Database Develop

Wich Filesystem is better for Galaxy S?

At now there are a lot of solutions for fix the lag issue on Galaxy S series... and some of these are based on ext4, jfs, ext2 and other. My question is: wich is the better filesystem for the hardware of the Galaxy S? I think than any solutions have pro and cons, so which is better for life battery? for speed? for CPU usage (that maybe is the same of battery usage)? for smoothness? And for other aspect that I have forgotten or omitted?

As a matter of fact, you won't notice any difference between filesystems' speedboost, especially, using Froyo. I tried several ones, but using RyanZA's OCLF 2.0: it delivers the easiest decent way to boost your GT-I9000 in my opinion.

No idea but some say ext4 is overkill and wastes cpu time. Ext2 would be way to go , I myself use jfs
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

I wouldn't recommended jfs. My experience with it has been far from great, it's unstable and has bugs.
I'd suggest ext4 but it appears to use more battery then rfs. As far as ext2 goes, it seems the most stable and less consuming but it's not the fastest imo.

Well battery life is the price to pay if you want something faster, EXT4 is the way to go.

And pinned topic that in detail describes differences is just invisible?

JFS has some bugs, Timezone and Locale changes every reboot
I think EXT4 is the best choice in terms of performance, but not for battery life.

yep
EXT4 is fast and best for galaxy s

You can't say that jfs has timezone bugs and so on, as there are users who don't experience this, like me. For me, jfs is the best fs, and I' ve tried them all.
But I guess you should try then all. It's a matter of opinion and taste, like opera/chrome/firefox
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

dupel said:
And pinned topic that in detail describes differences is just invisible?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1, it's getting impossible to search around here. Last thing we need is more and more topics of the same thing.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

PaulForde said:
+1, it's getting impossible to search around here. Last thing we need is more and more topics of the same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a discussion only about the better filesystem for the Galaxy S, not about the better LagFix. So I don't see the point of your contestation.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

JFS is the best in both battery and performance but it has a nasty timezone bug (locked to 00:00 and it resets on every reboot)
EXT4 is very fast and most stable and you shouldn't feel speed differences when using JPA or JPO.
EXT2 may cause data loss.

But EXT4 for what I have seen drain battery a bit faster than EXT2 or RFS...

Yup, me too but it's still the best compromise until somebody figures out the JFS bug...

ext4 is the best all-round. I'm on JFS at the moment and it seems unstable.

Why unstable? (besides the timezone issue)

Random stuff happening I didn't get with ext4 like hangs, phone resets, takes ages to wake up from lock etc.

FWIW, I've had little to no problems with EXT4 as a replacement for RFS.
Haven't compared with JFS in terms of battery, but I do get pretty good life overall, and very much similar to RFS.

IMO ext4 is the best at the moment. Smooth, fast, stable, reliable. But the minus thing is, it uses more battery.

dirk1978 said:
Random stuff happening I didn't get with ext4 like hangs, phone resets, takes ages to wake up from lock etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You must have done something wrong, I had none of those...

EXT4 worth it?

Hi, so after cm rooting i noticed there is also an ext4 upgrade...is this worth it and will I have data lose during the change? Im on 2.3.3 and am wondering if it is really worth it! Ed

are you kidding me?
besides that this post should not even be in this forum (try Q & A) there are hundreds of other posts and threads discussing this topic if you only use your -(0-0)- !

Yes and no
It may have some advantages but as for what I'm not sure but as for nay major advantages I would say no. I'm still using EXT2 and my benchmarkes are still 1900+. I've tried almost all the other lagfixes and found no real advantage. The only thing I hate about custom kernels with lagfix is the secondary samsung splash screens and custom splash screen. They kill the post time.

