yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
I just scored 2597 on a DK17 FroYo ROM (Quantum Rom v1.5 {WarpSpeed}) running at a stock 1.0 GHz. I believe this sets a record for a stock CPU on Android.

(At least it does according to smartphonebenchmarks.com) UPDATE - It's official. This is the 8th highest recorded Quadrant score and the very highest recorded stock clocked CPU score on that website.

This score was made possible by the EXT3 (EDIT - Correction, ramdisk) hack implemented in the most recent version of the ROM, released this morning.

EDIT - I'd like to note that the "lagfix" was incorporated into the ROM by the author with noobnl's assistance to prove a point; neither condone the serious use of Quadrant scores in it's current form. This hack is purely a Quadrant scores boost and does not provide real-world benefits. It is a demonstration that we should not rely upon inaccurate measurements to tell us what ROM or hardware is best.

An exploitable benchmark is no benchmark at all.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11825908/snap20101127_124836.png

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11825908/snap20101127_131805.png
[Epic 4G General] AndrewZorn:
So just to clarify, does the ext3 hack do nothing other than improve benchmark scores? Is there any real-world improvement?

As common knowledge as the Quadrant thing is, I'm amazed people KEEP IMPLEMENTING this tweak and bragging about the results... unless there was an actual (less-drastic than Quadrant shows) improvement.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
I agree that first we have to look at the big picture..while it may not help as much as the number makes it out to be, that doesn't necessary mean that it gives no benefit.

Next is this, why do people complain about Quadrant so much? you are using a FREE version..the FREE version only gives you a total number..Quadrant Pro on the other hand gives you the scores in each category..and is actually one of the best for measuring atm on android...
[Epic 4G General] noobnl:
it is true, we mounted benchmark data folder as a ramdisk/tmpfs, theres no ext3 filesystem in the rom because just for the lulz and educate the group that a lag fix won't do ****.. just to cheat a benchmark.. we were pissed at roms user thinking making rfs to ext3 will make performance better...
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
It has nothing to do with cost. It has to do with the fact that Quadrant is the most commonly used benchmark and it is deeply flawed.

Yes, the Pro version does break down the scores. Most people don't pay for Quadrant. Secondly, the I/O scores are weighted very heavily... the score nearly tripled because an I/O test completed a little quicker. There's a significant problem with that.
[Epic 4G General] biff6789:
I've been impressed by the Epic's speed, but your scores aren't truly valid because you are "cheating"

I assume you're using the new Quantum ROM (which I also have installed) that implements a lagfix in which one moves the app data and dalvik cache away from Samsung’s embarrasingly slow internal Storage. Doing this significantly boosts I/O scores in Quadrant, thereby cheating the system. In real-life use, your system is barely performing any faster than before the exploit/lagfix

Read here for more info to see how a dev exploited this to create a 3300 Quad score (can't post links so remove the spaces):

http : // androidspin .com /2010/08/23/my-quadrant-is-bigger-than-your-quadrant/

This exploit has even been confirmed by the almighty Cyanogen himself
[Epic 4G General] Eazail70x7:
So is there any real benifits to this Epic 4G "lag fix"? I've seen that the "lag fix" within the other galaxy S phones actually does give real world results...
[Epic 4G General] biff6789:
Sure, it provides a speed benefit. The only thing being addressed in this thread is that, just because your quadrant scores double, it doesn't mean your device is twice as fast in actual use
[Epic 4G General] decalex:
Look for Dameon's post a couple of days ago in the quantum rom thread (on tapatalk..and linking sux). He talks about this exploit, but sadly (and understandably), most of the rom migrants want something to quantify expected results.. Even if bs

sent from my RAZR
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
Its not fair to say quadrant cheats.. rather it just may or may not be measuring performance of an operation that is ever really used on your system. In fact your system does use some fsyncs like quadrant and those will be faster like quadrant. Your system could start using fewer fsyncs though and quadrant would never know. Also your device certainly doesn't use only fsyncs..but those are very related to the lag. So basically, quadrant says the lag fix works if I'm not missing something. That's OK...but you don't need a crazy number to say that.

Bottom line... the only thing that tells how your phone performs...is how your phone performs and that's not just some little disclaimer. Hardware speed depends DRAMATICALLY on how it is used.
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
Actually the tweak, as noobnl states, quite specifically provides NO performance improvements to the phone. He would know because he made the hack. See the quote below.

Moving on...

This was the whole point of my post... I think you might have missed that. I would also recommend this article as well: http://briefmobile.com/cyanogen-demonstrates-quadrants-flaws
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
Well realistically speaking even without the I/O exploit the none pro version never had any meaning to it..why?

