of your flash. A hard-reset and careful re-installation of your applications MAY be warranted to fix this. *more below*
2). Block size is quite probably 256Kb. I think your device also uses the M-Systems DOC 64MB chips.
The DOC G3 64MB (512Mb) consists of two 32MB (256Mb) flash planes that consist of 1024 blocks each, organized in 64 pages, as follows:
Page (Storage Unit) – Each page contains 512 bytes of user data and a 16-byte extra area that is used to store flash management and EDC/ECC signature data. This is the SIZE of block which changes EACH TIME something gets saved to memory on your device.
Block (Erase Unit) – Each block contains 64 pages (total of 256Kb). A block is the minimal unit that can be erased, and is sometimes referred to as an erase block. This is the SIZE of block which must BE ERASED each time we need some more space on the device.
Note: Since the device works with multiple planes, the operational block size is actually 512Kb. This means each time 64KB of space needs to be erased, when a block can bee freed.
3). And now the hard question ...
The compaction thread is effectively attempting to move the random fragmented blocks of 512 bytes of data in each of the Storage Units around into larger blocks of 32KB (256Kb) Erase Units. Otherwise, you'd have parts of your data erased each time you needed more free space in the Flash to use. 8)
Essentially this comes down to a "defragmentation" algorithm, however the problem is that the device is still actively being used at the same time. To solve this obvious problem - the device NEEDS to be paused, the compaction run to completion, blocks are freed up for usage, and then the job can continue. It's quite obvious when you think about it.
For example ... 64 Erase Units, each has 1 Storage Unit usefully allocated in it. The compaction thread now can in theory take each of those 64 Storage Units and put them into one larger 'Erase Unit' Block space. To do this is needs to read ALL 64 units (32KB) into memory, maintain all the blocks UNFREED (since if you reset your device now you'd lose your data). Erase a new UNUSED Erase Unit, write all 64 Block Units into the new Erase unit. Then it can go through and mark in the FileSystem, where the NEW location of these Storage Units is. Once that's done, it can mark those other 64 Storage Units as being available for Erasure (or for reuse of any remaining Storage Units within it). If it detects that they are full, then those 64 Erase Units can be erased, and it goes ahead and does that. Natually all this 'shuffling' of data, with guarantees that you don't lose any in the process, needs to be done CAREFULLY and PROPERLY.
*RANT* ... For (insert deity of choice here) sake ... NEVER EVER HIT THE RESET PIN WHILE YOUR DEVICE IS BUSY COMPACTING!!! You can (and probably will!) lose your data ... have patience ... just wait ... it really is busy doing something VERY important. But otherwise, go ahead ... RESET away ... you'll probably be cursing that you're continually doing HARD-RESETs all the time, and that it's a sh*tty device you've bought. Well ... after all ... you NOW KNOW ... it really IS your OWN fault. :roll:
The issue comes when there is something which CAN'T be paused (a device driver, OS core, etc.). This will still need flash storage space while the compaction thread runs. This is possibly why your compaction takes 20 minutes or more. Remove the 'extra stuff' which could be doing bad things.
Also, there are those (I shouldn't use the word, but anyways) idiotic people who think that by forcing this to the "now" that they're making their devices better. For example - inapprorpiate use of Priority256 registry keys, in raising the priority of a task (to above real-time even!) in order to solve their immediate issue - they believe is a good thing!!??!!
This results in the compaction thread needing to 'back off', then the OS runs the 'real time task' which corrupts the defragmentation process, so when the compaction thread has an 'idle' chance again, it starts up ... starts cleaning ... tries ... gets interrupted ... (cycle repeats).
I'm trying to 'do away' entirely with this issue in TuMa v1.4 by forcing the compaction thread to run more often, at times when it can do so, just below application level requirements, but above idle. So barring any 'fixes' introduced by l-users ... it should maintain an even performance level over time - barring obvious issues, like when the Flash is too full for compaction to run!
In this way, through usage testing by knowledgable users, I have validated 'theory' in Alpha versions, and will now/shortly be moving into 'practice' in Beta testing with a lot more 'general' users becoming my 'unwitting' performance testers in releasing the TuMa v1.4 ROM. I believe theory will be put into practice, and as experienced by the alpha testers, performance should be continuous and stable. 8).
I have another question - the msdn mentions that CacheSize is deprecated and should the folowing keys be used: FatCacheSize and DataCacheSize. Why are you still using the old reg key ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CacheSize is deprecated, and in TuMa v1.4 ALL keys are explicitly specifed, while in TuMa v1.3 FatCacheSize was not. The reason is two-fold. For the BA ROM (since it's unofficial and a patchwork of other ROMs), these ROMs were still using older drivers (WM2003SE) which did not support the new keys.
The explicit 'new' keys override the deprecated key. However, the old key is still kept in there for legacy reasons, or for applications or users who might 'insist' on twiddling them in the future. I'm now resorting to this, and trying to 'protect' people from their own performance tweaking "foibles".
If the compaction problem is solved in the hx4700 (and probably on the dell x50v) the device will be worth it's money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If people are willing to put up with a slightly slower 'overall' device, but have continuous same-level performance ... then I can give them an answer (hopefully) right now, or soon if I ever get this TuMa BA ROM to a point I'm happy with it (probably AKU2).
If they want to be blind adrenaline junkies and need 'speed at any cost' ... just keep doing what they're doing, tweak caches, put off until later all the housekeeping, and then, when it hits the wall, go ahead and try to do it all in 20 minutes of device lockup when it's become all too much to handle.
If they want 'rocket-ship' speeds at all times, they'd better carry around a non-flash based device or a laptop. But they'll look REALLY dumb holding up one of those things to their ear when making a phone call. 8)
[flame retardant suit is on]
Thank you for the great forums and the great community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for such a great set of questions ... let's me get the point out as well.
Now ... I wonder who else will actually read this post? Maybe it'll be Wiki'd? Maybe ... maybe it's better if not.

