yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I would really appreciate it if you can. The benchmarks results for the current version of the Kernels you know already, since I do them frequently to study the performance differences between each release. I'll tell you how much the higher throttling point will benefit performance. Also to be honest it shouldn't even be that hard. At least as far as Snapdragon is concerned. Because on Snapdragon devices there is a simple file regulating the way throttling works. It's called Thermal Engine or something, and it can literally be edited while you are in OS. I don't know if Samsung made things more complicated for Exynos though. It should still be a bunch of variables though.

It should yield around 8% CPU performance improvements on sustained loads. And again, it would open the pathway to future CPU overclocks that bring the CPU in multi core at >1794MHz. Optimally at 2314MHz in Quad Core and Tri Core mode and 2652MHz for dual core which are the originally intended frequencies for this SoC. More optimizations to keep the M3 cores fed as well would allow us, with all of that, to match and beat Snapdragon 855 in CPU performance according to my expectations. And I am not kidding.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
The problem here is.. either the maximum thermal in One Ui is too low or the game optimization app limitation that makes any kernel couldn't reach more than 2,9Ghz CPU Clock and 572Mhz GPU Clock.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
You actually have a good point. I have in fact suspected it might be the game optimization app in the background to limit my thermals to 71°C. I should test that, but if it doesn't turn out to be the case, it's nothing ykk shouldn't be able to fix. It should be a table with all the thermal thresholds, somewhere in the system files.

However I suspect the game optimization app is the one at fault for GPU frequencies going down, and not the thermals. Because in benchmarks the GPU boosts up to 572MHz just fine (the game launcher isn't executed on the background). However once 70°C are reached, CPU throttles anyways. So it's a problem on both parts.

I'd gladly uninstall Game Booster, but it's a system app so I am afraid of removing it. Not to mention that force stopping it and removing its system modification privileges just don't help. It turns itself back on and it might be exactly what is ruining performance. I have no idea what to do. Perhaps Ykk can do something at Kernel level to disable that nuisance or at least bypass it. It just isn't good at what it is supposed to do. Game Optimizer App is also a problem, as it openly states that "It modifies maximum CPU/GPU clocks".
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
yes it is possible

actually sammy have included dvfs inside the framework files as well as some apps, rom developers should know that. but as trevinutomo mentioned, there could be some other controls in the roms nowadays, i have not examined the one ui so i cant confirm atm

also you may try to disable game optimization by adb commands if you want to, however those inside the framework files still in effect, if they have a role to play too
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I can disable the game booster, game launcher and game optimizing service since I have an app that allowed me to do so. I'll do that and let you know if anything happens
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I disabled those apps however the behaviour of the GPU didn't change. This has to do with the DVFS. Even at 15% boost frequency it just doesn't care. If go on a game and I have 20% usage, it goes at 260 instead of 572. The hktweaks settings just aren't applied. CPU obeys as long as it's <71°C
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
"Static" behaves differently from other GPU governors. And more than "static", I'd call it random, as it continuously changes frequency apparently without logic, though in games it seems like it uses 546 and 572 more. Still very random. Again, boost frequency parameters are ignored by the system as far as games are concerned. In benchmarks the GPU fares best with the booster governor and targets 572 nearly instantly.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
in case you are interested:

i assumed you have magisk installed. there's a module that let you fake your device to another one you like eg xperia or pixel for instance

since , in the old days, the embedded dvfs in rom was decided by the device model (they have included others like n9,ms8, s9 etc) and then apply the dvfs accordingly. if it is still the case, a fake device id could help to bypass it, if and only if there is no default dvfs settings. this will need to decompile all files as to look for the dvfs settings embedded

you see what i mean?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Yeah I guess but definitely not one of the solutions I’d personally resort to. I guess fixing the Exynos 9810 is harder than I’ve expected lmao
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
So I have disabled Game Launcher, Game Booster and Game Optimizing Service. Nothing changed as far as I can see. The issue must be coming from the DVFS, possibly being very conservative.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Either way, here's a little sum up of what I've discovered so far.