I would say it isn't as worth it as what people say. First thing most people do after converting their filesystem is run quadrant. It's possible that improved quadrant scores don't translate to real world performance though.
Even worse, running quadrant actually engages the placebo effect so you walk in with a more positive impression. Meanwhile, I don't recall ever seeing anyone from the EXT4/EXT2 i9000 community running blind tests, and neither development community has actually shown any evidence formal testing has been performed. All the arguments seem to be based around quadrant and PC testing. If methods like this were applied to clinical testing, every drug would pass
Honestly, give both a try, but do it blindly.
Why Quadrant may be wrong
This is just a bit of background why Quadrant's scores may not reflect real life performance. Until we check the actual ratio's of Quadrant, and compare with actual usage ratio's though, we can't identify how "real" it's scores are.
Consider a benchmark which produces 1 final score. It may be calculated by:
[MAX TIME - Time to read 1000mb] + [Max time - time to write 1000MB]. In this case, both scores contribute to 50% of the final score, which can be worth 2x MAX Time.
Scenario 1: Time to read/write is both the same
Scenario 2: Read time is 1% shorter than Scenario 1, but write time is 1% longer. Both will have the same score in Quadrant..
Scenario 3: Read time is 5% longer than Scenario 1, but write time is 50% shorter. Scenario 3 will get the best score
Which one is ACTUALLY faster though. The benchmark-toting individuals will claim Scenario 3 is faster, because of the score. HOWEVER, that may be incorrect. Consider the following:
If a user reads 100x more data than they write:
1) Clearly, faster read scores are more important.
2) The BEST filesystem will be Scenario 2, despite being equal last.
3) Scenario 1 will be mid place
4) The scenario with the best score, will actually have the WORST performance.
5) A drop in 1% read performance would need a HUGE increase in write performance to actually be faster.
Until we have an idea of how accurate Quadrant REALLY is, run your own tests, and do so without knowing which filesystem is running. High quadrant scores may boost your e-penis size, but as you can see, it is theoretically possible for the scores which are produced to score slower performing filesystems more highly than faster ones. Disappointingly though, a decreasing number of users/developers at XDA these days are actually interested in the truth, and simply in not being wrong.
Even worse, the community for some reason seems VERY anti-RFS, and wont give it a chance regardless. It might be a LOT better than it used to be. Either way, it seems to be good enough for me.
Ignore the theatrics and run a blind test. That's the only way to determine what is ACTUALLY faster.

monkeytennis said:
Hi, so after cm rooting i noticed there is also an ext4 upgrade...is this worth it and will I have data lose during the change? Im on 2.3.3 and am wondering if it is really worth it! Ed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you mean CF root right? Will just answer the data loose question. No you shouldnt. But do a backup before. Its fast and easy (if you are on CF root that is)
If its worth depends on you? You experience any lag on rfs? Phone slow?
ramrod54 said:
It may have some advantages but as for what I'm not sure but as for nay major advantages I would say no. I'm still using EXT2 and my benchmarkes are still 1900+. I've tried almost all the other lagfixes and found no real advantage. The only thing I hate about custom kernels with lagfix is the secondary samsung splash screens and custom splash screen. They kill the post time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@ramrod54 , where did you get ext2 support on JVK? And what the?
What samsung splash screens and custom splash? What rom and kernel are you on? And what lagfixes? And we both know quadrant score doesnt matter does it ?

Yes, it's worth it. Some things (Android Market, Gmail) works really MUCH faster then on rfs.

Unrealwolf said:
Yes, it's worth it. Some things (Android Market, Gmail) works really MUCH faster then on rfs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hrm, I've never noticed a difference. Market is slow on any room, hell market.android.com is slow too. Gmail always worked fast for me, on any rom.
Personally, I don't see or feel the point in using anything but rfs, but I suppose if someone has half a bazillion apps installed, then maybe an alternative filesystem might be better.
I say try it. If you notice a difference, good for you. If you don't, then stick with rfs.

What about battery performance ? from what I have read, battery performance is also better with RFS.