Whao! A reply beyond my expectations! Thank you!
Here is my questions:
Update that drive in the meantime, and it needs to start all over again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this about the compaction thread or the disk defragmentation process? If it's about the compaction thread - probaly seting the Prio256 and PrioCrit256 to real time would make it almost interruptable (and make the device freeze for some time). If running time with critical priority takes effectivly less than my usual 20 minutes, it means that something is messing my compaction, right ?
1). 20-25 minutes is FAR too slow. There is definately something else taking up 'residence' or CPU time during this process. It sounds like you have an application installed, or a device driver, or you've twiddled priorities improperly, incorrectly using temporary storage, resulting in over-use of your flash. A hard-reset and careful re-installation of your applications MAY be warranted to fix this. *more below*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not fiddling with the priorities, and have no running applications (except acbPowerMeter or/and SuperTask to monitor the activity). When compaction hits I just close everything and watch it complete. When acbPowerMeter reports about 380mA usage - it's the Compaction. filesys takes about 90% cpu (10% taken by the SuperTask when it refreshes the screen with new readings). Activesync is stopped, disabled and etc.
Is it possible to monitor disk .. err.. flash activity ? All read/write calls? Probably a filesystem filter? (about filesystem filters I have a question below)
Is it possible to take some information about the compaction process itself, % done, blocks freed and etc. I suspect that there is something wrong - probably trying to compact a bad block or something like this. I have seen people complaining about this in the platformbuilder newsgroup.
Something that may be conneted to this issue is the filesystem filters I found attached to my storage devices. I have fsdspy and fsreplxflt. What are they? Some information points that fsreplxflt is for replicating ram to rom and fsdspy as an example!? Are they needed actualy?
Thank you for your reply, I have more questions and when I clear them in my head, I'll be more than happy to ask them to you.

Hi Tuatara,
Great explanation - clears up a few questions I had.
One question, however, remains. What's the easiest way to tell your device is compacting and hasn't just hung? I've had a few times when my device seemed to just hang solid - nothing worked, no buttons, no touchscreen, nothing. So I soft reset the device to bring it back up with no data loss. I assume this was a crash not a compaction.
Is there any way in TuMa 1.4 that you could make a "Compacting" icon or similar so that we can tell when compaction is being undertaken?

