Has anyone tried SMARTBENCH 2010 or 2011 vs QUADRANT BENCHMARK? Does anyone besides me think it seems more realistic? Not to take anything away from the OC Kernels which definitely make the NC much quicker.
Just DL'd it, installed, and ran it right off the bat. I got an abysmal 473 and a 1543 on graphics. Seems way too low to be true, maybe it is realistic though. Still love my super high quadrants though
Edit: Just re-ran the test, and got a much better 1066 productivity, and 1368 games index. Seems reasonable to me! What scores did anyone else get on smartbench 2011??
Sent from my NookColor using Tapatalk
Related
Hello all,
I'm quite shocked when testing quadrant and I got 1774 score. Usually I only got around 1400-1500.
Then I tried that time, I had around 1400 for the first time, and I repeat the test directly and get 1774 score.
I repeat the method the next day and get also a huge difference between the first try and the second try.
anyone can explain this??
I'm running CM6 RC2
1113MHz monks kernel
pretty nice score, possibly some other proceses running in the background, i got a 1200+ score then killed a bunch of stuff running and then got a 1500 score
I usually hit 1700-ish.
disgustip8ted said:
pretty nice score, possibly some other proceses running in the background, i got a 1200+ score then killed a bunch of stuff running and then got a 1500 score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
try again directly after you got 1500 score. I got 1700 for the second try
samsung galaxy s
I did the benchmark before applying the voodoo lagfix on my SGS, i was the third on the list just after moto droid x, after the lagfix and reboot, i'm now 1469 and on top of all the device, the original SGS score is way below...
the point is, how this thing work ? is this reliable ? i mean what's the point of the app finally ?
I honestly think that the score doesn't matter. Isn't the most important thing most aim for is speed and stability? If your phone feels fast then you shouldn't care for the score.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
1774marks? no it's not strange.
Here is a screenshot i have made about month ago on original-chinese-odexed Miui [email protected] without any hacks, it was fast as lighting (Or diarrhea)
Miui12.31 not so fast
What are your benchmarks? I was reading the EVO gets like 55 on FPS2d, but I ran it once and got 60 with StdDev of 11. My quadrant was 114. And Linpack is 1.618 MFLOPS. I'm upgrading to EVOs today, so was just wanted to get a feel for how much of a difference I'd see which should be a lot, but I was really blow away by my FPS2D benchmark...
Coming over from fascinate forums and just wondering how the benchmarks test change when we actually get some froyo. I know they don't matter but it helps show the overall boost in performance so anybody with linpack or quadrant if u don't care please post ur results. Thanks n advance. Don't flame me, this will give u cappy users a chance to brag
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Quadrant scores stay pretty close to the same, mid 900's to low 1000's, linpack clocks in between 13.5 and 15
As has been mentioned in many other threads, Quadrant scores are biased toward Snapdragon processors.
These benchmarks really don't mean anything from one phone to another, but within the same phone model it does give an idea of improvement..
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
1842 Quadrant Score after OCLF on Froyo which is great compared to 900 before the fix
This is with RyanZA’s EXT2 Lagfix.
Full Quadrant: 1867 (Saw 67 FPS at one point) This is substantially lower than the 2.1 EXT4 Lagfix, but still twice as high as the stock score of 957. I know Quadrant really doesn’t mean anything.
Benchmark PI: 1445 MS
Linpak:
MFLOPS: 13.809
Time: 6.07 Seconds
Norm Res: 5.68
Precision: 2.22044
The "Billabond1 real life use" benchmark shows performance to be as good or better than 2.1. I went from cognition 2.1 w/ voodoo lagfix to cognition 2.2 w/ oclf. I would say that the performance is about the same, good, and the features in 2.2 make it totally worth the update.
On a fresh install of 2.2 I got 995 on my quadrant score.
When I finished rooting and putting on RyanZA's OCLF, my quadrant went up to 2105.
Never did a linpack
Hi all.
I was running 2.1 Eclair just a few hours ago and was getting constant scores of 2.2K+ on Quadrant with the OCLF. I'm now running a rooted 2.2 Froyo with the same OCLF and scoring 1846. I can barely see a loss of performance... Does anyone know why this is?
Thanks in advance.
