yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717] erad1:
okay not bashing here so dont take this wrong but I'm just trying to wrap my head around this statement, so you pay $300+ for your device but dont expect stock ROM performance to be any good?...seriously? I dont understand why someone wouldn't of course, and if it did underperform (mine runs fine) as a consumer you have every right to take it back. I think alot of people lose sight of the fact that it's still a PHONE that can now do amazing things that you would not have had the luxury of just a few short years back. And granted, the awesome development we enjoy through these forums does improve quality and enjoyment value of these devices to the point of maybe spoiling us as advanced users, but remember the vast majority of consumers of these devices are typical users and to them (and me) the Note on GB/Touchwiz although not a perfect machine is still an amazing device right "out of the box".
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717] kimocal:
It is an amazing device but the Carrier$ load it down with u$ele$$ and unnece$$ary $oftware to $queeze more money from you. In the process the Bloatware DOES in fact hinder the performance as they run even when you don't launch them yourself. By getting rid of the bloatware you are unleashing the true potential of this beast of a phone.

Think of it this way... If you bought say a Subaru WRX STi and when you went to go pick it up and it had a bunch of useless Car Dealer stickons and random crap that hindered the performance, you are saying you wouldn't be upset ?
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717] erad1:
point taken...but you have to agree that the Devs do spoil us a bit! ;)
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717] kimocal:
Very true. I'd probably be using an iphone if it weren't for the DEVs here. Sad that we need them to unlock the full potential of our devices. We also get better support from them than the companies that make them. A great example of that is the HP Touchpad.

Support your local DEVs. I do so by adding to their beer/coffee funds. Coffee is better as it keeps them up longer to work on things :D
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] camcardshark:
My phone is allowing me to get to the recovery but will not allow me to go past the first screen. No matter what I click on it takes me to a black screen with the clockwork mod symbol. Then when i hit the power button it takes me back to the first screen in recovery.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Hand76:
Sounds like you keep hitting the wrong button. Try selecting with the trackpad button on the bottom of the DINC.
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] camcardshark:
Thank you!

Now i also can't seem to see the ROM i downloaded onto my sd card when i try to install it from the sd card.

Any thoughts?
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Hand76:
Hmm download a few roms and see if any of them show up. They should if you are going to the right section. Maybe someone else can answer this if you still have issues.
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] camcardshark:
It shows up when i mount the sd card to my computer but it doesn't show up on the phone in recovery...????

Any ideas?
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] SlimSnoopOS:
Copy the contents of your sd card to your computer, reformat the sd card to fat32, then copy everything back onto your sd card. There shouldn't be an issue with finding a rom that's on your sd card.
[Droid Incredible Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] DhoCael:
usualy if youre ROM isnt showing up, it would appear through 'download' under SD card. and i would recomend downloading the ROM in your computer, then transfering it to your phone through USB if you aren't already.
[Eee Pad Transformer Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] pmdied:
Is it safe to say that, unlike my Thunderbolt, any Rom flashing I do is supposed to be through a recovery program that only reads the internal memory? Can someone recommend a recovery method that best achieves this? Thanks.
[Eee Pad Transformer Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] baseballfanz:
Roach's 3.2.0.1 will read from an external sd card

Team Rouge's CWM will read from both internal and external.

If using the CWM 5.5.0.4 be careful with using superwipe script.
[Eee Pad Transformer Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] pmdied:
Thanks. I installed Rogue recovery and everything is working fine. What method of app/data restore do you recommend? I have titanium backup but it won't restore; I've read somewhere that the file folder needs to be copied or moved but I'm not sure exactly what to do. I've done this a thousand times with my Android phones but this is a little different :-)
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] turner2914:
I am wondering if anyone would happen to have the stock firmware for the gt-s5660m on solo mobile. I have tried the Bell stock but it causes my phones service bars to jump around dramatically.
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] 0M3G4_:
try here: sammfirmware.com
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] turner2914:
Its not there tho

