A call for all the benchmark whores, this is your time to shine. Your e-peen will grow like no other. You can post your new quadrant scores, without anyone telling you that it's outdated!
Article link
Market link
AndroidPolice said:
When it comes to benchmarks, one name usually stands above all others: Quadrant. Even though it has been proven to be easily faked, there's just something about running it and see a 3000+ score show up at the end to make you feel your device is untouchable.
Despite its popularity, Quadrant has been missing one key feature: multi-core support. That all changes with an update that was pushed to the Market earlier today, which brings Quadrant up to version 2.0, though. Not only does Quadrant now support multiple-core chips, but the update also brings ICS support, GUI improvements, support for Polish, and a fix for slow frame rates on PowerVR SGX 540 GPUs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it would matter, mine would be 3547.
It also occurred to me, that I might have not posted in the correct subforum. If so, I kindly ask Scotty to beam me up and back down a bit to the left.
And in the meantime it also occurred to me, that someone else had posted a similar thread already. I can only blame the forums for not giving me relevant search results.
It's still crap, because it doesn't display per-test scoring so you can know WHAT changed a score.
For example, disabling per-file sync in the filesystem code gains you a few hundred points in Quadrant - in AnTuTu it's clear that this improvement is in database write tests. (It also doesn't skew the scores nearly as much. Quadrant's weighting sucks.)
With ICS 'LPB' i got 3914.
I got 4004 on i9100 with ICS XXLPB
However...
Quadrant reports that my device has only one core, which is quite an important mistake, and some of the graphics tests keep hitting the 60fps ceiling, which ruins the integrity of the test, assuming it is based on measuring the maximum possible framerate.
hedgepigdaniel said:
I got 4004 on i9100 with ICS XXLPB
However...
Quadrant reports that my device has only one core, which is quite an important mistake, and some of the graphics tests keep hitting the 60fps ceiling, which ruins the integrity of the test, assuming it is based on measuring the maximum possible framerate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The s2 framerate is capped at 60 fps because of vsync, it can't be changed..
And Quadrant results are more accurate on quallcomm device.. Other than that results may vary and could even be manipulated, CMIIW
I suggest you to run nenamark2 benchmark instead.. It's free on the market and gives a comparable results too..
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Guys, is the planet part of the test scores only about 38+ fps?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
3875 on XLB remix 9.2
Using omega's ics rom...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Gorjess said:
The s2 framerate is capped at 60 fps because of vsync, it can't be changed..
And Quadrant results are more accurate on quallcomm device.. Other than that results may vary and could even be manipulated, CMIIW
I suggest you to run nenamark2 benchmark instead.. It's free on the market and gives a comparable results too..
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 60fps limit can't be changed, but quadrants graphics test can be made more challenging so that the limiting factor is power rather than the arbitrary fps limit. It's not an accurate test if its hitting the 60fps ceiling.
ephraim033 said:
Guys, is the planet part of the test scores only about 38+ fps?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mine stuck @ 45 fps for the same test, are you in ICS rom?
edit:
between got 4285 in LPB
4346 here and planet test is at 38 fps.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
3510 on CM9 latest
bala_gamer said:
mine stuck @ 45 fps for the same test, are you in ICS rom?
edit:
between got 4285 in LPB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, i'm using Hyperdroid ROM
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Hmm... it seems to me that CM9 gets lower scores than other ICS ROMs. That, I think, can be explained by the lack of full kernel support. Let's hope for the better, when they will get their hands on the kernel sources.
Please don't discuss Quadrant scores in this forum. Search "quadrant" in GSII General for the 7 or 8 threads we've closed for the reasons why.
Thanks
Related
Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.
OmegaRED^ said:
Quadrant is very inaccurate the tests are not up to spec for testing +1Ghz devices accurately.
The reason i say this is due to the fact that the benchmark varies from test to test.
I suggest AnTutu Benchmark.
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.antutu.ABenchMark
It is much more accurate, as the the scores are closely similar time and time again.
The tests are a bit longer
But that is the good thing "accuracy"
It also gives info on each testing stage.
I got 2176 on WB's 007.1 TW rom, BB.67 with custom kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good, will give it a try but it'd been better if you post this in themes & apps I guess
by the way what scores do you get with this rom in quadrant?
Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market
i've got 1973 on CM6 006 at 1.1Ghz
benchmarking
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.
kryptoner said:
Chainfire released his new benchmarking tool yesterday, its called CF-Bench, search in the market
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2232 hmm right behind the nexus s
Cm6 wb bb67 custom kernel z
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
Try smartbench 2011. That's the best one
Sent from my x10 on gingerbread
All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
pepy_24 said:
All benchmarking apps generaly suck. Its about how you feel using your phone. Not the numbers.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it's a good comparison between phones after having a average score for each phone. But like you say, the numbers don't mean anything. Everything is personal.
zodiac100 said:
It does not matter what benchmarking utility you use. They all give you a general idea of the performance of your phone. I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see.
In reality the score of any phone using any utility is always relative to the scores of other phones using the same utility.
The thing to focus on is not the actual figures you get back but how your device measures up to other phones using the same benchmark test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True about benchmark apps but I don't think I think the OP just wants to use the tool that gives him the score he wants to see. What the OP is saying that with this app the difference between each time's score is not much hence why calling it accurate.
To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously
maddes1402 said:
To look for a good benchmark is more important if you use a new phone with dual core CPU cos the old benchmarks aren´t optimised for them. I read that CF-Bench is optimised for dual cores and stresses the CPU and not so much the GPU of the phone.
But interesting that it seems that the overclocking have such a huge influence. With the first run (Wolfbreaks CM6 TW007) i had 2800 points with 1152MHz and in the second run with 998MHz 2400 points.
But true....it´s more a interesting gadget than to take it too seriously
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It comes down to what you have happening in the background.
If your phone suddenly "for example" decides to fetch data off of 3G or suddenly refreshes the media midway thru the bench then it can effect your score. this is why it's best to do tests when the rom is clean and gone silent. "no background activity" with data disabled.
Benchmarking is used to place the current performance of a device in a certain category.
It's no different from benchmarking PC's.
A whole profession has been built around PC benchmarking with people competing for a first place.
If your score is higher than everyone else you win the competition.
i got 2232 on custom kernel at 1113 mhz processor
Sent from my X10 TripNMiUI-IRIS
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF Bench (full version) has the most stable results, and IMO its the best out there.
Sent from my Sony Ericsson Xperia™ phone
Linpack is perfect
kantk20111 said:
Linpack is perfect
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linpack only tests the cpu.
I haven't checked how CF bench works yet.
will report.
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CF bench 101%
Wolfbreak said:
CF-Bench
Smartbench 2011
Quadrant
Antutu Benchmark
what is the best now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chainfire one!
that thing is scale-able across cores (single/multi-cores) and fairly accurate
Finally we have a fair test for the dual cores. Just been running it and i have the top 5 scores!!
Is that 1608mhz , your phone must be on fire
Now have 150.595. It was a bit warm. I expect it to fall as the number one soon, i m sure there are guys on here with over 1.7ghz. I cant seem to get that to stay stable.
Finally! My highest (1.2) was 122 although that was an inconsistent result. My average high is around 100. Wonder what the Sensation and Tegra devices are hitting.....
Regards.
Best i can do so far.
I'm getting wildly inconsistent results. Managed to get 120 at 1200mhz with a accuracy of 2.2 after a dozen runs.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
Yeah you just have to keep trying until you get a high score with a valid accuracy. It wont let you save unless its consistently accurate.
MaBlo said:
I'm getting wildly inconsistent results. Managed to get 120 at 1200mhz with a accuracy of 2.2 after a dozen runs.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
did you set both minimum speed and maximum speed to 1200?
152 is my new high, thats it for a while, battery flat, phone rather warm!
140 is my best stable score, running @1.425ghz using Tegrak
rovex said:
152 is my new high, thats it for a while, battery flat, phone rather warm!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the top 10 has only your results in it, lol
Its the Moto Zooms i worry about., Although the Tegra is slower the Zoom seems to be able to hit up to 2GHz. We need a 1.8Ghz SGS2 to keep them down..
I do wonder if the Atom powered tabs will beat us though.
ph00ny said:
did you set both minimum speed and maximum speed to 1200?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I did.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
I got 155.597 MFLOPS with my Galaxy S II overcloked to 1.56 GHz at 1.375v on Core voltage.