I always use ex4, its not as needed now on gingerbread but I just prefer the file system...it is better than RFS...but RFS has improved a great deal so you may not noticed that much difference, the rom may become a little smoother..You wont get data lose because of ex4, maybe the way the kernel is built...dont forget that 2.3.3 gingerbread is still beta and without the source code for the kernel you cant expect great things yet, although chainfire has done some amazing work and now we can change the file system using his app....works really well.
Also regarding battery, the difference in performance is such a small margin that its not even an issue.
What alot of people aren't aware of is that the Nexus S for example uses ex4 file system as default straight out of the box
Its not just a lagfix for the galaxy s, its a very good file system too...
Just a side note on Quadrant, ex4, ex2 will trick the app...if you buy the pro version, you will see how much the file system stretches on the bar...Quadrant is more for fun....or HTC

Think it´s worth cause rfs slow down your system after a while

I moved back to 4.0.3

After trying many Roms...i decided moving back to 4.0.3
Now my phone works well ,Super fast ,and very very Smooth. It seems that JB "4.1.2" is making Lg 4x HD very slow... cyanogenmod too...
Im running ics "4.0.3 v10B"
I was thinking 4.1.2 will be better
Sent from my LG-P880 using Tapatalk 2

and why should we care?

theofficialpimp said:
and why should we care?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't be so rude, he's just reporting. I admit that he should have tell us a bit more about the different performances but this is a forum ! He is reporting something so that users who are in the same case could do as he did.
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda premium

im sorry for being rude

I had a few phones with Android.
I saw that the pre-installed system is almost always better than update.
Wysłane z mojego LG-P880 przy użyciu Tapatalk 4

sQuAshPL said:
I had a few phones with Android.
I saw that the pre-installed system is almost always better than update.
Wysłane z mojego LG-P880 przy użyciu Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's because they had all the time they have to develop a better ROM before the official launch. But once after launch whiners and babies will cry for updates so they had to rush a bit more, which sacrificed optimisation time.
Good ROM takes time. If CyanogenMod didn't have nightlies or RC - just stable releases, god it could be ages before anything from them sees light.

Life'sGood said:
that's because they had all the time they have to develop a better ROM before the official launch. But once after launch whiners and babies will cry for updates so they had to rush a bit more, which sacrificed optimisation time.
Good ROM takes time. If CyanogenMod didn't have nightlies or RC - just stable releases, god it could be ages before anything from them sees light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe LG is working on.4.2.2 yet and want a perfect 4.2.2 so they dont.tell anything and working very long ... and it takes time
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda app-developers app

GalaxyVolvoZ said:
Maybe LG is working on.4.2.2 yet and want a perfect 4.2.2 so they dont.tell anything and working very long ... and it takes time
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're dreaming dude IMO we won't get official 4.2.2 nor 4.3
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda premium

Mm, probably not, but why is it shocking to you all that 4.0.3 is faster? :s The lower the android version, the less resources it needs because it has less features, less processes, looks worse, lower demand for high quality rendering etc etc.
Think about it, would running 4.3 be as fast as running 2.3.x on it?
In my eyes, the lower the android version, the "Faster" it will appear.. Also, post some benchmarks of v10, and we can compare them to a benchmark of 4.3?
Edit1:"Optimizations" You mean they add placebo to the stock rom? fact is, CM9 will be faster then V10, and CM10 will be faster then V20. Say they release V30 as 4.2.2, you can bet your ass CM10.1 would be faster, v40 as 4.3, CM10.2 would be faster. v50 as 4.4 say, CM11? Would probably be faster than it.

penguin449 said:
Mm, probably not, but why is it shocking to you all that 4.0.3 is faster? :s The lower the android version, the less resources it needs because it has less features, less processes, looks worse, lower demand for high quality rendering etc etc.
Think about it, would running 4.3 be as fast as running 2.3.x on it?
In my eyes, the lower the android version, the "Faster" it will appear.. Also, post some benchmarks of v10, and we can compare them to a benchmark of 4.3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No higher Android better Performence. Because it has more features, and can handle the Hardware better. For Example I mean Android 1 Beta dont support Dual Core Processor. Because the Rom doesnt detect it. And Android 4.3 can handle Bluetooth 4.0 and can handle the Ram and Processes better. Like compare windows 2000 with Windows 7 64 Bit.
If the Hardware Requirements is ok, we can have the full Power of it with good Android Version.
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda app-developers app

GalaxyVolvoZ said:
No higher Android better Performence. Because it has more features, and can handle the Hardware better. For Example I mean Android 1 Beta dont support Dual Core Processor. Because the Rom doesnt detect it. And Android 4.3 can handle Bluetooth 4.0 and can handle the Ram and Processes better. Like compare windows 2000 with Windows 7 64 Bit.
If the Hardware Requirements is ok, we can have the full Power of it with good Android Version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
W.T.F. :banghead:
Did you really just try arguing that?

