yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
You can UV on T26, have already tested.

testing the speedfrey right now.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
awesome, man.. thanks.

found this link too (I'm not sure how) but just for reference.

rootzwiki.com/showthread.php?t=3110
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
ninphetamine 2.1.1 result's out!

Hello, already added results using Ninphetamine 2.1.1 !

Anywhoo.. can someone give be a brief summary between the difference of Lulz Kernel and Tegrak Kernel? Any thing I should know about before flashing them?
[Galaxy S II General] bonillax:
Thank you for the update seems like nin2.1.1 runs better.

I have a question ninp is overlocking to 1.2ghz ?

And the time you have on each one is have the display on always with all the bright, Right?
[Galaxy S II General] goofy584:
canot open the pictures! "access refused"

:confused:
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
speed is on default 1.2Ghz

yes, always on and brightness high on white wallpaper with no widgets.

huh what pictures? those are links to modems I requested.
[Galaxy S II General] goofy584:
:o I thought these are screenshots about the results of 2.1.1 :cool:
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
:D screenshot on the first page.
[Galaxy S II General] nicregi:
Not bad! really respect you for the hard work. Thanks for sharing. Thinking if I wanna get speedfrey or something. Hmm :drool:
[Galaxy S II General] Lenunited:
Thank you for all your efforts.

i know its kind of out dated but ive heard nothing but good stuff about 2.0.2 neph kernel.

Might make the switch to 2.1.1 what do you guys prefer for battery life and what UV/UC do you use?
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
I used to run Lt. 4.2 which came with Nin.2.0.2 and used to get the best battery usage. At night 8 hours I never lost more than 2%. During the day I consumes not more than 40% or so. That way it use to last good 2 days.

I have used other too including Lt.5, 6.0, 6.1. LT 6.0 was worst. Used LT. 6.1 with speedmod T26 kernal and it was more less better than Lt 6.0

Lt.5 lasted good too however not as good as Lt 4.2.

Currently testing Lt 4.2 with Nin.2.1.1 after that will test it on Speedmod T26.

With S.T26 you could underclock.
[Galaxy S II General] pspilot:
I double that, testing myself a few of the new combis, never reached the low standby of 4.1/2.0.2. I have several 'suspicions', one is, whether the BLN support (which wasn't in 2.0.2, but in alot of other kernels) is the culprit. I don't use BLN. Other thought: could we use the ninp 2.0.2 kernel with Lite'ning 6.1? The 4.1/4.2 was great, but anyhow I missed the lagfree browser. I know, there're alternatives, tried them, but I like the original browser.

So any thoughts about the combi LT6.1 & ninp 2.0.2?
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
Why don't you give it a try.

If some members here could try different combination and post their experience, one can have a good chance deciding the best option.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
unexpected

Before going home from work, I decided to test another kernel on the way home.

I'm supposed to test SpeedMod T27 next but my guestimate battLife for this is someehere around 4h 30m.. If so, I might not have the time to charge up again and test SpeedMod before going to bed, so I thought I'd test a different one instead that I assumed will have the least battery life.

flashed. the usual I left my phone on,awake on white background, in by bag between 2 books, while traveling. checked it sometime around 60% and might have moved it away from the plain white screen after that, that's why theres a slight bump on the graph starting at 60%. I tried to correct it starting around 50% by playing a few games, ran compatibility tests while checking back and forth with the graph and got back on track at 40%. still almost a straight line going down which is great. now to wait for the empty batt..waited..waited.. and waited.. to be honest I really did not think this will last this long.. very unexpected. This even made me think of verifying my test at least once more specially for ninph2.0.5. this test already overtook ninph205 result.. meaning I WILL test ninph205 again, since it was my first benchmark, and after several more discharge cycles testing different kernels, probably this will perform better the second time around..

curious now? so what is this kernel?

..drum roll.. and the kernel is..

found on the 1st page.. :D who would've thunk it, right?
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
thanks for the tip about LR 4.1/2 and ninph 2.0.2 guys.. got me thinking tho, could it also be the baseband related. read somewhere that this guy went from KH1 to KH3 then back again to KH1 due to battery issues. LR 4.1/2 both used KG3 if I'm not mistaken. since modems are flashable as easy as flashing kernels, I would include this in my future benchmark while stayinh in 6.0.