Exynos 9810

10nm Process. Came out in early 2018.

Equipped mainly by S9/S9+ and Note9 devices.

Octa Core big-LITTLE setup

4xMongoose 3 (Cortex A75 Based) big cores at 2704MHz (Single), 2314MHz (Dual-Tri), 1794MHz (Quad)

4xCortex A55 LITTLE cores at 1794MHz

ARM Mali G72 MP18 @572MHz

4000mAh battery

8/512GB in my configuration of Note9.

Stock (Samsung Limited):

Throttling point set at 70°C

Conservative DFVS reduces GPU performance and CPU performance greatly, with minimal temperature benefits.

AnTuTu V9 (Average for N960F ): 366,927

CPU: 106,810

GPU: 120,270

Memory: 60,612

UX: 79,237

Our comparison will use Exynos 9820

AnTuTu V9 (Average for G970F): 489,218 (Weakest 9820 is roughly 33% faster than Exynos 9810 here)

CPU: 129,632 (20% Faster than 9810)

GPU: 169,983 (40% Faster than 9810, like claimed by Samsung)

Memory: 84,349 (40% Faster than 9810)

UX: 105,255 (33% Faster than 9810)

Geekbench 4:

Exynos 9810

Single: 1900 to 3850

Multi: 7700 to 9250

Exynos 9820:

Single: 3900 to 4350 (14% better than the 9810)

Multi: 9400 to 10,600 (15% better than the 9810)

3DMark Slingshot Extreme Unlimited:

N960F: 3,754

G970F: 4,890 (30% improvement over Mali G72MP18)

Exynos 9810 (N960F, Awakening initiated, Aka BeastMode Kernel V2.11c6)

4xMongoose 3 (Cortex A75 Based) big cores at 2886MHz (Single), 2496MHz (Dual-Tri), 1794MHz (Quad)

4xCortex A55 LITTLE cores at 2002MHz (1950MHz with throttling)

ARM Mali G72 MP18 @572MHz

70°C throttling threshold

AnTuTu V9: 444,025 (10% slower than 9820)

CPU: 127,033 (Less than 1% slower lmao)

GPU: 133,279 (26% slower than the 9820)

Memory: 83,587 (Again, less than 1% slower)

UX: 100,126 (5% slower than the 9820)

Geekbench 4:

Single: 3879 (Some recorded results above 3900) (12% slower than the 9820)

Multi: 9459 (Some recorded results above 9700) (10% slower than the 9820)

3DMark Slingshot Extreme Unlimited: 4,415 (11% slower than the 9820)

Battery overall is not affected by the performance improvement at all. Exynos 9810 (Unleashed) will be far more powerful and might finally be able to reach 9820.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
So maybe if we could undervolt CPU by 5-10% and run Cortex A75 at 2886MHz more frequently. Than i think Note9 CPU could win the 10% slower than 9820 in AnTuTu V9.

Also,

Undervolt GPU by 10-15% and run 572MHz more frequently. Then i think Note9 GPU could have same score with the 9820 in AnTuTu V9. Which only less by 26%.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
Anyway, i found DVFS root in Note 9. Maybe it could help.

/sys/devices/platform/17500000.Mali/DVFS
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
After tweaking here and there, I have done these after all:

Disable app: device care, game optimizer, game launcher, game plugin, and at last

DVFS. I done it by these steps below

Step 1: Download ES File Explorer from the Google Play store. It is a free download.Step 2: Slide out the left drawer, under tools turn on Root Explorer.Step 3: Now head on to the System partition, then the sys folder. The exact location you want to end up in: sys > devices > 17500000.maliStep 4: Find the file dvfs and then long press it. You want to now open up the permissions dialog by going to: More > Properties > PermissionsStep 5: Now uncheck all of the permissions on the permissions dialog so no box is ticked.Step 6: Now do the same for two other files in the same folder dvfs_min_lock and dvfs_max_lock. Unchecking all of the permission boxes.