orcish said:
Whao! A reply beyond my expectations! Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I aim to please ... or was that ... I'm pleased to aim ... *fire* ... eh ... whatever. ;-)
orcish said:
Update that drive in the meantime, and it needs to start all over again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this about the compaction thread or the disk defragmentation process?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the simplest terms for our devices it's both. Disk defragmentation is just the example everyone understands ... so I'm using this 'understanding' to explain it.
A flash disk doesn't need ANY defragmentation - it's indexed like RAM, and we can get at any data directly. No need to make any data contiguous like on a hard disk (which spins). So, that's why they use the word "compaction" instead of "defragmentation" ... but the principle is the same.
So ... putting it simply:
It really doesn't matter where it's stored to ACCESS it. But it does matter where it's stored if we need to ERASE it.
Remember we have 64 Storage Units per Erase Unit. This means that if we are actively using even one of those Storage Units, but need to erase the rest of the block to get more "free" space, we need to move the used Storage Unit somewhere else first, before we can erase that block, to use it again.
If you have an application writing to storage during this time ... well ... then the 'free' Storage Units in those nice-new-empty Erase Units can be used up, and the compaction thread has to start over again - trying to pack things in to make more available free space.
orcish said:
If it's about the compaction thread - probaly seting the Prio256 and PrioCrit256 to real time would make it almost interruptable (and make the device freeze for some time). If running time with critical priority takes effectivly less than my usual 20 minutes, it means that something is messing my compaction, right ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes ... that would be true - although I have no idea what running the compaction thread at time critical would do to your device!!! I would probably set it to a NORMAL (0xfb / 251) priority ... maybe something at most "THREAD_PRIORITY_ABOVE_NORMAL" (or 0xfa / 250) at a highest value. It may be worthwhile to experiment and see what the result is. Backup your device before doing this though!
orcish said:
I'm not fiddling with the priorities, and have no running applications (except acbPowerMeter or/and SuperTask to monitor the activity). When compaction hits I just close everything and watch it complete. When acbPowerMeter reports about 380mA usage - it's the Compaction. filesys takes about 90% cpu (10% taken by the SuperTask when it refreshes the screen with new readings). Activesync is stopped, disabled and etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't answer this one unfortunately ... there are so many intricate details in the OS which could have an effect. Experiment with the priority settings if you wish to ... might be an option to see what the real cause is. If the compaction happens quicker, then we know it's due to flash usage collisions.
Thinking about it - change only the CritPrio256 values ... i.e. when the "s*it really has hit the fan" do it or else ... and see if it completes in less time. If you don't hit critical compaction - then try setting the standard priority as well.
orcish said:
Is it possible to monitor disk .. err.. flash activity ? All read/write calls? Probably a filesystem filter? (about filesystem filters I have a question below)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would be possible - I think that mamaich may have written such a tool for himself, but it is just that - a tool, and not something which could (or should) be actively utilised.
orcish said:
Is it possible to take some information about the compaction process itself, % done, blocks freed and etc. I suspect that there is something wrong - probably trying to compact a bad block or something like this. I have seen people complaining about this in the platformbuilder newsgroup.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if this is possible ... part of the problem is - where would you put the result data? It would need to be a memory mapped file or something, which is locked exclusively in RAM, so as to not touch the flash, and then your reporting app would need to operate in a similar manner. Not sure ... maybe there is a way to get some info (from the TrueFFS driver) but I wouldn't know how to.
Along the "bad block" concept - the TrueFFS driver has management within itself to control bad blocks and to transparently reassign blocks which have been deemed 'bad'. It is possible that this logic is somehow failing - i.e. not working as advertised.
You could try changing the Read/Write and Verify methodology which the TrueFFS driver uses. Here are some registry entries which might help you track down the problem. You should have registry entries similar to:
Code:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Drivers\BuiltIn\TrueFFS???]
“VerifyWrite”: When using this parameter, TrueFFS performs an immediate read operation
from the flash after every write cycle.
The value of this entry can be as follows:
dword:0 - Sets TrueFFS to Optimized Verify Write mode. This is the default TrueFFS mode for
devices supported by INFTL, such as DiskOnChip Millennium Plus and Mobile DiskOnChip. In
this mode, a sector is assumed to remain valid after it has been verified as long as no sudden
power-down event occurs; therefore, no additional read operations (verifications) are performed.
When recovering from a power failure, TrueFFS gradually verifies the validity of additional
sectors as data is written to the disk partition. All the sectors on the disk are eventually verified,
at which point no further verification is done and peak performance is achieved (default).
dword:1 - Sets TrueFFS to Read Before and After Write mode. In this mode, each write
operation is preceded by a read operation verifying the flash area is indeed erased, and followed
by a read operation verifying the data was written properly. Only after both conditions are met is
the sector considered to be written properly. Selecting this option results in lower write
performance, but insures absolute data protection against power failures or any other event (such
as errors caused from noisy buses, faulty flash, or flash close to its end of life).
dword:2 - Sets TrueFFS to Standard mode. In this mode, a sector is considered written
successfully when the flash media reports that the write operation ended successfully. Additional
verification (using a read operation) is not performed, so TrueFFS works at peak performance
regardless of past power failure events. This is the default mode for devices supported by NFTL,
as these devices do not require additional verification for most applications.
“UseCache”: Enabling this option improves performance, but requires additional RAM
resources. The NAND Flash Translation Layer (NFTL, INFTL or SAFTL) uses a small part of
each flash unit and sector for control information that allows accessing the data stored on
DiskOnChip as a virtual block device. Setting this option to 1 enables caching this information in
order to improve performance.
dword:0
dword:1 (default)
“RemoveFatFilter”: The Windows CE TrueFFS driver contains a FAT filter that monitors file
system write operations to the FAT area. The TrueFFS driver uses this information to improve
performance by deleting sectors from the media when the corresponding file is deleted. Use this
entry to disable FAT filter operation.
dword:1
So I'd try “VerifyWrite” = 1, “UseCache” = 0, and leave the FatFilter enabled ... see if this helps 'eliminate' that possible bad block issue.
orcish said:
Something that may be conneted to this issue is the filesystem filters I found attached to my storage devices. I have fsdspy and fsreplxflt. What are they? Some information points that fsreplxflt is for replicating ram to rom and fsdspy as an example!? Are they needed actualy?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The fsdspy filter is used to monitor the filesystem - incl OS level and TrueFFS driver performance checking (and for hooking). For the fsreplxfilt filter I believe this is required for data replication ... but the inner details of what it does, I'm not sure either. You do need to specify WHICH directories and files are NOT included - so therefore I believe it to control which files should NOT be replicated to the Flash as soon as possible (i.e. they are maintained in RAM cache, and only flushed at a later date, or by a special seperate thread - things like the registry files, temp files, object store, etc.).
orcish said:
Thank you for your reply, I have more questions and when I clear them in my head, I'll be more than happy to ask them to you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh ... I'll just need to find more time to answer then!

HiltonT said:
Great explanation - clears up a few questions I had.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome ... it's always better when things are 'demystified'.
HiltonT said:
One question, however, remains. What's the easiest way to tell your device is compacting and hasn't just hung? I've had a few times when my device seemed to just hang solid - nothing worked, no buttons, no touchscreen, nothing. So I soft reset the device to bring it back up with no data loss. I assume this was a crash not a compaction.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Compaction runs at a lower priority than other tasks, so if you have NO response from it for 10 - 20 seconds ... especially wait longer after having been IDLE for a while ... then it has definately crashed. Just give it enough time to see if it will recover though ... large block erases can take time - especially when the filesystem is in a 'transitional' state.
HiltonT said:
Is there any way in TuMa 1.4 that you could make a "Compacting" icon or similar so that we can tell when compaction is being undertaken?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We could have a 'task manager' which monitors the process list and then puts up a 'red light' when the CPU is being used for this task ... it may be a worthwhile project for someone to undertake. Unfortunately I don't know of anything like this at present ...

Tuatara said:
orcish said:
Talking about Compaction, Priority, and setting registry entries ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I made some recommendations to try ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was just re-reading things from Mike (http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/archive/2006/03/16/552996.aspx) and realized that no matter what you do to those Priority registry keys, they will have no effect. *sigh*
I'm changing those keys in the boot.hv (XIP section) in TuMa ROMs, so I do have the ability to change those priorities directly, but this is not an end-user Registry thing.
If I get the time, I may look into the 4700 ROMs and see if there is anything which can be corrected/adjusted for these - either that, or someone who can modify these ROMs is welcome to PM me, and I can send them the full registry dump (boot.rgu) and they can attempt to merge in the settings themselves and see how that goes.
Again ... apologies, but it appears MSoft has decided that you're not permitted to mess with these settings. The TrueFFS registry settings may follow the same rule, but then again - I'm not entirely certain of this.

Making Wizard run faster

Is there anyway to, as they say 'overclock' the wizard. It's a great PPC/phone, but runs quite slow. Thanks. [/b]

try the search button. use querry "omap"

The utility in this thread is what you need: http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=55782
It works on the Wizard, Charmer and Prophet. After installing you should find that you can run your device at 260Mhz rather than the factory set 195. 8)

Was able to download the battery-plug-in software. didn't damage anything on my wizard, but am not realy sure if it increased the speed or not. stil seems mighty slow.