The rest is default.
I can probably break 160 MFLOPS if i take the CPU speed up to 1.65 GHz if i can get it to run stable there.
rovex said:
Its the Moto Zooms i worry about., Although the Tegra is slower the Zoom seems to be able to hit up to 2GHz. We need a 1.8Ghz SGS2 to keep them down..
I do wonder if the Atom powered tabs will beat us though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me get this straight, you're 'worried' about another phone putting in a better score than your phone on a benchmark program?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Pagnell said:
Let me get this straight, you're 'worried' about another phone putting in a better score than your phone on a benchmark program?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL, my thoughts exactly reading this entire thread...
Pagnell said:
Let me get this straight, you're 'worried' about another phone putting in a better score than your phone on a benchmark program?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He's not even talking about a phone, if I understood what he meant, he's talking about the Xoom tablet.
[Sarcasm] Yes im going to have sleepless nights for weeks about it..[/sarcasm]
I would have thought the context (competitive spirit) was obvious..
Anyway it seem the Sensation bunch have found the Linpack cheat. 200 on a 1.2ghz non overclocked Sensation.. Nah...
Ok, now i managed to get 170.027 MFLOPS in Linpack with the CPU at 1.58 GHz and the Core voltage on 1.375v .
So far the phone are 100% stable at this clock.
Tom-Helge said:
Ok, now i managed to get 170.027 MFLOPS in Linpack with the CPU at 1.58 GHz and the Core voltage on 1.375v .
[image]
So far the phone are 100% stable at this clock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Precision: Inconsistent Result
Linpack v1.2.7 was released and I found a 4MFLOP increase without changing anything on my phone. Anyone else see a difference in their score? The update stats it only added multi-threading support but I believe something else changed.
Same for me as well. Must have changed the testing method. Went from 14ish with AAi3 to 17.5ish
abhaxus said:
Same for me as well. Must have changed the testing method. Went from 14ish with AAi3 to 17.5ish
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm getting 17.5 on Bonsai 5 also now. Here is a note from the Market description of the update-
"Note: Your MFLOPS rating will increase in this version due to updated libraries and methods. Shows Android is improving! Newly added the ability to fully test multi-core processors with the use of multi-threading. Compare speeds from a single and multi-thread runs. See how well your multi-core device works under android."
So not only does it state multi-core support, but also new libraries that increase the scores on all devices. Kind of confusing for a benchmark app to do this as it makes all the old scores obsolete.
Thank you very much for explaining why the scores increased. I should of read it all before upgrading.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
I got a 23 that's the highest I've gotten
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVML6Q1Qid4&feature=plcp
theandroidrooter88 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVML6Q1Qid4&feature=plcp
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Must be in General Section Dont worry MODs ll move it
Prashanthme said:
Must be in General Section Dont worry MODs ll move it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, thanks for fixing it.
Might want to move this to the T-Mobile GS2 forum.
Quadrant scores are too less. That stops me from using any Cyanogen Mod ROMS.
So far only F1 Galaxy Nexus ROM remains unbeatable in Quadrant scores (without overclocking or any other kernel) Scored around 3800 :good:
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
DD-Ripper said:
Quadrant scores are too less. That stops me from using any Cyanogen Mod ROMS.
So far only F1 Galaxy Nexus ROM remains unbeatable in Quadrant scores (without overclocking or any other kernel) Scored around 3800 :good:
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
High Quadrant scores aren't exactly a reliable standard for a ROM being 'good/bad' or 'slow/fast'. I've used CM10 for a few weeks and over 5 runs in a row Quadrant tested 2754, 2330, 2600, 3100 and 2982...
It's nothing more then a short and fast measurement, and the results aren't consistent at all.
I find daily usage of my phone with a smooth, responsive and reliable ROM far more important then the outcome of a few tests that took 1-2 min....
Sent from my GT-9100
DD-Ripper said:
Quadrant scores are too less. That stops me from using any Cyanogen Mod ROMS.
So far only F1 Galaxy Nexus ROM remains unbeatable in Quadrant scores (without overclocking or any other kernel) Scored around 3800 :good:
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actualled loled at your post. Why do mods let noobs make such lame posts? :S
DD-Ripper said:
Quadrant scores are too less. That stops me from using any Cyanogen Mod ROMS.