Decided not to test rageMod, sorry. its based on a kernel Im already testing on, speedmod, so I assume more or less that ragemod results will fall near it based custom kernel. probably when I'm free from other tests.

I still need advice on Lulz kernel and/or Tegrak.. are they the same? is one based from another?
[Galaxy S II General] jonny68:
Very informative thread good stuff:cool:
[Galaxy S II General] pspilot:
I will, I will ... it's just a matter of time and in the moment I'm testing 6.1 / 2.1.1 still (Looks promising anyhow) :). My ultimate test is always overnight - how much do I loose overnight (6-8 hrs). So it takes at least 1-2 days per combination. With the update rate of Litepro, Hacre and others, I see me busy for the next month ...

RIGHT, that would make testing a full time job finally :D. But you're right, the radio is most of the time ON, so why shouldn't it influence the battery life big time.
[Galaxy S II General] a9402169:
More than 12 hours, 62%. This is the best I had so far with the sgs2 during a day.

Moderate use - calls, sms, gtalk, internet, few downloads.

I9100XXKH3.

Speedmod T27.
[Galaxy S II General] goldbergx:
Can you please install CPU Spy and check what speeds these kernels are running at - would add more colour to the results.

Link for CPU Spy - https://market.android.com/details?id=com.bvalosek.cpuspy&feature=search_result

Also, some kernels under-volt by default - so is it really fair to compare an undervolted kernel (the first one on your list) to a Kernel that gives you the option to Undervolt from "stock" settings (example Nimph)? Just food for thought...

Also, seems to me that all that you are comparing is how efficiently the kernel runs the 1.2 Ghz setting. The defining feature of a Kernel for me is how well it switches between frequency states and how "efficient" it is in that - this is most probably not being measured here.
[Galaxy S II General] groaner:
What this needs is a "benchmark" doing the same tests but on Stock rom.

:)
[Galaxy S II General] Sp33d_:
Good idea!! Thanks for the comparison, very usefull :)
[Galaxy S II General] bonillax:
I am trying right know ln 6.1 with jeffreymod kernel and looks great until now.

However i will wait to see the end.

Another question i have so much is.

How can you modified some configuration or what can we do to reach the maximun internet speed from my cellphone company ?

Changing stock modem ?

I read something about fast dormancy ?

What do you else know about it.

I am really interesting, because i have a bad internet conecction here in Mexico

2mbs for downloading and .400mbs for uploading.

I want to reach the higest level but, how ?

Thank very much i will very appreciate it if somebody knows.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
@goldbergx ..thanks for the input. i agree that it isn't fair to compare uv'ed kernels to those not uv'ed.. that's why I dont tweak the voltages. I just flash the kernel and don't change anything.

perhaps on my 2nd pass of tests

@groaner ...err. I just did?

@bonillax .. yes I heard about the fast dormancy thing. I disabled it mine since i think our telco/s does not support them... btw , i wish i had ur bad internet.. :( what ou can do is test it for your self.. probably run speedtest 5-10 times during the day, get the average.. change whatever (dormancy maybe) .. then test again same amount and same time the next day..
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
SpeedMod T27

Results for SpeedMod T27 results out.

retesting ninph205 next
[Galaxy S II General] kungvn:
speedmod t27 :eek::eek::eek::eek:
[Galaxy S II General] pileot:
using your tests can you benchmark darkysrom? i used it on the i9000 and really liked it, figured i'd keep with the flow in the i9100

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1159920&highlight=dark+rom

I also am wondering, does the launcher you use play into anything? I use the modified TW4 (download the manager, then use that to download / install the latest version)

http://www.mediafire.com/?403e7rkc7m18fs7

Credit where credits due, i believe that ones made by fr4gger? not entirely sure i have so many apks from so many places, all i know is thats the one that works best for how i want to use my phone.

Lastly, is there a way to dual-boot android? if i could have my android on when i want to use my phone then switch to other android versions to benchmark that would be cool (aside from nandroid backups which have not been too reliable for me in the past)
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
you can help me by doing the benchmark on your own since you're going to be on darkysrom anyway. if your going to compare roms, just be sure that every hting else are the same (kernel,baseband,environement,usage,etc). check my tips.

I'm using Go Launcher EX.

re dual boot, haven't heard of it. nice idea tho.
[Galaxy S II General] pileot:
i would but i got lots of widgets that i know are draining the battery, for a fair test it should be clean.