Well it measures:

CPU

Memory

I/O

2d

3d

Now lets look at it from perspective..lets say we have a score of 3000 and 99% of it comes from 3d..the phone would still be laggy because even though it may have a good gpu it won't have the other things to back it up.

Quadrant weighs everything evenly...it exists for the sole purpose of getting people to buy the pro version..

So its not Quadrant that is flawed but the people who actually think a large number means everything is automatically super fast...

So in most cases yes, the I/O increase would be almost useless as nothing would utilize it to the point where you would need to utilize such high I/O..unless maybe you plan to run a database server on your phone? lol

But like any benchmark we have to not only look at the number but understand what the number means..similar to how on a linpack gets cheated on with use of a VFP since it measures with floating points...

Heck I can write a program called gTen Score which does an md5 sum of every file on the device and the closer the device is to mine the higher score it would get..would that make the device with the highest score the best? lol..benchmarks are benchmarks...we have to understand them and look at the details to how the numbers got there..In my opinion if its not Quadrant Pro people are wasting their time with the benchmark...
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
You make some very good points, but Quadrant IS flawed in that it should be able to test performance in a manner that is more consistent with real-world performance. A benchmark tool that provides poor results for a different configuration of hardware or software (in this case, Samsung's RFS file system) when performance is in on par or even superior to a higher-scoring configuration is a benchmark tool with serious flaws.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
The flaw of quadrant is grouping up all of those categories into 1...usually as you said things are weighted into a benchmark and each benchmark measures things like 3d performance, i/o performance an etc would each be a separate benchmark..Quadrant will never do that because their goal is for you to buy the pro version...it was never intended to be used for anything other then a proof of concept for selling the pro version...

Since people are not gonna buy Quadrant Pro..the best way is to get them to use a different benchmark...I hear some people touting GLBenchmark is it any better?
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
I've been following GLBenchmark and it seems pretty accurate as far as I can tell. A buddy of mine outed the HTC Glacier (Mytouch 4G) when he found that a developer had erroneously left scores posted on GLBenchmark.com. We could tell it was a next-gen Snapdragon by the scores, and that it wasn't running an Adreno 200. Became big news soon thereafter.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
Well then the best bet is to contact rom developers and ask if they could include GLBenchmark instead of quadrant and explain the benefits of having a specified benchmark over a general unweighed one..

and yeah I saw th HTC Glacier thing..
[Epic 4G General] biff6789:
You're right, I originally DID miss your point. My bad... I thought you were just another fanboi raving about the awesomeness of Quadrant. I should have read more carefully

But in essence, you and I were saying the same thing all along: Quadrant is bunk and can easily be manipulated by a tmpfs tweak

As for my other point about lagfixes offering real-world performance boosts in other phones, I was saying "yes" in a general way as often times they do, not "yes" specifically regarding Dameon's tweak

:)
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
Yeah, and from what I understand (forgive me, I am still a relative newcomer here) the other Galaxy S phones mount their file directory a little differently than the Epic does, negating the need for a real lag fix. However, the Captivate lag-fix, for example, does indeed provide actual performance improvements. Perhaps this misunderstanding is what is causing people to believe that the Epic needs to have some sort of lag fix too.
[Epic 4G General] biff6789:
You're exactly right. Dameon himself stated that the other Galaxy phones need a lagfix while the Epic does not (read the last line of the following post):

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=9440522&postcount=1174
[Epic 4G General] gsx62391:
quadrant has been known to very inaccurate. I forget who it was but someone tweaking their evo was able to get like 6000 on quadrant awhile ago. After that it has been tricked many times into giving big numbers with no actual improvements over the actual phone itself.
[Epic 4G General] lil2good20:
If its so easy to hack quadrant, then someone show me a 5000 quadrant on epic.
[Epic 4G General] Dameon87:
I must chirp in a few comments here.

gTen does make some good points. However, if the point of the benchmark were to evenly test every specified parameter it would cap each score at a certain amount, rather than an unlimited amount. The fact that the total score can be tricked this much is astonishing. Since I/O speed really doesn't affect total performance to such a level as to attain a billion points in quadrant; a diminishing scale should be used for each benchmark section; gaining a max amount of point, or even a significantly lower amount of points. The algorithms in Quadrant are an utter joke. I really hope we see better benchmarks in the future.
[Epic 4G General] Electrofreak:
Quadrant itself wasn't hacked, the Epic was modified to produce higher scores on the I/O portion of the test.

And honestly, I might as well have produced a score of 5000... my score of 2597 is more than double the highest score produced by any Epic not running this modification.

I'm hoping people will stop taking benchmark scores so seriously, and ROM developers will stop posting scores (and honestly, Linpack is hardly any better) to try to "sell" their ROM.