You'll find this by searching too, scattered about. Programs like SPB Diary, SPB Pocket Plus make the Wizard sluggish even when you've overclocked. I learned the hard way to be very choosy about programs that run automatically. Today agenda, SPB weather, PHM Traylaunch and Batterystatus are the only things on my today screen. Smartskey insures that practically nothing is running in the background. I have the latest rom, and I used Xelencin's version (now my own version) so that I have much more space on the device. The effect of all this is that my device is very snappy, except when it decides it needs to talk with the network at length and a good 15 seconds can go by while it does something with the network. Then it just doesn't do anything for 15 seconds, which seems like an eternity when you are about to show someone something, need to check an address or phone number, etc. But 90% of my complaints went away when I eliminated automatic programs, many of which I'd spent money on. It isn't that these programs don't offer functionality, they do, but most of that functionality is also offered by programs that have a smaller footprint.

You'll find this by searching too, scattered about. Programs like SPB Diary, SPB Pocket Plus make the Wizard sluggish even when you've overclocked. I learned the hard way to be very choosy about programs that run automatically. Today agenda, SPB weather, PHM Traylaunch and Batterystatus are the only things on my today screen. Smartskey insures that practically nothing is running in the background. I have the latest rom, and I used Xelencin's version (now my own version) so that I have much more space on the device. The effect of all this is that my device is very snappy, except when it decides it needs to talk with the network at length and a good 15 seconds can go by while it does something with the network. Then it just doesn't do anything for 15 seconds, which seems like an eternity when you are about to show someone something, need to check an address or phone number, etc. But 90% of my complaints went away when I eliminated automatic programs, many of which I'd spent money on. It isn't that these programs don't offer functionality, they do, but most of that functionality is also offered by programs that have a smaller footprint.

I like SPB Diary and Pocket Plus though. Between the larger cache trick and OCing it with battery status, the speed is fine for me. It was a mite too slow without the OC.

After using it for a little less than half a day, I do feel that there is some improvement in terms of speed. However, it still pales in comparison with the xda mini which I used to use. Is this the maximum speed that the wizard can process?

omapclock
Do you have omap running? I run mine at 247MHz but some people are running as high as 260 and report stability.

Re: omapclock
prestonmcafee said:
Do you have omap running? I run mine at 247MHz but some people are running as high as 260 and report stability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes - 260Mhz is just fine. 8)

I use omapclock and clock to 264 MHz with it, rock solid at that speed, but higher speeds are no go. The battery plugin shows 286 MHz when omapclock says 264 though

Yeah, have mine running at 260mhz, but don't see much improvement still. Am i doing something wrong? I copied the cab file into the main memory (but not directly into the windows folder), then executed it.

Yeah, have mine running at 260mhz, but don't see much improvement still. Am i doing something wrong? I copied the cab file into the main memory (but not directly into the windows folder), then executed it.

How do you know it is at 260?
If you use batterystatus, you can toggle back and forth from 260 to 195. That way you know if it is running and how fast. It doesn't need to be in Windows; mine is in My Documents/Programs. But it needs to be turned on; it is off by default even if installed, which is why I asked.

Is your Kaiser gruesomely slow?

If it is, then other than the missing drivers, then the chances are that either a subset of Kaisers, or roms, or third party apps are causing some devices to be a LOT slower than others.
There are people claiming that their devices take three seconds to change orientation. They also claim that you can actually see the icons being "drawn" on the screen.
As a happy Kaiser owner, I have never experienced anything like that (except when syncing over USB - when the device pretty much stops responding for the first few seconds of syncing and then returns to normal.
Changing to landscape on mine take approx 0.3 seconds (I say approx as its too quick to actually time).
Now I made a horrible error. I tried to point out to the defensive people over on the classaction thread that if their device was really that bad, they could try a different rom and see if that makes their device better. I didnt argue that "the" drivers weren;t missing or that their devices would be fine without them. All I did was try to get some research to see if there was an obvious group of devices or roms or apps that was causing the problem.
If like me, you prefer to sort these things out - rather than wait for a year for a class action - then try the benchmarking test in my sig and post your results and rom details. Hopefully, we can find the cause of the major differences in performance.
My device scored 1643 overall.

He's right, people should start blaming the device for everything. Bring back the days when you'd clean up your device when you'd feel it being slow.
Mine is in 1680 or so as well.

Unwired 4,
Can you perhaps provide a detailed list of all the applications you have on your phone?
I ask you this because I don't have alot of apps on my phone; mainly Googlemaps, livesearch, TCPMP, Dutty 1 calc, HTC Album, Opera mini and Palringo.
I don't have any SPB products clogging up my today screen with its numerous shortcuts. I haven't tweaked my clock appearance and I'm using the original windows blue background on my today screen.
My phone looks pretty similar to when it was bought yet I have noticed a lag, even when it comes to changing the screen orientation from portrait to landscape. It takes roughly one second. Sometimes opening an application takes forever, and closing it down to.
I had an issue with video playback, but the member 'Audio' and co offered settings which greatly improved movie playback. So that’s one tiny area fixed
What are you doing on your device which is causing your phone to run so fluidly?

I was happy with my device running the stock Orange Rom. It was quicker than my Hermes running the Black Majik rom. I recently flashed the V3 Dutty Rom and its a little faster - not much though.
I have a 4gb microsd card that I install most apps on. I use the HTC Home screen - with no other plug ins.
See below for screen grabs of installed programs.