And for the result: Truck Simulator Ultimate significantly has lower frame drop
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
haha, i just remembered this tweaks too so i set the permissions and ran geekbench

i got 4594

however, the max i have got in the past was 4737

besides, the temperature dropped more than 10C here

so, i cant tell if it really works

edit

so i ran the test again without touching the files after a reboot, i got 4244
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
so geekbench 4 & 5 is incomparable
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Correct. I use Geekbench 4 because I believe it is a better choice for older devices. However I can run Geekbench 5 too if so you wish
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I like you. But what I'd do with this CPU is claim back what Samsung took from us. For example, in single core the A75 cores were supposed to run at 2.9GHz. In quad core they were supposed to go at a groundbreaking 2.31. They underclocked it to 1.8. If we manage to get that frequency to work at sub 95 temperature, we are going to wipe the floor with the 9820. I'd also OC the GPU to 775. I don't like being conservative. 572 is a very conservative choice. I'd leave ov and uv to the user, since not all devices are equal and one uv across the board might work on some devices but fail on others

Also if you pay attention, I ran AnTuTu V9 for stock and Beastmode Kernel V2 Note9. On Beastmode Kernel the CPU is less than 1% slower than the 9820's.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Either way I will apply said tweaks and run the appropriate tests.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Geekbench is bad to test GPU performance. Use GFX Bench and 3DMark. I’ve tested anyways and I got 4660 with my own tweaks. None of what trevin applied. However if I apply his tweaks too, I might achieve greater results. I’ll let you know.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
The 9810 could actually match the 9820. But we can’t do it with a 1794MHz max CPU clock speed and 572MHz GPU.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Also if you found a way to disable the CPU DVFS, or at least increase that horrid 70°C throttling point, we are going to get around 8% extra CPU performance.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Trying to remove the permissions to the DVFS files doesn't work. They turn themselves back on

Nvm it applied. I wonder if this is reset every reboot though.

So it seems that the DVFS was at the fault for the Minimum and maximum GPU frequency doing whatever it wanted. With it disabled, the GPU sticks at 572MHz at all times if I put the minimum at such a number. However after reboot, said changes revert back to normal.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Results of the tests with the GPU DVFS disabled:

Ambient Temp: 22°C

Chassis Temp: 15°C (26°C under load, 30°C hotspot)

Tools: Xiaomi FunCooler Pro

3DMark:

IceStorm Unlimited: *50,378* (50,000 barrier broken. 17% faster than the average Note9)

GPU test 1: 317,1fps (Peaks registered at 323+fps)

GPU test 2: 221,9fps

CPU test: 102,2fps (Peaks registered at 106+fps)

SlingShot Extreme Unlimited (OpenGL ES 3.1): 4,390 (17% faster than the average Note9)

GPU test 1: 34,2fps

GPU test 2: 15,2fps

CPU test:

Part 1: 57,9fps

Part 2: 35,3fps

Part 3: 18,6fps

Wildlife Unlimited: 2,364 (Average, expected)

GPU test: 14,2fps

PCMark, Work 3.0 Performance: 9,386 (Almost 52% faster than the average Note9, faster than a 9820)

Web Browsing 3D Score: 6,916

Video Editing 3.0 Score: 6,612

Writing 3.0 Score: 10,583

Photo Editing 3.0 Score: 22,796

Data Manipulation 3.0 Score: 6,605

I avoided GFX Benchmark as it is very GPU specific, and like highlighted by 3DMark Wildlife, there would be 0 improvement since the Max Frequency is the stock one.