Also, every battery will perform just slightly different, each phone will be slightly different, and im in canada so i have the I9100M (might not make much difference, ya never know)

I will, however, do a nandroid and give er a shot, got an extra battery and a wall charger too so i can test with the OEM battery and play with my after market.

Will let ya know how it goes.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
doesnt matter. if you have a lot of battery draining widgets then that would be your test environment. changing between kernels will not really affect that environment so much. you can compare kernels and/or baseband but keep the same test environment. :)
[Galaxy S II General] pileot:
Im going to set up a slightly different getup, soon as i get it all done i'll start blasting through and posting results. gotta run now tho girlfriends waiting :) Tonight before i go to sleep i'll get one going for ya.
[Galaxy S II General] rumthin:
Seeing your results for Speedmod T27 is really tempting me to flash it. I'm currently running Ninpo 2.1.0 and I get about 24 hours with medium usage.
[Galaxy S II General] Odiumvex:
Hows does Speedmod t27 feel compared to ninph 2.1.2 or at least 2.1.1 speed wise?
[Galaxy S II General] fenomeno83:
This kernel in this version(higher versions consume more battery) should be the best for battery

http://xdaforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=687183&d=1313225953

Unistall setcpu if you have
[Galaxy S II General] goldbergx:
Ah maybe I did not say it clearly - some kernels are undervolted by default (check out Jeffrey's OP where he says he uses a lower than "stock" voltage), some are not.

So by not tweaking voltages, you are comparing a UVed kernel (example Jeffrey) to a kernel that is not UVed by default (example Nimph). Maybe mention this in the first post for fairness sake?

Since you are keeping almost everything else the same, all you are essentially comparing is the Voltage at which the kernels are running at 1200 MHz.
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
I am back on Lt 4.2 testing it with Nin.2.0.2 with screen on. Since I have a fair idea how the Lt.6.1 with speedmod and Nin.2.1.1 was am sure Lt.4.2 should be slight better. Since I changed the rom have already drained it from 100- 0 and got almost 5 hours out of it. Recharging now and will drain again and see how it performs.

By the way looks like Speedmod kernal is back in the race. I found T26 on Lt6.1 performed much smoother compared to nin.2.1.1

I also tried speedfrey 2.2.0 with Lt.6.1 and it performed similar it T26 in battery usage however T26 was a lot smoother. One big advantage on speedfrey was the charging time. just 2 hr- 40mins compared to others like ninphetamine, Speedmod that take time between 3 - 3 & half hour.

I would also suggest you add Nin.2.0.2 to the test since it comes without the Bln support, would be fair compared to other Ninphetamine kernals on your setup and I feel it should do better.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
@goldbergx ..alright.. thanks man.. changed in my 1st post from 1200Ghz (no uv/oc) to default kernel speed and no uv/oc on my part. Ill take note of that and check it on my 2nd pass of test.. because apparently after several full discharge cycles my battery may have improved. on the basis that I retested ninph 2.0.5 and got better results..
[Galaxy S II General] gibilator:
Firstly, THANKS! Sorry but this phone's battery isn't nearly up to my previous iPhone 4's =[ Battery expectations under load is a question that has always played in my mind when dealing with all the roms. Villain/batista/lightnin/darkies were all muddled together in one blob inside my brain. Once somewhat understanding the differences in the roms then came the radios & kernals! I just want the battery to last longer dammit! Much thanks for clearing this matter up somewhat. If I may add, these tests whilst good seem somewhat imperfect, a single test is unreliable, if anything I would like to see these tests multiple times.

/giBz
[Galaxy S II General] LockeOn:
Bulls**t, Hardcores kernels does not support UV only UC via SetCPU. Tested it with Voltage Control, Set CPU and Tegrak Overclock (also search the SpeedMod thread to find out that it never supported UV). That is why RAvenGEr made yet another kernel which adds UV to original SpeedMod to make it even more battery efficient.
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
Sorry about that miss print, what I meant was UC. Made that post while I was on go through my S2 :D

It surely does UC which works fine in saving some battery % when the screen is off or during sleep hours.

Thanks for correcting.
[Galaxy S II General] zzz777:
can you test nimph 2.0.2 too ?

(last build before BLN support added)

:)
[Galaxy S II General] pileot:
Might care to add a section for me in the first post, i'll keep doing tests in the same manner as fast as i can completely charge my batteries. Wanna be thorough, dont wanna rush it or i'll get skewed results.