Sent from my GT-S5660M from Canada eh
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] Peteragent5:
Look at This Thread

List of Stock Roms

S5660MUGKG3

PDA: S5660MUGKG3

Phone: S5660MUGKG3

CSC: S5660MBMCKG3

Version: Android 2.3.4 Gingerbread

Country: Canada BELL

Date: July 2011

Download

pass: sampro.pl
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] MrFdhigsKp:
Do you guys know why I can't use CWM to flash this ? :'(
[Samsung Galaxy Gio GT-S5660] iok1:
Because it's made for Odin.....

Sent from my HTC Sensation
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Res 1

One request for the kernel developers:

could you please post me what are your preferred / recommended settings in terms of Governor and I/O Scheduler?

Only one configuration per kernel please, as running these tests is rather time consuming.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Test Settings

So for anybody who wants to follow the same methodology as I used to test kernels, please pay attention that in some tests i didn't use stock settings, to try to improve the reproducibility of the results.

Before all test, i put the phone in flight mode, and disable all synch services.

Antutu: DB I/O and SD Write and Read have poor reproducibility. So i run these tests separately 5 times, and take the best scores.

RealPi: the number of iterations is increased by factor 10x i.e.: 100000 digits

MPAC: lots of customization here. Also be careful as it's not very stable and some settings will make it crash.

All tests: 8 threads (or 8 producer / consumer pairs)

CPU: 10000000 iterations, use case: integer (i'm considering to add logical too)

Memory: stock apart for nr of threads. Repeat the test 5 times and get best numbers

Cache: 40 iterations
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Res 3

With this should be enough. :)
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] lawonga:
Judging from those results, CFS Devil looks really promising.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] ZioGTS:
Semaphore live oc stability issues happen only on Slim ICS indeed. On ICSSGS I have perfect stability at 1.2 ghz. And performance is just great, paired with very good battery life.

GT-i9000 / ICSSGS 4.2 / Semaphore 0.9.0
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] cba1986:
A quick question: did you lock the max freq to eliminate the "governor" variable?

Because each kernel could have governor's tweaks that the other don't.

Based on what you posted here, the differences between Glitch and Devil is practically none.

I tested both and didn't feel any tangible difference, in the end, it comes down to the unique features of each kernel.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] phzi:
Overclocking bus vs adding an extra step aren't even slightly comparable. Maybe do tests not overclocked?

Also there is a new glitch build with 100% working bln.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] belmethos:
+1 for tests without overclock. Majority of us, users do not overclock. Maybe a seperate test for overclocking could be nice , but comparisons should be done with stock speeds imho.

Thanks for the time and effort. We needed this.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Overclocking bus Vs adding an extra step isn't an apple to apple comparison, I agree.

However my goal was to use each kernel in the best possible way, and if some kernels have the possibility to use higher multipliers / extra frequency steps, that is an advantage for the user, compared to the kernels who only offer live overclock.

Don't get me wrong, i love Semaphore and i've been using it for a long time.

And i have no doubt that some users can get it stable with live overclock to 1.2GHz.

But that is the ceiling, while with other kernels even my phone can reach stable overclocks of 1.5GHz, and that is something to consider.

I chose as the basis for my tests an overclock of 1.2GHz because it's something which practically everybody can use, without massive battery drain, overheat or shortening the life of the device.

I'll try to add measurements at stock speeds for those who don't like to overclock.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
I didn't want to take the governor variable out.

Because, as you said, each kernel could use (and often does) governor tweaks which make the kernel "special" or different from the others, and that has to be taken into account in evaluating them.

Because nobody will use the phone locked at the maximum frequency.

So for me the governor and its tweaks is part of the user experience of a certain kernel, and a distinctive factor.

At the end, all kernels are coming from almost the same sources, so it's the little things which make the difference.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
That's great!