Geekbench 5:

Single: 689 (Average. In the past I managed on stock ROM a score above 720. It's all about that 2886MHz being used more often)

Multi: 2,074 (Average, sometimes I do 2,100+, LITTLE CPU throttled to 1950MHz :mad:)

Compute: 4,759 (Useless score to me, but it's here anyways)

AnTuTu V9: 444,001 (21% faster than the average Note9)

CPU: 129,255 (21% faster than the average Note9, Little CPU throttled to 1950MHz :mad: )

GPU: 132,410 (10% faster than the average Note9, however SD845 defeats this by 24%)

MEM: 81,955 (33% faster than the average Note9)

UX: 100,381 (27% faster than the average Note9)

We have got room for improvement. Especially that 70°C throttling threshold.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
so it works, rite?

you can add the changes to an init script as it will roll back after reboot

btw i just installed a new build, better kill me, my screen turned into something like an old tv with full screen of snowflakes... i am afraid it's about to die....
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Then why not install the old one and check if it gives you the same issue?

Also no idea how to do an init script. Either way not much of an issue for me, because I guess you already realized that the DVFS is as good as gone.

Also it did work, but in games (and for 2 minutes, since the phone goes 70°C pretty fast and throttles, and I get a little pissed). For benchmarks? Not so much, because they already make the GPU boost very high to begin with.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
yeah of coz i did, i installed an old build and it's fine now

it made me more certain that i have loss in the lottery, very likely hardware problems

for first it turned green in recovery when idle months ago, then now with the snowflakes. but even though it's a bad contact with the cable of the screen, i couldn't fix it by myself
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Usually the lottery thing only applies to the processors. The behaviour of your screen is really weird. I guess that you should make the overclock options something that can be configured by the user in OS so that we can test it for you if your phone has failed the lottery

What did you change exactly in the new build that could've caused this problem anyways?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
Is it possible that ur screen's flex cable damaged? If that so, then after swap it with new one surely solve those green screen and snoflakes
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] trevinutomo:
Terribly sorry, doesn't mean to be rude, ykkfive. I found that A2N kernel for S8 could have DVFS settings that allow max throttle threshold to be set depending CPU Freq we want to be. Is it possible to make it happen in Exynos 9810?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
yeah your are right, but that happen in other hardware too

i did nothing unusual actually but upstream the linux kernel

yes, for me, the performance now is very good already, provided that i dont play games and i use it for an hour or two per day, so it's just for you guys
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
it could be, but i am lacking the technique to repair it
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
no problem mate, as i always said, i need inputs

however not all can be ported due to different linux version etc

anyway i will take a look at that later. thanks
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
True. I actually wonder how did I forget to tell you. The A2N Kernel allows a level of customization never seen before since the developer also created his own software for it. He charges a buck or so for it, but I’d pay (and I did pay) gladly for this stuff lmao. Most notable features are how he allows people to adjust throttling temperature on CPU and GPU and, if desired, disable GPU DVFS. He pushed the Exynos 8895 so far it can rival and defeat a Snapdragon 835. Perhaps you could either study his Kernel or ask him for tips, he seems like a nice lad from my impression.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
ok i remember that kernel now, it's on the cards but i don have time to review it yet (i have bookmarked too many 😅 )
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
LMAO. Take it nice, relaxed and easy man. Best of luck for everything. U got this
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
oh btw, you guys mentioned 70C throttling point, where did you find it, i mean the 70C?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Observation. As I executed benchmarks, I noticed that the LITTLE CPUs are forced to 1950Mhz as soon as 71C CPU temperature is reached (can’t set 20002 anymore without reboot) big cores drop too but it’s not forced anymore as soon as I go under 71. Zeus Kernel apparently is aware of this and has an experimental fix for the little cores forcing themselves at 1950
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
alright, coz i couldnt find the 70C specified so i believe it could be arrived by some calculations or affected by other hardware

in fact i have applied most of the oc things before but when tested the performance dropped quite significantly. so i removed them before releasing those builds
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
You can simply verify it yourself bro. OC the little cores to 2002, run Geekbench 5 or antutu v9, then go to hktweaks and you’ll see the little cores max frequency is forced at 1950. No calculations or anything. I ran the benchmarks, got done with it, noticed CPU little dropped to 1950 as soon as 70C was passed. It’s clearly a threshold. It has to be stored in some file somewhere. The performance dropped because with the oc things, you most likely hit the 70C so fast, so hard that your cpu most likely dropped the frequency very hard to cool down. That’s how throttling works.