So far only F1 Galaxy Nexus ROM remains unbeatable in Quadrant scores (without overclocking or any other kernel) Scored around 3800 :good:
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As the firm says many recognized developers:
However, if you put any trust in Quadrant scores you could use them to prove that dancing naked for 5 minutes in your garden affects device performance. By Chainfire
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:good:
DD-Ripper said:
Quadrant scores are too less. That stops me from using any Cyanogen Mod ROMS.
So far only F1 Galaxy Nexus ROM remains unbeatable in Quadrant scores (without overclocking or any other kernel) Scored around 3800 :good:
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think Quadrant scores don't mean much. It doesn't really mirror the user experience fluency. It's pretty much just a number.
Just for the record, I've got the score of 4K on CM9.
Sent from my premium potato
ArmorD said:
I think Quadrant scores don't mean much. It doesn't really mirror the user experience fluency. It's pretty much just a number.
Just for the record, I've got the score of 4K on CM9.
Sent from my premium potato
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it affects gaming performance. I only bought Samsung Galaxy S2 for Gaming purposes not for development n other stuff....
Btw how did u got 4K on CM9..?? You probably must have Siyah or any other kernel and Overclocked ..I scored around 2800 on CM9 on all default settings..Just after I flashed that Rom
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
DD-Ripper said:
But it affects gaming performance. I only bought Samsung Galaxy S2 for Gaming purposes not for development n other stuff....
Btw how did u got 4K on CM9..?? You probably must have Siyah or any other kernel and Overclocked ..I scored around 2800 on CM9 on all default settings..Just after I flashed that Rom
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A high score during a short test doesn't have anything to do with gaming-performance.
Again: quadrant scores are useless when you're talking about overall performance
Sent from my GT-9100
siedus said:
A high score during a short test doesn't have anything to do with gaming-performance.
Again: quadrant scores are useless when you're talking about overall performance
Sent from my GT-9100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is. If you score less than 3000, heavy games like NOVA 3 gets too much laggy and unplayable (In Multiplayer) unless you over clock.
So I'm not saying that CM10/CM9 is useless, I'm only saying that those ROMS are not good for gaming purposes. You guys are taking my words wrongly.
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
thats what i found
DD-Ripper said:
It is. If you score less than 3000, heavy games like NOVA 3 gets too much laggy and unplayable (In Multiplayer) unless you over clock.
So I'm not saying that CM10/CM9 is useless, I'm only saying that those ROMS are not good for gaming purposes. You guys are taking my words wrongly.
Sent From My Premium Potato 2 HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not taking your words wrongly, i think you don't understand what i'm trying to explain.
But i think this 'discussion' about quadrant scores is a bit off-topic, so maybe it's wise to end it
Sent from my GT-I9100
Aside from quadrant scores meaning absolutely nothing, it should probably be noted that this video is done on the T-Mobile USA model, the SGH-T989. Which has an inferior chipset/CPU. So of course the scores are low.
AnTuTu Benchmark from cm-10.1-20130908-NIGHTLY
Antutu score on stock.
Ye I also don't understand how I got that.
My scores usually hover between 19500 and 20500 though.
I added stock scores so people could have a reference atleast.
Sent from my GT-I9190 using xda app-developers app
My benchmarks: CM10.1-20130915-Nightly
Antutu: 20492
Quadrant: 5948
-----------------
Antutu
Quadrant
Sent from my GT-I9195 using xda premium
Thats odd. Mine turned out much lower than usual:
I read the other day that Samsung use higher clock speeds with benchmark apps, higher than the phone runs normally, which in my eyes means benchmarks on these phones means jack squat! I was going to buy the S4 Mini but because of this I have lost faith in Samsung and have just ordered the HTC Mini. Will post the link when I get back home with what I read.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
rofl. If you would read more about this topic, you would find out, that samsung isn't the only one doing this. But I don't see the problem, because first of all I don't really care about benchmarks and secondly I think the purpose of a benchmark is to test the phone on the highest settings.