My standards as follows:

Clean install for each kernel / rom

Wifi, GPS, etc OFF

NOT conected to any google account

Autosync OFF

NO Sim

NO microSD

(I cant think of anything else that will drain the battery, if i can i might add it to the tests)

Apps used:

App Backup and Restore - Backup the apps i use for testing, same version of each app for every test.

TW4Manager - For the launcher I use. Will test with stock launchers later.

Flashlight app - Keep the screen on white for the duration of the test.

Screen On - Keep screen on while flashlight app is active.

Battery Logger - Gives us data!

Stability Test - Classic stability test used, kills the phone FAST!

Meathod:

Start battery logger

Start flashlight

Start stability test

Use notification menu to access battery logger

Hold Menu to bring up recent apps, start flashlight

Put in a cool place as the phone will get nice and warm :)

Results:

Day 1

Kernel

2.6.35.7-I9100XWKF3-CL276555

ficeto@beast #SuperCore_1.7

Build

DarkyROM2 XXKH3 Base R2

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1159920

Drain time:

4901 seconds

4.013 V to 2.991 V

Remarks:

Steady drain, linear graph, smooth test, went a LOT faster than i anticipated.
[Galaxy S II General] imprezaej25:
Thanks a lot for your test, and it helped a lot of people who intend to choose among various kernels.......is it possible for you to test Ninph 2.0.2 kernel? It is the kernel that i used for a long time after trying so many.
[Galaxy S II General] pileot:
Disreguard this, i need to learn2search
[Galaxy S II General] kungvn:
why?

1.0ghz and 1.2 ghz? I don't understand?:confused:
[Galaxy S II General] xinfinityoO:
did u undervolt the ninpo kernels..as speedmod kernels\variations are undervolted by default where as ninpo u have to use setcpu
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
I tested the Litening 4.2 with Nin.2.0.2 kernal that comes with. Battery lasted 6.5 hours with full contrast and white display working on 2G network.

Certainly obersved its much better than Lt.6.1 with nin.2.1 & speedmod T26. where I got 4.5 to 5 hours respectively.

Currently testing Lt.6.1 with Nin. 2.0.2
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
If you meant 6½ hours of Screen On time then you need to provide a screen shot.
[Galaxy S II General] rab1412000:
OP thanks much. this is the thread ive always wanted to create but never had the time to do.
[Galaxy S II General] joelteixeira:
The same, thank you very much.
[Galaxy S II General] m444266:
@pileot Thank you very much for your help. Very much appreciated. We'll be waiting for the next result against what your comparing so we'll know if the result is good or not. perhaps with one of the previously tested kernels(if your comparing kernels..if not nvm me). :)

@xinfinityo() no i did not undervolt. sorry. It did not occur to mer when I started testing. speed is whatever the kernel's default is.. but I will test probably ninpheta (again) since its the most flexible but with 1Ghz.

@kungvn talking about undervolting. opposite of overclocking (correct me if I'm wrong). SGS2 by default is 1.2Ghz. it says so in the box. with custom kernels it can be changed. SpeedMod for example is clocked at 1Ghz upon flashing while ninphetamine is at 1.2Ghz. the theory is lesser speed= lesser battery consumption= longer battery life
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
You're wrong. overCLOCKING has to do with the CPU's clock frequency, (hertz). underVOLTING has to do with the amount of megavolt amperes you use to get your CPU vibrating at a certain clock frequency. While intimately tied, they are not opposites. You can overclock your CPU to 1400Mhz, while still UNDERvolting it for that frequency.

undervolt = using less power to run the CPU at the same frequency

overclock = raising the CPU's clock frequency, regardless of voltage.

Now, what should be understood from this isn't: SLOWER CLOCK = less battery consumption, but rather: LOWER VOLTAGE = less battery consumption.

For example: you can have the phone at 1Ghz, with a 1000mVa (example voltage, do not set this) voltage, and a phone at 1.2Ghz with a 1000mVa voltage, and both phone will use the same amount of power (and so battery consumption will be the same for both phones).

However, usually, the higher the clock's speed, the higher voltage it will need to run stable. Keep that in mind.
[Galaxy S II General] abhi021:
Will surely do that. Right now on Lt6.1 with 2.0.2 kernal.
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
I am waiting to see it........
[Galaxy S II General] AndreiLux:
1.21 JIGGAWATTS!!!