For me the stock rom 4.0.3 was fast but had alot of lag issues when installing apps, closing apps etc.. Now on stable cm 10.1 i got no issues at all and my battery life doubled.
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda app-developers app

SimonTS said:
W.T.F. :banghead:
Did you really just try arguing that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is some truth when it comes to 4.3. For me cm10.2 is like lightning even compared to v10a. v10a ICS was pretty fast, but not as good as this. Its the best rom from LG with no tinkering though
Sent from my smart frying pan (Tegra 3)

Well try to use CM 10.1.3 latest with iodak v7.. U feel much difference!!! Its much battery friendly and Smooth

I moved back too, but to "official" 4.1.2 not 4.0.3. im using Jellyfish HD 1.3 (with iodak kernel) and its great. Finally MHL works, camera is awesome, video recording is smooth not like on cm. everything is smooth and battery life is much much better. I don't need to worry anymore if something will not work (like on 4.2 customs)
oh and games are more laggy, thats only one disadvantage

Sorry but we need to differentiate between pure android and OEM modified android. There is no possible way pure ICS is smoother/faster than later pure android versions. Resource management has only improved in newer versions of android. Hence low end devices always experience a performance improvement from newer aosp based Roms, from their latest stock firmware. Its common that OEMS introduce poor code, bugs etc that may take from the user experence in newer versions of their firmware, this is possibly the case of our device. Although there is a very minimal difference between stock 4.1 android and custom ROM/ kernels in terms of battery vs performance(other devices I own, the difference is night and day.). Which indicates lg done a great job of android 4.1 on our device.

JoinTheRealms said:
Sorry but we need to differentiate between pure android and OEM modified android. There is no possible way pure ICS is smoother/faster than later pure android versions. Resource management has only improved in newer versions of android. Hence low end devices always experience a performance improvement from newer aosp based Roms, from their latest stock firmware. Its common that OEMS introduce poor code, bugs etc that may take from the user experence in newer versions of their firmware, this is possibly the case of our device. Although there is a very minimal difference between stock 4.1 android and custom ROM/ kernels in terms of battery vs performance(other devices I own, the difference is night and day.). Which indicates lg done a great job of android 4.1 on our device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's total rubbish. I've seen nexus 7 users get worse and worse lag as they upgrade. That's pure android straight from Google! Nexus 4 users too. 4.3 Does have optimizations, and good ones at that. Its bloody fast no ****. But I've never seen a direct correlation between higher android version and smoother performance. Never. And I've had too many phones due to breakages. I knew a guy who swore by froyo when cm10 was available, because it was bloat free and smooth. Just because new bloat isn't directly visible doesn't mean it isn't there.
Sent from my smart frying pan (Tegra 3)

@non4 said:
That's total rubbish. I've seen nexus 7 users get worse and worse lag as they upgrade. That's pure android straight from Google! Nexus 4 users too. 4.3 Does have optimizations, and good ones at that. Its bloody fast no ****. But I've never seen a direct correlation between higher android version and smoother performance. Never. And I've had too many phones due to breakages. I knew a guy who swore by froyo when cm10 was available, because it was bloat free and smooth. Just because new bloat isn't directly visible doesn't mean it isn't there.
Sent from my smart frying pan (Tegra 3)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you seriously think google push crazy amounts of money into making a worse os than they had? I agree, and said in my previous post that updates occationally brake things, Its understandable for the android ecosystem(im not saying its accepable, i pisses me of and ive experenced it myself.)
Each update is a net good for android, btw google isnt bloating android, oems are responsiable for that, and oftern ruin what would have been a good update for a device. ICS on this device was better for gaming, but it distroyed battery , JB fixed that found a better balance.
I know people who still cling to windows xp, some day they will have to reliese, underling windows 8 is a much improved os.(no matter how much they or I disagree with the interface)