Because Quadrant is a SYNTHETIC BENCHMARK! It only tests a single specific workload
I was also under the impression that OCLF didn't work on Froyo unless you first ran the Z4 app and then the OCLF. I also agree though that Quadrant isn't that useful. The best test is whether you're happy with the speed of the phone. I'd be happy with it if it responds to my touch without a pause of a second or more.
Quadrant means nothing really, anyone can get 1k in there and outperform a 2.6k score.
my quadrant results are in the 4k while my wife's S2 is in the same range (slightly higher) both without any overclocking
I was happy with 4k but now I wonder why my wife's s2 can achieve similar numbers with no overclocking.
My GN overclocked at 1.7 with performance gov hardly go over 5k
I think I read some quadrant are in the 7k
what's yours ?
guessing here but since the cpu/chipset are the same and the note is a little slower in benchmarks, I'm gonna say its the bigger screen resolution that it has to power, more pixels to push.
Bingo.
I got around 4200. Fully stock.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
I got 5800 quadrant score overclocked at 1.7
and scored 5005 at default 1.4 Ghz of frequency
I am happy with it...
Thanks guys for the input I feel better now
ArcticCat said:
Thanks guys for the input I feel better now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well you just made me feel worse, im getting 3900
Quadrant score fluctuates a lot, so I don't know if it is reliable. I had about 5k and the next benchmark I had over 6k, so.... ofcourse, i had it set to 1.7ghz.
Usually around 4000.
1st 3800
2nd 4000
3rd 4200
4th 4600
5th 4700
6th 4600
Not sure which result is accurate even knowing that quadrant means nothing.
Quadrant is such a badly flawed benchmark, it can't even be used to compare the real world performance between two ROMs, let alone two different devices!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
foxmeister said:
Quadrant is such a badly flawed benchmark, it can't even be used to compare the real world performance between two ROMs, let alone two different devices!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your proof?
WE hear it all the time but nobody ever explains it.
1.4ghz Non-Overclocked, but massively tweaked and I get:
1st Score: 5900
2nd Score: 6200
3rd Score: 6200
4th Score: 6000
5th Score: 6300
xAnimal5 said:
1.4ghz Non-Overclocked, but massively tweaked and I get:
1st Score: 5900
2nd Score: 6200
3rd Score: 6200
4th Score: 6000
5th Score: 6300
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow that's impressive!
What kind of tweaks are you taking about?
ArcticCat said:
wow that's impressive!
What kind of tweaks are you taking about?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Deleted pretty much everything you can to create a stable system
Adjusted the voltages based on my use
Added some build.prop tweaks
Tweaked the system UI for less RAM usage
No background widgets/No background activity
Double checked an triple checked all apps to make sure no mail process is in use
RAM Optmization tweaks
A bunch of other tweaks that I can't recall off the top of my head... haha
My Score ...
this is my score with quadrant !!
seepage said:
Your proof?
WE hear it all the time but nobody ever explains it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My personal proof is my own personal experiences, but you only need to Google terms like "quadrant benchmark flawed" to find lots of examples.
I've owned a great number of Android devices, and seen widely varying Quadrant scores, yet not one of them has ever indicated the comparative real world experience between the devices.
For example, my Galaxy Tab 7" would only score around 800 (stock) whereas my Note gets over 3600. Is the Note 4.5 times faster in real world usage - not even close! It is faster, but I would subjectively place the performance at around 1.4x to 1.5x.
In a similar vein, when I changed my Galaxy Tab 7" to use EXT4 instead of RFS, but Quadrant score shot up to nearly 2000, but was it over twice as fast as stock? No, once again not even close! However, it still felt faster in real world usage than my HTC Sensation which gets around 2500 on Quadrant.
Quadrant basically performs a lot of individual benchmarks on a device and then amalgamates the result into a single number. Those individual benchmarks may well be of use, but the ultimate number is derives clearly "weights" each benchmark inconsistently/incorrectly to be of any real use when comparing real world performance.
Ultimately, what do these numbers mean if they can't give you an idea of comparative performance?
I find it quite amusing the number of people on this site who chase high Quadrant scores. It's like comparing an M-series BMW with a regular model which has a M-series bodykit and then saying how they perform based purely on looks.
Regards,
Dave
Phandroid (or AndroidCentral) had an article about the crapyness of Quadrant some time ago.
And actually, a lot of mobile review sites refuses to run Quadrant anymore.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium