Database Develop

what is your Quadrant results ?

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

[Q] Best antutu scores on roms?

Hi, i went down quite a lot of pages and did not find any antutu score tests on galaxy s.
I was just wondering whats the best ones in what rom's and what kernels. I tried to google i9000 antutu best scores but seems there was not really that many hits and best scores i found was like 4k what sound quite a lot but not sure how legit those are when there was no pics.
I mean my friend got a galaxy note and it get a bit over 7k point and then reading more the damn old sucker galaxy s2 best with pic proof is like 8k.
Was just wondering how my fine old faithful galaxy s can do. I got a decent gingerbread rom and i get a bit over 3k without OC. Can't remember how much more i got with ICS OC'd to 1,4ghz. it was over 3k too tough but not remembering how much above.
Would be nice if you can post your roms that score over 3k and what roms + kernels you are using and how much OC you done. I mean the i9000 is not the fastest phone by far at this point but would be intressed to see if people got how high antutu scores.

Nowadays benchmark doesnt mean anything. There's many ways to cheat, and even if those score were honest it doesn't matter much. What does matter is real life performance

Oh antutu score can be fixed too these days? I mean i now the quadrant score has been always a bit question mark and i heard lots of cheating in it. Well i was just wondering the honest score. I'm trying to find a decent fast rom and the better score in benchmarks the less processor power it uses on stuff and that means a bit better battery life too.. well not always.
I'm just trying to get all out of my sgs before sgs3 comes out.. i must say i just love t his phone.. when i had a fast rom where it worked stable at 1.4ghz it was as fast as iphone 4s in same internet pages on stock browser.
But if people could post the LEGIT non cheated scores it would be better than the cheating ones lol

an0nym0us_ said:
Nowadays benchmark doesnt mean anything. There's many ways to cheat, and even if those score were honest it doesn't matter much. What does matter is real life performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. SGS with Froyo and EXT2 lagfix got a much higher score in Quadrant, but with ICS the experience is much better.

So the real question is what ROMs have given the best real life performance for you?

For me, it's 3827( on Antutu ) ;D with TiramiSlim RC2.0

[Q] 3D and 2D performance

Hi N7 fellow users
i get MAX 2600 3D and 350 2D in antutu and quadrant though i'm all the time OC the GPU to 520mhz
is that normal ?? i'm running the latest Paranoid Android rom along the latest Franco kernel.

That is about what I get for 3D. If you go to the developer menu you can improve your 2D performance by checking the "Force GPU rendering" . For what it's worth my 2D for Quadrant went to about 1000 after the checking that option.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Thanks for your reply
My htc one X was getting 39xx, 1k higher than my nexus
though they use nearly the same gpu.

Homurato said:
Thanks for your reply.
My htc one X was getting 39xx, 1k higher than my nexus
though they use nearly the same gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
quadrant does not measure gpu, it measures fps. and we are limited to 59fps no matter how much we overclock the gpu. use a benchmark like windmill, or basemark taiji, to test your gpu and what tweaking your gpu does. quadrant is an old, out of date benchmark.

simms22 said:
quadrant does not measure gpu, it measures fps. and we are limited to 59fps no matter how much we overclock the gpu. use a benchmark like windmill, or basemark taiji, to test your gpu and what tweaking your gpu does. quadrant is an old, out of date benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i guess i have to forget about all this paranoia coming from the low benchmark scores since every game works xD
(except horn strangely runs about 25 fps it seems, even though i'm oced to 520mhz)

Low of diminishing returns, if you over clock it doesn't mean ull always get higher scores, after ur GPU gets heated up it start to show lower and lower scores.
GPU is stable @ 446 (beyond that when ever it gets heated up it will cause touch and other issues)
Source: Read kernel Developers OP once a while

[Q] How can you affect the AnTuTu 3D Score?

Hi there!
I'm have been trying several different ROMS and tweaks to improve my general AnTuTu Score. Although I have a general idea what affects what score there's still one mystery to me - the 3D score.
I've been getting values from 1.000 to sometimes 1.800 and everything in between those two.
I can't seem to get consistent values here. I got the highest values on CM 10 stable (something like 1.900 3D score, up to 9 FPS in the "ogre fighting" benchmark part) and now on JB 4.2.1 (Fishears and CyanAOSP 0.7.5 and 0.6.5) the highest I got was 1.600 with 7 FPS max at the ogre fighting scene.
It's just mind boggling that I cant seem to find out how to raise this score.
Does anyone know WHAT exactly affects this score? I mean which tweaks do you guys run to improve this? Does the 3D score fluctuate as much for others too?

AW: [Q] How can you affect the AnTuTu 3D Score?
My values are from 1400 to 2200 and i have also no idea why.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

It's kinda strange that no one seems to know... ;D
But it seems that Live OC as in Semaphore or Devil Kernel speeds up GPU too and therefore increases the 3D score too. (as opposed to normal OC of just the CPU)

[Q] Mini Performance

Hey, i think i have a big problem.
Im using a new ROM (this one http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2622069) and i changed my Max CPU freq to 729Mhz and Min freq. to 122Mhz using ONDEMAND. So i decided to run a benchmark test using Quadrant Standard Edition and i got around 800 points i was kinda shocked because i saw many screenshots from other Mini Users with 2000+ points using an old ROM in this post -> http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1437030.
I dont know what i have done to get so low score, i only have facebook and skype installed and greenify. I think my phone is faster then before but with this Benchmark Score i think my phone is in a pretty bad condition
Any suggestion?

erasem said:
Hey, i think i have a big problem.
Im using a new ROM (this one http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2622069) and i changed my Max CPU freq to 729Mhz and Min freq. to 122Mhz using ONDEMAND. So i decided to run a benchmark test using Quadrant Standard Edition and i got around 800 points i was kinda shocked because i saw many screenshots from other Mini Users with 2000+ points using an old ROM in this post -> http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1437030.
I dont know what i have done to get so low score, i only have facebook and skype installed and greenify. I think my phone is faster then before but with this Benchmark Score i think my phone is in a pretty bad condition
Any suggestion?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, what you're running is a Jelly Bean, which is NOT officially supported by Galaxy Mini's hardware.
Also, if you think your phone is already fast, then DON'T believe benchmark. I never choose benchmark for testing phone's smoothness, instead I use the ROM around 1 week, then see how does it responds. If it's faster, then I would say the ROM is good.