This test i run is not the "be all end all", it was just a recommendation at the time of writing.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] HiKsFiles:
Agreed but, then again, benchmarks should be done at original CPU clock IMHO.

Otherwise, results are distorted.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] zorxd:
agreed. Especially since stock team hacksung seems to be clocked at 1GHz

what's the point of the comparison? Really?

As expected, there is no noticeable difference between all 1.2 GHz kernels.

It's not as if there was a real difference between them anyway.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
That's not quite true.

If you look closer, you'll see that Devil CFS has quite a distinct advantage over all others in 3D tests.

The point of the comparison between stock hacksung @1.0GHz and the others, who can overclock, is to show what kind of benefit you get from switching to kernels which are overclock friendly.

Especially considering that you can't assume that a 20% clock speed increase will bring a 20% performance speedup across the board.

At last, i'd say that you may have "expected" that the kernels tested at 1.2 GHz don't have such a difference in performance.

But expectations have to be verified.

I tried to answer the questions:

On Devil's kernel, is BFS really better than CFS?

The "popular belief" is that BFS is faster than CFS.

According to my tests, CFS results faster instead.

Another question may be, what kernel gives you the best gaming performance.

If you pay attention to the An3D Bench XL, you'll see that Semaphore 0.9.5b, even overclocked a 1.2GHz, is significantly slower than Devil.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] belmethos:
If i recall correctly Semaphore Author claimed that some kernel developers overclock GPU, and he didn't. Idk anything about it, but i recall something about it.

Is it possible to overclock only GPU, without overclocking CPU??
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] mialwe:
I completely agree on benchmarking every kernel at the same frequency (stock 1Ghz max) but I think there are two different options for further benchmarking:

1) Benchmark kernels configured as similar as possible regarding CPU governor, IO scheduler, readahead -> comparable results for all kernels.

2) Benchmark kernels with default settings (only makes sense if all compared kernels are optimized for similar purpose like performance, does not make sense if a kernel does *not* focus on max. performance and uses e.g. Conservative CPU governor as default setting.

@Pipperox: Would it be possible to check my Mindnight-ICS dev version with your benchmark suite? I'd be really interested in the results as you use the same setup for all kernels (1.2Ghz would not be a problem, does not use LiveOC but old school 1/1.128/1.2Ghz OC).
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] dark_knight35:
Interesting thread... I never used devil's CFS version, always BFS. Will try CFS out now.

@Mialwe Where can we get your ics kernel?
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Sorry guys, i understand your logic but i do not fully agree with it.

I'm not comparing overclocked kernels with heavy tweaking of voltages and special settings with which they only work.

I did the "poor man"'s overclock, setting to 1.2GHz using NSTools, a setting where 95% of phones should have no problem working.

I think that if some kernels offer you this possibility while others do not, it is fair to use this "advantage" that they have over the other kernels.

Because a lot of users will have the possibility to do the same as i do, without esoteric knowledge and with just a couple of clicks in the menus.

That being said, "due to popular demand" :) i will also try to retest those kernels at 1.0GHz as soon as i get a bit of time.

BUT in my recommendations, i will also consider the overclocking capabilities.

@mialwe: sure, i'll give a run to your kernel as well!
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Dude, sorry but i don't seem to find your ICS kernel anywhere.. can you provide a link?
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] mialwe:
Sorry you had to search (without success), I'm preparing my dev version but it's not ready for public upload yet (final tests, checking app functionality,...).

If you want I can send the kernel via mail, just pm me.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] damianmb:
Hi, nice thread!

I guess battery is influenced by the kernel + OC, are you going to perform some battery tests?

BTW do you notice the difference in the GUI and using common apps like whatsapp, gmail, etc.. (not games) when OC to 1.2?? Because for me 1Ghz is ok for common usage.