timon12 said:
I moved back too, but to "official" 4.1.2 not 4.0.3. im using Jellyfish HD 1.3 (with iodak kernel) and its great. Finally MHL works, camera is awesome, video recording is smooth not like on cm. everything is smooth and battery life is much much better. I don't need to worry anymore if something will not work (like on 4.2 customs)
oh and games are more laggy, thats only one disadvantage
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please can you link me to Jellyfish ?
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda premium

ectoplasma22 said:
Please can you link me to Jellyfish ?
Sent from my LG-P880 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://dlbase.seo-fuerst.de/?dir=LG-Forum/LG-P880/Jellyfish HD/Jellyfish Versionen/v1.3/

[Q] Is anyone getting 'perfect' performance on CM11 vs alternative ROMs?

Hi, I'm only a couple days into owning the Nook HD+, really happy with it but sort of working on trying to get my performance a bit better. It's just a little sluggish. I'm currently on the latest official CM Nightlies (cm-11-20140617-NIGHTLY-ovation.zip)
It's about 80% usable but just slow enough that I'm considering flashing a new ROM. So far, I've turned on ART, set processor to ONDEMAND and I/O Scheduler to NOOP, as well as turning off animations and anything I can to get better response. Honestly, it's almost fine.. I'm just a little obsessive with tweaking. And it is pretty obviously slower than my Galaxy S4.
First question is, are most people using a slow CM11 or did I screw up? I had a few hiccups on my CM11 install at first, is it possible I did something then or now to cause the slow performance? Even the CM boot animation is slowww. I could factory reset, wipe dalvik cache etc and reflash my same CM11 Nightly to see if a fresh start is better.
Secondly:
Some people recommend 'Succulent' builds
Some people recommend 10.1.3 Stable
There are also Unofficial 10.2.1 Builds and even Carbon ROM
I would start flashing away myself, but I already spent some time setting up my apps & accounts & blah blah on my current ROM and I'd like to only do it all over again if I really know it's gonna help. Do we think CM11 is gonna get better quickly with each new Nightly and Milestone?
Can any seasoned Nook Warrior help guide me down the path of enlightenment? My performance is not great but it's usable. I'd love to have KitKat on this device but if it really just won't fly I'm OK with 4.3 or 4.2 if it means I can have the tablet of my dreams. Help me XDA, you're my only hope.
=====================
edit: Since I got no responses here (what the deal, XDA?), I am starting to just go through the ROMs I linked myself to see how they perform. Just did a full wipe & restore to flash the 'Succulent' 28APR2014 Build. There is an immediate difference in that the CM boot animation is correct now, and not laggy and ****ed. This gave me a lot of hope, however after setting it up & messing around a bit, it's not quite as drastic a change as the animation. A bit faster, a bit better, not perfect. Gonna give it a day or two of use then probably try 10.2.

I'd be surprised if you saw significant performance differences between ROMs. They are all based on pretty much the same code after all. Although the Antutu benchmark results for my HD were about 10% better with CM 10.x.x than with the B&N software, I could detect no real world difference.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Free mobile app

lmacmil said:
I'd be surprised if you saw significant performance differences between ROMs. They are all based on pretty much the same code after all. Although the Antutu benchmark results for my HD were about 10% better with CM 10.x.x than with the B&N software, I could detect no real world difference.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey thank you for the reply! so far I'm pretty much settled with the 'Succulent' ROM. I'm surprised there wouldn't be a big jump in performance going back to 10.2.x or 10.1.x- wouldn't those be much less demanding on the hardware? that's what I had assumed anyway.
either way, I will probably stick with this ROM for now.

pchc_lx said:
hey thank you for the reply! so far I'm pretty much settled with the 'Succulent' ROM. I'm surprised there wouldn't be a big jump in performance going back to 10.2.x or 10.1.x- wouldn't those be much less demanding on the hardware? that's what I had assumed anyway.
either way, I will probably stick with this ROM for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Google did a ton of work to make KitKat run in less ram so it should be bit smoother than earlier versions.

jpisini said:
Actually Google did a ton of work to make KitKat run in less ram so it should be bit smoother than earlier versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, great to know! I will definitely try to stay on CM11 now. the Succulent build is pretty great. I'd say I'm happy.