Underwired 4,
Thanks for the response. I have an 8GB memory card, and I install all my applications on this card, and not on the device memory. The only thing I've installed on the device memory, that I can recall, is the PIE fix, and the slight fix for the camera. That is all. Everything else goes onto my 8GB storage card, of which I have over 5GB of memory left over. From the looks of it, I have more device storage memory than you do, but slightly less programme memory than you.
My free storage memory reads: 112.76 MB
My free programme memory: 48.54 MB
I’m left scratching my head...

Graphics Test 1 1060
Others Test 2 1730
JPEG Test 3 2246
Games Test 4 1261
Sound Test 5 0669
Final Score: 1393

246810 said:
My free storage memory reads: 112.76 MB
My free programme memory: 48.54 MB
I’m left scratching my head...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have scratched my head about this before too. I tested this last night and if you take the card OUT, you will see a BIG increase in your memory.
My feeling is that maybe if you have shortcuts on the phone TO those apps on the card, at boot time, the phone reads all of those and maybe that is what does it? Or 1 or 2 of those apps on the card load (somehow) on the boot up.
I hope I explained that correctly

Here's my list (doesn't have all I have installed) and it's not slow whatsoever.
My VSbenchmark overall result is 1600-something.. I'm really using it, and Kaiser is coping with it with no problems.. my Wizard would beg for mercy at this point.

MirrorminD said:
Graphics Test 1 1060
Others Test 2 1730
JPEG Test 3 2246
Games Test 4 1261
Sound Test 5 0669
Final Score: 1393
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks Mirror. Where are you? What device is it (ie tilt, tytn2 vario3) and which rom?

246810 said:
Underwired 4,
Thanks for the response. I have an 8GB memory card, and I install all my applications on this card, and not on the device memory. The only thing I've installed on the device memory, that I can recall, is the PIE fix, and the slight fix for the camera. That is all. Everything else goes onto my 8GB storage card, of which I have over 5GB of memory left over. From the looks of it, I have more device storage memory than you do, but slightly less programme memory than you.
My free storage memory reads: 112.76 MB
My free programme memory: 48.54 MB
I’m left scratching my head...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you run any tweaking programs to set page pools etc? Such as Kasier Tweak or Shaps advanced config tool?

Mines a bit random.
Sometimes about 1 second, sometimes more. Sometimes it redaws off center and has to draw again. Seems to take longer when sliding the keyboard back in than it does the other way.
Can't say it really annoys me too much... I just wait for it

unwired4 said:
I was happy with my device running the stock Orange Rom. It was quicker than my Hermes running the Black Majik rom. I recently flashed the V3 Dutty Rom and its a little faster - not much though.
I have a 4gb microsd card that I install most apps on. I use the HTC Home screen - with no other plug ins.
See below for screen grabs of installed programs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since you seem to be on a mission, please provide us video of your screen rotation. Actually 2 videos; one with only today screen showing and one with any program open on it. If im on Today, the screen rotates in about a sec, but if I have i.e. Opera Mini open it takes 3 sec at least.
I just said on the classaction.org thread that i had a friends Ipaq 6915 for few days and the difference in speed, i.e. opening programs menu is obvious.
Im still running Duttys WWE lite rom with Spb Pocket Plus + Diary + weather, S2U2, WkTask, TC, Office, Live etc installed. On my today i have only 4 quick launch icons and the Spb Diary.
BTW. Its a joke playing even Spb Arkball on the Kaiser...

foobar1977 said:
Sometimes it redaws off center and has to draw again. I just wait for it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that happens, especially if there is some program running....

graphics: 1084
others: 1831
jpeg: 2286
games: 1284
sound: 0681
final score: 1433
Stock Tilt Rom, without the AT&T software.

The only mission I am on is to imporve the plight of the unhappy Kaiser owners.
Despite accusations of being an HTC spy etc etc, I just want to back up that my happiness with my device is due to it responding as fast as I need it to- which may also explain why HTC think the device is fast enough.
(Am trying to shoot vids now. Opera Mini will always take longer to redraw as its a java app inside a midlet mgr).

Sane said:
I just said on the classaction.org thread that i had a friends Ipaq 6915 for few days and the difference in speed, i.e. opening programs menu is obvious.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just for the record, my fiancee's Wizard (used to be mine) is a faster when opening menus and redrawing the screen. Why? It's running WM5 stock ROM with almost nothing on it but basic functions. The today screen is empty. Only thing it has is S2U2 running on background (so that her purse doesn't keep calling me).
My Kaiser is filled with stuff, as you can see screenshots on my previous post in page 1.. and it's a it slower.. delay of 0.4 seconds doesn't bother me.

sharpja said:
graphics: 1084
others: 1831
jpeg: 2286
games: 1284
sound: 0681
final score: 1433
Stock Tilt Rom, without the AT&T software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems that reflashing to Dutty's v3 ROM makes it a bit faster. And, splitting hairs, replacing ati_d3d.dll to the one from LG seems (judging by VS benchmarks) to make it a tiny little bit faster as well.

Really bad quality videos... sorry! Did them in a rush on my old sony digital camera. Focussing would have helped...
Switching in today - portrait to landscape is faster than I am! Back to portrait takes nearly a second.
Switching and scrolling through emails.

My "stock" Kaiser - ATT Tilt -with a few apps installed and running Hotsynch to get my corporate mail, I scored the following:
Test 1 - 1067
Test 2 - 1772
Test 3 - 2176
Test 4 - 1244
Test 5 - 0786
Final Score - 1409
I got 1441 after soft reset with HotSynch running to synch mail wirelessly, then removed hotsynch and got 1509.
So, I guess I need to go ahead and flash my ROM.
I am new to the site and have to start reading the threads and getting familiar, but to jumpstart me, is there a "best" or "most used" ROM and Cab config that is popular and stable amongst the group? I saw a touchflow video on youtube - do many of them have that?
Tom

pearsth said:
I am new to the site and have to start reading the threads and getting familiar, but to jumpstart me, is there a "best" or "most used" ROM and Cab config that is popular and stable amongst the group? I saw a touchflow video on youtube - do many of them have that?
Tom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome, Tom =)
Most used ones are probably Dutty's v3 ROM and Alex's Home ROM. Also, many of our "most famous" cooks are testing and creating stable ROMs that run WM 6.1.. so if you want, you can just wait for a bit and reflash 6.1 ROM.