Thanks!
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] zorxd:
You don't, because you don't know if the speed increase comes from so-called "tweaks" or from the overclock.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] J0HNiE:
Hi guys, Great Thread!!

for ICS Roms i like to use Glitch's 14V5 kernel because it's neat and comfortable and gives you great results in OC and smoothness!!

he's GlitchOnDemend and Glitchass V2 are just fantastic! such great battry life on MIUIV4(way better then any ICS roms i've seen) and great smoothness when OC to 1.4GHz, deep idle V2 and stable thats amazing, aside from the bugs of MIUI v4 on i9000 :(

and if you can test zach's ICS kernel even though it's outdated?
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
And frankly i don't care where the speed increase comes from.

The question i'm trying to ask is "which is the fastest kernel that i can use", not "which is the fastest kernel when the wind comes from south east and the moon is blue".

I made these tests first and foremost for myself, i believe that 1.2GHz with the added clock state is something that anybody can attain with no effort, with the kernels which allow it.

Also if you pay attention you'll see i run (some) tests with Semaphore at 1.2GHz.

Please keep in mind that live overclock if any should give an advantage compared to adding a clock state because:

you get a higher bus speed, so potentially higher memory bandwidth and/or lower latency

you have one less step to transition through when scaling towards the highest clock frequency
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Battery tests would be great, but i think it's nearly a "mission impossible" task.

Too many variables, too many different usage models, too much influence from random or difficult to control factors (e.g. getting calls, getting emails, signal strength varying, location, time of the day...)

Concerning your second question: there was definitely a big difference in UI smoothness with overclocking on Gingerbread, but that seems to be practically gone with GUI hardware acceleration in ICS.

However, while i play games very rarely, i still find overclocking useful and well visible in two of my daily tasks: Google Maps, and the internet browser.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] mk_ln:
thanks for this thread.

this may have been redundant, which is why you didn't specifically specify it, but was devil CFS noticeably smoother than BFS in usage? I see that most of the numbers suggest that it is better, but I actually wanted more of a subjective opinion on this.

thanks in advance.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
My impression was that CFS was a lot smoother than BFS in version 1.1.

Version 1.1.6 has brought tremendous improvements to both versions of the kernel, and the scores are pretty high for both.

I don't play the most graphically intensive games, with the exception of a short run in Shadowgun (which i frankly bought mostly just to see how it runs).

In my experience i notice a difference in smoothness only in the following case:

SOMETIMES when opening the app drawer in Nova Launcher

While the mediascanner or other *intensive* background app is doing something, all kernels stutter but CFS does it less than BFS
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] ImraanK:
just wondering.. what's the best way to swop kernels ? Any cleaning procedure that u follow etc ?
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] DROCSID:
Swop or swap? Just use a kernel cleaning script/tool or reflash the ROM and you'll have stock Kernel back.

Sent from my iPad
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
As RATBORG said, one (super safe) way is to reinstall the ROM.

But i usually do the cleanup manually using a root explorer program, my favorite is ES File Explorer.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
So, some updates.

As requested, I'm adding some tests at stock frequency.

I also started testing the latest "semi official" build of Icy Glitch:

Glitch-20120314.0048

It should fix the issues with LED (seems ok now) and nandroid (untested); according to the test at stock speed, it's also blazing fast, as fast or slightly faster than the previous champion, Devil 1.1.6 CFS.

I've also added a new tab to the document named "Other ROMs".

Somebody submitted to me some impressive numbers with Semaphore running MIUI v4 2.3.16; since i cannot verify these numbers and i'm not going to test all kernels on all popular ROMs out there, i'm just posting these numbers "as is" in this separate tab.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] DROCSID:
@Pipperox

I'm NOW working on all the benchmarking for the common i9000 ICS-

based ROMs. I took, although DevilKernel performed better in a slight

way, the Glitch kernel semi-'V6' with the fixed BLN and CWM.

Will post it hopefully tomorrow :)

Thanks for the information in this thread
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
At stock speed, the latest "Glitch-kernel-without-an-official-version" :p seems if any even slightly faster than Devil CFS.