again, you can check the Zeus kernel details to see that there is a “possible fix for 2002mhz” or something like that. I’ve seen some guy in this thread saying that it’s the cache frequency’s fault @ykkfive

if there is a file with that temp threshold, I’ll find it.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
i mean the "70C" doesnt exist in the sources, so it could be affected by say an increase in gpu temperature etc and thus triggered it . from the sources i found the 1st warning temperature is 85 if i remember it correctly. so chances that there were something else triggered, or as a result of something which prevent the cpu to arrive at the first warning temperature, cant tell at this point

besides, i found that the relationship between the cpu and gpu are very closed, meaning that if you oc the cpu, the gpu will be affected as well. that's why you may find that i have removed the gpu oc but left the cpu oc there

anyway, these will be addressed next
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Sorry bro. I gotta correct myself. Testing right now SPECIFICALLY for the thermal throttle temperature (CPU Throttling test and Hktweaks split screen) I noticed that above 70C nothing happens. But at around the 3 minutes mark, the little CPU dropped from 2002 to 1794Mhz even though the maximum frequency was still set at 2002. Stopped the benchmark and after a while the 2002 started being used again. No 1950. Now benchmarking it’s back at 2002. I’ll check if the event repeats itself.

update: 2:30 minutes mark. Max GPU temperature registered is 58C. Max CPU is 74 under maximum stress. Throttling of the little cores happened at the 2:30 minutes mark at 72C CPU temperature and 57 GPU temperature. Little cores dropped for a short while to 1950 and then to 1794 remaining stable there. Maximum little core frequency is now forced at 1950.

@ykkfive (sorry for the second ping). This is getting more and more confusing lmao

update 2: No changes with disabled Samsung hot plug. At temperature 74C CPU at the 1:22 minutes mark, LITTLE cpu dropped at 1950 and forced max frequency at 1950. I am starting to think there has to be some kind of “timer” when cpu load is very high at this point. Or maybe it’s cache like that guy said.

I don’t think 85C can be reached unless there is 100% cpu and GPU usage. CPU at 100% usage barely reached 74. We have OC headroom. A lot too. But if we don’t figure out where this problem is coming from we can’t do much.

at this point…is this some kind of power throttling?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] moderndaycowboy:
disabling hotplug in hktweaks makes the ram performance worse, perhaps you may check it with antutu or devcheck.

Edit: one thing more, disabling hotplug limits in exkernel manager, makes the cpu multicore performance worse.

I am confused about those hot plug thing.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Look, I only disabled it momentarely to see if it was the one causing this odd frequency behaviour. As far as I'm aware, the Hotplug allows the CPU to use the single, dual and tri core frequencies. Without it, the CPU runs at max 1794MHz. That's why you may notice improvements in memory and single threaded workloads.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
yeah it should behave like that, i mean 2002 can be reached again, that's what i observed as the cpu time for 2002 increased in subsequent benchmark test. so i don understand why it could not be reached again (after cooling down), unless it is a bug. so this should be fine

for the 85C, i guess, it depends. for example in asia which the weather here is relatively hot, the cpu is at around 36 when idle. so may be it can reach 85 a bit easier? just wild guess

anyway, the mechanism "should" allow the cpu to go further until 115C, but in the real world is it possible? for how long? not to mention 115, i think it will be hard to reach 100 or 110 actually, and this is for the cpu alone, so how about other temperatures? these are the questions

note: i could be wrong, they are based on assumptions