I am pretty happy with his build as well it makes good use of the hardware. The Nook will never be as smooth as an iPad but for the price it is a great tablet.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using XDA Free mobile app

jpisini said:
I am pretty happy with his build as well it makes good use of the hardware. The Nook will never be as smooth as an iPad but for the price it is a great tablet.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, pretty much this. Although mine actually is equal to or a bit better than the GF's 1st gen ipad. Shame is she can't go back to an earlier iOS or install a custom ROM. so a physically perfect device is bordeline unusable because of apple policy. such a shame.

80% usable?
I don't know how one quantifies usability, but I had no complaints using CM 10.2.1. It's even faster using CM 11 6/15 and on. I'd say mine is 100% usable.
(You are on emmc, right?)
I use two apps for usability "benchmarking." The first is Garmin Pilot. There's a menu that pops up for map overlays that takes time to display. The closer to real time, the more usable the ROM. There's about a half second delay.
The other "app" I've started using to gauge usability is APPS in Settings. It used to be on CM 10.2.1 that it took a second or two to populate the Running applications. Now, in CM 11, the Running apps populate almost immediately after swiping. Can't get much faster than that.
FWIW, AnTuTu benchmarks at about 13660. (Hotplug, deadline, 512Kb cache using SD-Booster. Dalvik.)
I wonder if you need to run trim manually? I noticed my browser slowing down last month and used Lagfree. Browser sped back up.
Or perhaps do a /system wipe and reinstall? I've had leftovers in /system before.

PMikeP said:
FWIW, AnTuTu benchmarks at about 13660. (Hotplug, deadline, 512Kb cache using SD-Booster. Dalvik.)
I wonder if you need to run trim manually? I noticed my browser slowing down last month and used Lagfree. Browser sped back up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have 3 Antutu data points for my HD. Stock: 12697, 10.1.3: 13234, 10.2.1: 13713. I know Antutu isn't 100% repeatable so it may be that the 10.1 and the 10.2 numbers aren't really different but they are both definitely faster than stock firmware. I saw similar improvements on my wife's HD+.
I thought trim was built-in from 4.3 on?

lmacmil said:
I have 3 Antutu data points for my HD. Stock: 12697, 10.1.3: 13234, 10.2.1: 13713. I know Antutu isn't 100% repeatable so it may be that the 10.1 and the 10.2 numbers aren't really different but they are both definitely faster than stock firmware. I saw similar improvements on my wife's HD+.
I thought trim was built-in from 4.3 on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems like we're in the same ballpark benchmarkwise.
Yes, I've read that trim was built into the ROM. But I don't know when it triggers (daily, weekly, monthly) while charging. All I know is that, last week, while still on 10.2.1, my browser got really slow. So I used lagfix and the browser sped back up.

PMikeP said:
Yes, I've read that trim was built into the ROM. But I don't know when it triggers (daily, weekly, monthly) while charging. All I know is that, last week, while still on 10.2.1, my browser got really slow. So I used lagfix and the browser sped back up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used lagfix when I was on 10.1.3 but never really noticed any difference.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Free mobile app

I have been running the official cm11 m4 build on art for about 3 months now and am very satisfied with the performance. In all this time, I have only had a couple of random reboots.
I have not tried succulent's build, so can't compare, but am happy with my hd+.
___________________
Sent from my BN NookHD+ using Tapatalk Pro.

If i decrypt the phone will the performance of it be better?

What will improve and should I do it? I've seen that booting up takes longer but I can live with that, what bothers me is performance in system and I'm not really worried of someone spying on me

Try it, but you probably won't notice a difference. Other than the difference in boot times they felt the same in performance. I tried both ext4 and f2fs and couldn't see a performance difference either. F2fs uses more of the storage so I switched back to ext4 and got an extra 2 or 3 gigs of storage back.

Theoretically yes but practically no. In newer phones such as the OnePlus 3T you won't really notice the difference.