Anyway, looking forward to the results of your tests!
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
UPDATE: added Midnight ICS to the kernels tested at stock settings!
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] gokussjx:
@Pipperox,

Take a look at these screenshots depicting FIOPS vs SIO schedulers.

Obviously, single test is never as accurate as multiple tests, but a general idea is clearly gained.

Test Environment: Dark Knight 3, Devil 1.1.6b CFS_CMC_BLN, OC 1300MHz.

FIOPS:

SIO:

Pretty big, eh? ;)
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Thanks for your contribution!

Frankly, i'm not too confident about evaluating I/O scheduler performance with the current tools, because the test result variance is way too high.

On Antutu you can get for SD card read or write anything between 4 MB/s and 12 MB/sec, without changing kernel nor scheduler.

Same for DB I/O i've seen it varying between 260 and 360...

That's why you see these results "grayed out" in my table.

I think we'd all like to know which I/O scheduler gives the best performance, but right now i haven't found a convincing way.

Also apart for poor benchmarks, there is also the fact that I/O performance is a mix of several factors, such as:

access latency

max throughput / bandwidth

scalability with respect to workload and queue depth

variability dependent on file size

CPU utilization (for example noop is said to be very simple and use little CPU time)

...

I tend to use FIOPS because it is

theoretically

a very efficient scheduler and because empirically it gives me the impression of very good responsiveness (may be placebo though :p )

I also used NOOP a lot.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] gokussjx:
I know what you mean! Kernel benchmarking is extremely imprecise & not quite dependable.

Kinda like the fact that NOOP performs better than SIO in benchmarks (Almost always... probably always), but SIO is the faster & more efficient one, against NOOP.

Its a fact. Its the unique way SIO handles the threads & processes that its depicted lower than NOOP. Benchmarks are many times misguiding ;)
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Dude,

ok but on what are you basing your conclusion that "SIO is the faster & more efficient one"?

As a computer engineer, my approach is that theoretical expectations are often negated by measurable facts..

And no, benchmarks are not misguiding, it is only BAD benchmarks which are misguiding.

"What you can't measure, you can't manage."
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] gokussjx:
Well, based on my research, it seems to go a bit differently. Take a look:

(http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=22016462&postcount=5)

As for reason for me calling SIO faster, try this: (Although, out of about 10 benchmarks, I've seen about 5 NOOP faster than SIO results, & 5 just the opposite. Very rough estimation... So basically, its really mostly controversial.)

(http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=10669818&postcount=591)

(http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=16006776&postcount=6)

(http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=15800297&postcount=1)

If you can throw some more light over these, it would be quite helpful. More the opinions, more tests, greater chances of accuracy ;)
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] Pipperox:
Thanks for fishing out all that stuff!

I can't throw any more light, because that data is largely contradictory or inconclusive...

Also it doesn't really show such a superiority of NOOP in benchmarks.

I understand the argument about starvation, but then again here we're talking about phones, not DB servers.

I wouldn't expect to have too much file access concurrency from background tasks, probably not even from the media scanner.

Right now i can only say that i feel like i'm unable to make a recommendation about I/O schedulers based on the benchmark suite that we have available.

For me this does not mean that the concept of benchmarking is wrong (a benchmark does not need to be unrealistic, actually quite the opposite) but just that the benchmarks available for Android are primitive.

The same was true for PCs maybe 10 years ago, but there has been a constant push for improved and more realistic benchmarks and today i'd say it is possible to have a fair performance assessment of every PC component.

In my work i need often to develop ad-hoc benchmarks to test newly developed products.. benchmarking is an art of itself.

I'm confident that somebody could find a good way to test the performance of the various I/O schedulers available on Android, but it is a task which requires a significant effort.
[Galaxy S I9000 Android Development] bhu1:
good project...reminds me to add mods in my rom to increase performance with other utility mod...gonna try some stuff.