D2 high RAM usage..

I've been trying to find something about the subject but no luck so I'm posting it here.
I'm not sure if it's just a case of my D2 but the RAM consumption is extremely high. After about 48hrs since the last soft reset, with no application running, the RAM consumtion is whopping 74%!?!?! Reading from the windows Memory card is saying: Program: Total 183.73MB, In use 134.71, Free 49.02MB. Out of supposed 288MB of RAM on D2 this looks quite scary to me, I'm experiencing slowdowns of the system when I'm switching between Opera, Mail, ocassional phone call and Contacts. I hope my D2 is not faulty, but I'd like to hear from you guys if this is a common thing or a problem with my D2. I compared with my colleague's Touch Pro and he's never nowhere near these figures, he gets max to 50%, if that.
Any help is appreciated.

yeah, she's a leaker. I'm sure your device is fine. I think Opera chews up a lot. I notice bigger drops after using Opera.
Have you tried using CleanRam? You'll be pleased with its performance. I usually run it once a day or so and it keeps the memory 50% or lower.
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/ppc-download-cleanram.html

The Single biggest thing you can do to speed up your TD2 and release a lot of that RAM is to switch off TF3D. It's a much better phone without it in so many ways.

WMguy said:
yeah, she's a leaker. I'm sure your device is fine. I think Opera chews up a lot. I notice bigger drops after using Opera.
Have you tried using CleanRam? You'll be pleased with its performance. I usually run it once a day or so and it keeps the memory 50% or lower.
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/ppc-download-cleanram.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this one worked for me..sktools seems dont have enough privilege to kill some exclusive task. One main culprit is opera running in the background all the time..

I have been worried about what I thought was very high memory usage since I've had my TD2. Mine seems to settle at about 75%.
I have also noticed this drops to about 55% with TF3D turned off. As I like the TF3D interface a lot I'm not willing to lose it for the memory gains. I have tried running memory intensive apps like TomTom with TF3D on and off and there doesn't seem to be any significant difference.
I have been using Oxios CloseApps to free up memory. This work pretty well, but I'm going to give CleanRam a go, and see how it compares.

WMguy said:
yeah, she's a leaker. I'm sure your device is fine. I think Opera chews up a lot. I notice bigger drops after using Opera.
Have you tried using CleanRam? You'll be pleased with its performance. I usually run it once a day or so and it keeps the memory 50% or lower.
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/ppc-download-cleanram.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many thanks, buddy, the app works a treat! D2 still manages to get to 75% of memory usage after a day or so but at least I don't have to restart to get to down 60%. It is still weird though, 75% of RAM constantly in use without an intervention - is this the way it was designed or just a poorly tuned ROM?

My TD2 stick %64-65 level after one week usage without soft reset .. Even with TF3D
Daily used programs are;
Opera *****
Youtube ***
Chronos alarm * (3 alarm set for morning.. also chrono and timer sometimes..)
iGO8 *
Resco File explorer *
Resco Photo Viewer *
GS Finder *
Pocket Music ***
Pocket Player * (for mono bluetooth headset music transfer at gym )
Core Player ***
Mobibook **
Several games **
* Stars indicate usage frequency for daily usage...
...but i'm upgrade my 1.39 stock rom to new asia 1.40... Before upgrade, it's like yours %75 memory usage or above.. 1.40 rom seems reduce memory consumption..

cassper1 said:
Many thanks, buddy, the app works a treat! D2 still manages to get to 75% of memory usage after a day or so but at least I don't have to restart to get to down 60%. It is still weird though, 75% of RAM constantly in use without an intervention - is this the way it was designed or just a poorly tuned ROM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well interesting...my HTC Raphael never goes over 55% and have similar apps in use as you do...

Mine usually is around 55%-60%.
Can I ask how you close opera? Do you just hit the x or do you exit from the menue. i have noticed that when I exit through the menue the ram percent drops significantly. I also saw an increase in batterey when I started exiting through the menue and not the x button.

Rexton270 said:
Well interesting...my HTC Raphael never goes over 55% and have similar apps in use as you do...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I already mentioned that in the very first post.. My colleague's Rafael rarely gets over 50%, that's why I started to wonder if there's something wrong with my Topaz

Compared to the Raphael, the TD2 has more memory consuming apps, such as having the Enhanced TF3D with much more functions including the new start menu, new contacts center, new notifications & a higher resolution screen to name a few.

Don't worry about it
Free memory is wasted memory.
Your device should be using all the memory it can to cache all that it can and keep as many of your applications running as possible. That's how your device can switch between apps quickly. If you start another app which requires more memory than is currently available, WM will close one of the least used applications to make room. Until you start that second app, there's no point at all in closing the first one just so that the free/unused/wasted memory figure is increased. Symbian devices have had this behaviour for years and in fact it's been in place in WM for quite a few versions. Glad to hear that HTC's TF3D is making better use of it.
As it happens, Vista now adopts this policy, compared to previous desktop Windows versions: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html.

HTC Touch Freak said:
i have noticed that when I exit through the menue the ram percent drops significantly. I also saw an increase in batterey when I started exiting through the menue and not the x button.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the ticket with Opera at least. I noticed today that if you tap the X button, it will disappear from the HTC Task Manager so you think it's closed. However, I have SPB Mobile Shell 3.0 and also use its built in task manager assigned to one of my hard buttons. When the HTC TM shows no Opera running, I bring up the SPB one and sure enough it's still running. I wonder if HTC makes an exception to Opera due to the push internet feature so it doesn't appear in the Task Manager.
So, in other words, if you want to close Opera, use the 'Exit' command within the program.