Yes, but you won't notice it. Performance impact of encryption is negligible.
Encryption (at least fde encryption in Android) is about protecting your data when you lost your phone, not about protecting you from spying. Think about it that way, losing your phone is a bad thing but losing your phone AND your all your data (your contacts, chat, sms, mms, photos, call logs, app data, banking data, browser history..) is much worse. Why would you put your data in such a risk? Don't do it, it is not worth it.

Michalko5896 said:
Yes, but you won't notice it. Performance impact of encryption is negligible.
Encryption (at least fde encryption in Android) is about protecting your data when you lost your phone, not about protecting you from spying. Think about it that way, losing your phone is a bad thing but losing your phone AND your all your data (your contacts, chat, sms, mms, photos, call logs, app data, banking data, browser history..) is much worse. Why would you put your data in such a risk? Don't do it, it is not worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's it. Also, a lot of developers keep disabling encryption in their ROMs without a reason. Since encryption has become a standard in Android, CPUs have adopted lot of changes to bring the performance impact almost to zero.

954wrecker said:
Try it, but you probably won't notice a difference. Other than the difference in boot times they felt the same in performance. I tried both ext4 and f2fs and couldn't see a performance difference either. F2fs uses more of the storage so I switched back to ext4 and got an extra 2 or 3 gigs of storage back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just look at that link... For f2fs vs ext4
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2697069
Edit: if u write a big file on ur phone it need to be encrypted, so it takes more time. So basically decrypt is way faster, but u will not see any difference.
Gesendet von meinem ONEPLUS A3003 mit Tapatalk

I could care less about benchmarks for speed or performance or anything. I trust my instincts and they tell me the difference is not noticable in my daily usage.

954wrecker said:
I could care less about benchmarks for speed or performance or anything. I trust my instincts and they tell me the difference is not noticable in my daily usage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only reason to decrypt that I can think of is to use MultiROM.

Kk. If u test both, f2fs and ext4 u will see a big difference in app opening or switching apps. F2fs is way faster. but that shouldn't be discussed in that thread.
Gesendet von meinem ONEPLUS A3003 mit Tapatalk

I remember reading somewhere that the SD821 has hardware encryption, unlike any earlier chip. Which means the chip is taking care of it, and not the software... eliminating any slowdown of encrypted vs not encrypted.
Can someone confirm?

Yes, indeed I confirm : I made the comparison on Oxygen 3.5.4 and there's absolutely NO difference neither in day to day usage, neither in benchmarks.
The only reason I took the decision to not encrypt is multirom.

eddymonti said:
I remember reading somewhere that the SD821 has hardware encryption, unlike any earlier chip. Which means the chip is taking care of it, and not the software... eliminating any slowdown of encrypted vs not encrypted.
Can someone confirm?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure about a cryptography ASIC in SD821 (at least I've never heard of it), but ARMv8 has a set of instructions made for cryptography and that makes newer Android phones around 10x faster in software encryption.

Ok thanks for the answers guys.. I remember when I had nexus 5 when I encrypted my phone it did slow down so I thought it was the same on this phone

eddymonti said:
I remember reading somewhere that the SD821 has hardware encryption, unlike any earlier chip. Which means the chip is taking care of it, and not the software... eliminating any slowdown of encrypted vs not encrypted.
Can someone confirm?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes but it is not used. HW encryption in Snapdragon is much slower than SW encryption.

Tweet about the crypto-engine on 820/821

eddymonti said:
Tweet about the crypto-engine on 820/821
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe, but most devices are still using software encryption.

Anyone actually spent days comparing both setups or are you all simply giving examples based on benchmarks and not real life usage? My posts are based on real life NOT silly benchmarks.

GioBozza said:
I'm not sure about a cryptography ASIC in SD821 (at least I've never heard of it), but ARMv8 has a set of instructions made for cryptography and that makes newer Android phones around 10x faster in software encryption.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
every cpu cycle take battery life-- what about battery life impact ?

oTeMpLo said:
every cpu cycle take battery life-- what about battery life impact ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
little to none