But in all seriousness, it's millivolts for voltage and there's no amperes anywhere as we can't control current. Also just mV, no mVa.
[Galaxy S II General] goldbergx:
OK, so this is how it actually works.

The power dissipated by a chip using static CMOS gates is C * f * V *V, where C is the capacitance being switched per clock cycle, V is voltage, and f is the switching frequency.

In this case, we can ignore C as it should be a constant for our devices, so you are left with V² x f which gives you how much power is being drawn from your device

So effectively, Power draw is linearly proportional to the frequency and exponentially proportional to the voltage.

more info here (written by the person who posted right above me :) )

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=16702647&postcount=1839
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
Oh that's right I forgot all about you. I just charged to 100%, installed screen on widget, and will post screenshots when im near empty.
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
You know I actually had it as millivolts, then edited it. lol. Thanks for clearing that up.
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
It's not only about me, in this whole GSII section in XDA there is not a single screen shot of 6+ hours of Screen On time. As I said anyone uploads one he/she will be the first person.. I am eagerly waiting to see one.

Besides, you don't need a Widget for that. Just tapping on to Display option under battery usage stats will tell you that.

Regards.
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
Oh but you're the one who is going to cry the loudest when I post screen, so I talk to you directly. And I use a widget so the screen will stay ON from 100% to 0% battery. Quickest way to see if I get 6+ hours or not :)

By the way, so far: 97% battery left, screen on time = 45 minutes.

:D
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
I am not crying and other users may not get interested yet until you post a screen. And do post the Time On details under Display option in battery usage stats.

97% after 45 mins. So in this rate you are gonna have 1500 mins, i.e- 25 hours.

Oh God :eek:

Regards.
[Galaxy S II General] rocketpaul:
you claimed to have amazing battery life before, but you didnt back it up with any screen shots if i remember correctly .
[Galaxy S II General] LockeOn:
There is no t single one custom or stock kernel that sets CPU at 1GHz as default all of them starts at 1.2 GHz. I don't know how did You do it but SpeedMod by default comes with 1.2 GHz for everybody except for You.
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
No, you just call me a liar. Last time I didn't bother taking screenshots, and recharged before I could. This time, I will take many screenshots :)

Yes, because obviously if I don't post a screenshot I'm lying, I couldn't possibly post in order to be truthful and informative because for me, having a battery life that beats yours is my reason for living and why I registered on this forum.

:rolleyes:

I'm connecting my phone via USB for 2 minutes in order to put some screens here:

Screenshot numero uno, 45 minutes:

Screenshot numero dos, 1h10mins:

That's roughly 10% battery per hour, which will hopefully give me 10h+ screen ON time.

We are faaaaaar from those "max 6h" you were all quoting like its the bible. And as you can see, I have apps running, and WIFI always on.
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
And after the completion of the test do post the graph which comes by tapping the Standby time duration section (the one at the top stating 1h 7m 6s), need to see your charging state too.

And I never called you a liar, you said that by yourself!

Regards.
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
Where is this Standby time duration section? I do not see it?

And if when I make a post stating my battery life is XX and you ask for a screenshot, it clearly means you do not believe me and think I'm a liar, you don't need to say the word to imply it's meaning :)

No hard feelings though, I will post your screenshots as you like.

edit: Found it:
[Galaxy S II General] ithehappy:
The one at the top which is stating the standby time, i.e- 1h 6m in your case. PS- Yes, that's it. Just post it once more at the end of the test.

I didn't mean you a liar, it's simple as that. You didn't provide any screens, that's why I requested for it.

Going to sleep, it's 2-40 here. Gonna check the existing shots tomorrow.

Regards.
[Galaxy S II General] Bonestack:
@m2smoe

What's up with those two charging (short) sessions?

Edit: Don't think they affect your batterytime by much, just asking.
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
That's when I plugged USB in to copy those screenshots, unplugged right after it was done copying.
[Galaxy S II General] goldbergx:
Your screen-shots are tainted now man :P
[Galaxy S II General] m2smoe:
Naw, the phone was plugged in for maybe 40 seconds total. It won't change anything, and it will show up precisely on the graph above so they can't say I recharged it, considering it was plugged in less than a minute.
[Galaxy S II General] Bonestack:
Okay, that's what I was quessing :) What's your screen brightness? I'm running on 17% with 5h55min standbytime with minimum brightness but constant internet use, anything special?