*Any* program can make itself disappear from the user-facing Task List simply by declaring itself as a background task. My own D2 right now is running 14 of these background tasks, including Opera. Think of it like the difference between the "Applications" and "Processes" tabs in the regular Windows Task Manager. It's been suggested that Opera runs all the time to manage the Push Internet pages, although as I've said in an earlier post, there's nothing wrong in it staying around (so long as it's not consuming much CPU/battery), so that it's ready to be pushed to the front immediately when the user requires it.

You can make those "Back Ground" applications appear in the HTC Task Manager by deleting (or renaming) their names in the following registry:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\HTC\TaskManager\ExclusiveList\System\

[APP][EXPERIMENTAL] MobileBooster v.a1 [UPD.:21-03-2010]

(Current version: alpha 1) DISCONTINUED!
MobileBooster is an experimental CPU-booster tool (experimental as if it may have no effect at all in worst case).
In theory this application can improve the speed and responsiveness of your device in high-load scenarios. It has no settings and is completely invisible.
Features:
- simple and clean installation and uninstalation
- boosts your multitasking capabilities by managing process priorities
- slightly boosts active application speed at the expense of background tasks
- supports all HTC devices
Requirements:
- 275kb of free space
- 148kb of RAM
- Microsoft .NET Compact Framework 3.5
Installation:
- download and install the CAB to your device
- soft reset and you're all set!
Uninstalation:
- uninstall using Remove Programs, no reset is required
- be aware that you DO need to soft reset to eliminate all boosting effects (for benchmarks/comparing speed)
The usual disclaimer:
This application is provided as-is. I take no responsibility for any damages that may occur by misuse or bugs in this software.
Project goal:
This is experimental concept and it may have no effect at all save for consuming CPU cycles. If you download and test this, please post back your impressions and opinions. You may experience increased fluidity of your device during normal use and better responsiveness under heavier load. You may experience nothing at all. You may experience decreased speed. Whatever this does for you, uninstall will wipe the application clean so this should be a risk-free test.
Note that your device is less responsive immediatelly after soft reset - this is normal WM behavior. Give it a few minutes before testing.
.

let's give it a go on my TP2 with AthineOS 23549
first impression: Opera 10 seems to render the xda forum pages much quicker. Now lets's play BoingGLES

Yeah... "SEEMS" is the keyword here, Opera indeed seems to be working faster for me, especially with running background tasks and Sense is a bit more responsive, but even though the theory behind this is valid and time proven on single-core PCs, it may all be just a placebo effect.
That's why I posted it for others to see and judge

It could just be a roll of the dice, but gscroll is actually working perfectly (on ereader) with this running. I probably shouldn't have said anything, cuz it'll decide to take a lunch-break soon.
Can't tell much else, but it doesn't seem to break anything.

each restart of the HTC HD2 it gives error cant start this application,
so i unistalled

On my TP works fine, actually seems the whole system actually speeded-up. I had an error once but never happened again. It takes 624k of RAM, so it's quite something but oh well... keep up doin this good job!

Well it's not exactly optimized for memory or CPU usage, neither does it properly handle runtime errors... this is just experimental proof of concept
I have been testing it extensively and from my experience:
1) it definitely does not slow things down.. if it seems so, it's probably because your device is still booting
2) it has little to no effect when you use only 1 application
3) it seems to help a little with concurrency of 2 or more processes
that can be seen during heavy background network traffic or heavy concurrent tasks
- Opera loading pages and rendering at the same time
- you can notice increased responsiveness while playing music in background and doing stuff
- rotating screen in various scenarios also seems a bit faster
- sound cracking under heavy load should be reduced
- basically the more things you run at once, the better improvement you should see; well until you hit the ceiling of your CPU
... I'm not talking huge improvements here but every little bit helps
4) keep on mind that part of the effect is persistent until you soft reset, even if you uninstall or kill the booster you need to soft reset if you want to bench/compare

Thanks nik3r for the app I tried it installed and uninstalled easy with no errors.
Unfortunately, it greatly slowed down my TP performance. Opera rendering was sluggish, opened apps were windows media player, contacts, WLM, tasks, calendar, activesync. As for opening and using other programs , i did not notice a dip or increase in speed.

i'll try it o my htc touch pro 2 and my HTC mogul...

Could you please post the name of your ROM and pagepool size if you know it? I think that pagepool may have huge impact on the ability to multitask.

I'm not 100% sure it has to do with mobileboost, but I've been having some issues with writing to the sd card. (This is actually kind of funny, lol). Last night, I created a shortcut to mobileboost.exe and put it on my sd card, where I have a second copy of my start menu that I access with the XTask file manager (I put stuff I'm testing out there instead of the real start menu). This morning, I scanned my sd card with Scandisk, and it found an error in the folder where I put the shortcut. Ok, no big deal. Today, I was running some SK Tools benchmarks with mobile boost, and I copied them to my sd card (and created a new folder) while MSB was running. After soft resetting and running some tests w/o it running, I looked in the sd card and the folder with the benchmarks wasn't there. I scanned the disk, and the files were recovered as .chk files. I guess it could be happening because I'm using caches applied to the sd card as well as writeback. But, I've never seen this happen before.
Code:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\StorageManager\Profiles\SDMemory\FATFS]
"EnableWriteBack"=dword:00000001
"BitmapCacheSize"=dword:00000100
"FatCacheSize"=dword:00000400
"DataCacheSize"=dword:00000c00