BamRom 4.3.1
Sent from my GT-I9195 using xda app-developers app
junkyde said:
rofl. If you would read more about this topic, you would find out, that samsung isn't the only one doing this. But I don't see the problem, because first of all I don't really care about benchmarks and secondly I think the purpose of a benchmark is to test the phone on the highest settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe others do, but its not right. I use benchmarks when purchasing a phone, so do some others and companies know this, why else would they ramp up scores? And fine if they want to show off their highest settings, but not if these high settings dont actually run for more than 10 minutes before frying your phone. These aren't real world stats which is what they should be showing. I mean who are these high settings benchmarks ment to be for if not everyday users? Personally I think its a scam and ANY company that goes by these rules is shameful...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
RuffBuster said:
Maybe others do, but its not right. I use benchmarks when purchasing a phone, so do some others and companies know this, why else would they ramp up scores? And fine if they want to show off their highest settings, but not if these high settings dont actually run for more than 10 minutes before frying your phone. These aren't real world stats which is what they should be showing. I mean who are these high settings benchmarks ment to be for if not everyday users? Personally I think its a scam and ANY company that goes by these rules is shameful...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't really understand this whine about specific settings on benchmarks?! People who want the highest score disable everything, use the highest settings, overclock, use fresh install, delete all useless apps etc. Clearly these newbie phone benchmarkers have never done pc benchmarks. And if someone buys a phone because of it's benchmark score then clearly those don't have any idea about real life usage vs benchmarking.
leripe said:
I can't really understand this whine about specific settings on benchmarks?! People who want the highest score disable everything, use the highest settings, overclock, use fresh install, delete all useless apps etc. Clearly these newbie phone benchmarkers have never done pc benchmarks. And if someone buys a phone because of it's benchmark score then clearly those don't have any idea about real life usage vs benchmarking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I myself have done many benchmarks both on PC and mobile phones and I myself use the scores I get and compare it against it's physical aspects. Everyone has their own way of buying a phone and you can't judge people for the way they do stuff.
RuffBuster said:
I read the other day that Samsung use higher clock speeds with benchmark apps, higher than the phone runs normally, which in my eyes means benchmarks on these phones means jack squat! I was going to buy the S4 Mini but because of this I have lost faith in Samsung and have just ordered the HTC Mini. Will post the link when I get back home with what I read.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A benchmark is not a good reason to buy a phone, I think you are a fanboy trolling
features man that's the real deal, battery life, network, camera, memory, screen, style construction, etc.
not only a benchmark if you want the best bench score buy the full one not the mini
Sent from my GT-I9192 using Tapatalk
Benchmarks mean something to me as well. They aren't guidelines to what phone I should choose, but the specifics can give me a good judgement for the aspect I'm intending to improve when upgrading my phone. I had an s3 mini before this and was disappointed by battery life versus performance. I could tell the difference by taking multiple benchmarks at different times during everyday use. I noticed when phones/ROMs have widely varying benchmarks then the battery life and performance would dwindle. The s3 mini on most ROMs would vary by approx 2000 points, and that's a lot.
It's worth noting that a custom ROM can affect the stability of a phones functioning a lot, but it is mostly due to the hardware used when a phone/computer has dwindling performance. The s4 mini for me, has had fairly stable performance and shows it with the battery life. My scores vary between approx 19800 and 20800 with moderate use.
Sent from the dark side of the moon.
Results with @proxuser's kernel:
Azariah Vidya said:
Results with @proxuser's kernel:
View attachment 2340182
View attachment 2340183
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i get 21620 with oc 2ghz
Good!
Using Antutu for benchmarks on Samsung devices
You should not use Antutu to benchmark Samsung devices because they are unreliable as the stock ROM will score higher no matter what so if you want real benchmark results then use another program.
Using
cm - 10 . 2 - 20131018 -NIGHTLY - serrano 3 gxx after 30 sec reboot and limiting background processes to
2.
Result: 21140
Sent from my GT-I9190 using xda app-developers app
Anyone yet tested OpenGL ES 3.0 on Antutu, what kind of scores are you getting
Mine: 3816
Sent from my GT-I9190 using xda app-developers app
View attachment 2348641
always aoperal
very good bencmarks, my mini duos is arriving, :laugh:
Here is screenshots of over clocked serrano-x kernel. It's still not stable but I can run 2ghz without reboots.
Sent from my GT-I9195 using xda premium