Definitely unrelated, MobileBooster installs to the device no matter what you chose and it autostarts (from \windows\startup folder).
Make sure you safely disconnect from PC when you're in flash drive mode and don't connect/disconnect the device in flash mode during any transfers

OK, here are some benchmarks with SK Tools. The first two compare benchmarking w/ and w/o mobileboost running, each after a soft reset. I ran three tests, took the average of each three and show the standard deviations.
W/O the boost:
Test AVG STDEV Units
Integer 329.2143667 2.620626281 Moves/25 usec
Floating point 7.595333333 0.022590558 MWIPS
RAM access 537 31.48015248 Speed index
Draw bitmaps 638.6666667 7.637626158 Speed index
Main storage (write) 2366.656667 29.27902036 KB/sec
Main storage (read) 6871.67 770.7838631 KB/sec
Storage Card (write) 3385.506667 131.6158236 KB/sec
Storage Card (read) 4341.836667 1005.563271 KB/sec
File List 2606.666667 139.2850794 Items/s
FL: Storage Card 2424.666667 26.57693235 Items/s
SKTools loading 2185 86.79285685 ms
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the boost running:
Test AVG STDEV
Integer 329.7313333 2.010925713
Floating point 7.614 0.031240999
RAM access 442 1
Draw bitmaps 653 4
Main storage (write) 2420.056667 27.17658244
Main storage (read) 7459.18 177.8904416
Storage Card (write) 2712.48 215.2829438
Storage Card (read) 5341.15 928.2778203
File List 2512.333333 68.23733094
FL: Storage Card 2340.666667 67.82575715
SKTools loading 2187.666667 27.53785274
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These two are really pretty similar. In my experience, there's a lot of variance in how well the RAM access and bitmap tests run; they aren't consistent at all, so seeing the faster ram access without the boost running probably means nothing.
Next, I ran a set of .mp3's over WMP and did the tests (3 for each, w and w/o the boost, with a soft reset in between the tests). This was to test multi-tasking performance. I ran the same two songs for each test (takes about 5 min per test).
W/o boost:
Test AVG STDEV
Integer 289.113 23.80731014
Floating point 7.300333333 0.015143756
RAM access 531.6666667 10.96965511
Draw bitmaps 729.3333333 4.509249753
Main storage (write) 1840.866667 46.8405992
Main storage (read) 7033.93 267.0015249
Storage Card (write) 2730.49 189.3420405
Storage Card (read) 4724.97 997.641275
File List 2279.333333 34.58805189
FL: Storage Card 2196 40.03748244
SKTools loading 2320 57.61076288
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
W/ the boost:
Test AVG STDEV
Integer 241.0114 13.07119076
Floating point 7.227333333 0.007023769
RAM access 543.6666667 13.0511813
Draw bitmaps 727.6666667 3.055050463
Main storage (write) 1898.493333 59.4344196
Main storage (read) 6885.55 481.199009
Storage Card (write) 2708.99 39.82972383
Storage Card (read) 5276.103333 174.1402014
File List 2342.333333 44.23045708
FL: Storage Card 2057.333333 43.01550108
SKTools loading 2286 11.35781669
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The integer test is a lot faster w/o the boost running, and the floating point is slightly faster (not a ton). Both take a hit compared to not running WMP, which is a major resource hog. The RAM and bitmap tests are both faster, and this just goes to show that they're pretty random tests and I wouldn't ever get too excited about results with these two tests (unless they're consistently awful, I suppose). The only benchmark (besides the first two tests, which basically measure processor speed or effectiveness) that I care about is the last one, which is the SK Tools boot-time (you have to close the app and re-start to get different measurements). It's pretty good in all cases, and doesn't change that much.
Long story short, I'm not seeing much benefit in these tests, but if it helps to get gscroll to work (not sure 100% yet), then I might use it.

nik3r said:
Definitely unrelated, MobileBooster installs to the device no matter what you chose and it autostarts (from \windows\startup folder).
Make sure you safely disconnect from PC when you're in flash drive mode and don't connect/disconnect the device in flash mode during any transfers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I dunno if it's related or not, but I was doing all the file transfers with total commander on the device. I didn't use the cab to install mobilespeedbooster, I dumped the contents with sk tools and then started it manually with a shortcut (that I made w/ TC). So, it wasn't running from startup.
Edit: now that I think about it, I've also got these keys applied to the sd card:
Code:
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\StorageManager\Profiles\SDMemory\FATFS\Filters\CacheFilt]
"Dll"="CacheFilt.dll"
"Order"=dword:2
"FileCacheWriteBackPriority256"=dword:FE ;shadrac's settings
"FileCacheWriteBackTimeout"=dword:A
I have a feeling that mobileboost was messing with the writeback thread, and that's why I wasn't seeing files writing properly to my card.

Thanks for the tests, even though synthetic benchmarks on WM are inherently imprecise and this app is more about perceived speed than actual raw speed. Your SD problem at least gave me more ideas, I should really treat system services separately with higher priority and try to decrease the thread scheduling overhead, which may cause the differences in benchmarks.

where can I find the setting app?
cause I cannot find it on System settings and start program....
or just install it without setting and anything else...?

There's no settings, the core is fully automated - just install and soft reset and it's online.

Improved performance on my phone
I'll like to start off by thanking you for this great app I usually just read other people who post and if it looks good I download it and I never post back but I really liked this app so I felt like it deserved some feedback. I've noticed my TP run smoother and faster esp when I'm listening to music . Also I don't know if its from your program but my phone would just go to a white screen for 5 sec when I try to go back to my home screen, but thats about the only issue I've seen so far. Keep up the good work

Mine is Exquisite ROM 4.06 ... and i think the pagepool size is 0... as the thread says...

Torakiki83 said:
Mine is Exquisite ROM 4.06 ... and i think the pagepool size is 0... as the thread says...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and i forgot, sense 2.5