I admit, we still do need a way of comparing ROM performance fairly for those speed enthusiasts, but this isn't it.
[Epic 4G General] blspyro:
I may be new to this forum but I think what you said is dumb....you are saing benchmarks are ineffective ways to determine which is better/faster and all benchmarks have flaws.nobody will ever agree 100% with how a benchmark gets its scores etc....if you don't like linpak or quadrant make your own benchmark.oh and if you don't want to use benchmarks to see which one is better/faster what do you think should be used?

PyRo
[Epic 4G General] NYYFan325:
He's not saying benchmarks themselves are useless, he's saying that using a benchmark that can have its results manipulated with no real world performance gain is useless.

For example my friend and I build 2 identical PC's. We use a benchmark suite to see what our overall scores are in each section. One section tests DVD read speeds. On his PC he uses his actual drive, on my PC I create a "fake" drive on my PC and tell the benchmark suite to use that. My score goes through the roof because its using my hard drive speeds instead of my DVD drive speeds. I blow his benchmark score out of the water because I used this trick/hack.

Does that make any sense I should go and tell people my PC is faster then his?
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
by request.. reposting this here.. although I think I should really ask in development, not offense to the users here.

first

1) Yes this is fake, because there is no "disk" writing ever going to happen (for tmpfs). The data will be lost. Everyone agrees.

2) However, if you used an fsync violating write cache.. like loopback you can get a similar score (we all know this too) but that's NOT fake (as many people say), that's just saying that write caching improves short burst intermittant write performance which is ABSOLUTELY TRUE (and can remove lags!) but it isn't a measure of I/O throughput AND since many types of realistic writes may already be cacheing one way or another (not fsyncing), it may or may not be that relevant.

Now the problem is the logic goes that quadrant gives this "fake" score ergo quadrant is useless ergo epics low score on stock is meaningless and especially since we all know epic doesn't lag.

Problem. epic doesn't lag because it's writes are supposed to be more aproximately like zero time than like SGS time (say 1/4 SGS time at worst to make up a fake number). That means no matter what you do, force fsyncs, avoid caching etc... the score should be pretty high (closer to 2400 than to 900 one would think). (edit 2500 or so seems to be the ceiling and probably the score is something like 1 over a weighted sum of times to complete certain tasks. 1/(time_of_other_things_like_video) probably equally 2500 so it will never get better than this with I/O fakery or tweaks.)

None of this explains why epic gets a low score on unmodified stock roms. I'd expect 1500 at the very least. Something is still missing in the understanding here. Yes I know, one should look at full quadrant, ok but that argument implies something else in the epic is holding the score back alot edit: and that theory doesn't hold up either because then the "fixed" score should not be as high as it is. It's funny that both the low and high scores are almost identical to the SGS.

The answer may still be quadrant is garbage, but it would have to be garbage in a new way, not just in that it gets fooled by ram disk way (edit: which isn't really its fault anyway, although if it wrote a larger file it might not get "fooled" by a cache, but that argument depends on what you want to measure).
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
If I were to guess..Quadrant is suffering from the same problems linpack is..

Here is a benchmark (not by me and your device is the Epic)

Epic scores a 946...now look at the Nexus One and that CPU score...

So in reality..its not about Epic having a low score but realistically NO DEVICE has 2k+ Quadrant score without faking it in one way or the other...

To reiterate the VFP in the snapdragon is making it show crazy CPU scores (since many CPU scores use floating point as a test which a floating point accelerator cheats on lol) which it is in reality not capable off...

So its not that we are scoring a low score on quadrant..its more like every other device (at least snapdragon based) is cheating on quadrant..

If you throw away the Nexus 2.2 CPU results and the Moto X I/O results you will see Galaxy S actually wins by at least a small margin in every category.
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
And to the guy talking about using the HD instead of the CD... if one android implementation is clever enough to do it in a way that is useful and gets speeds gains then YES that android will run faster and smoother. NO it doesn't mean your hardware is faster, but then none of these tweaks change hardware so ANY software that improves a benchmark could be called a "fake" by that argument. And in some sense that's true.

There are rumors that Samsung is developing battery backed ram cached solid state devices. Is it cheating that every write goes to ram and gets written later while you're doing nothing? Only if you're running a heavily loaded server. Not for most people using a cell phone to send sms messages though. Shoot in principle at some point it could basically be a RAM drive (if battery usage is somehow controlled, which probably isn't possible) which just happens to "back up" to solid state once in awhile at a leisure pace. Ok these devices have little RAM so that's not fair either, but some level of RAM caching IS fair.

Anyway, I'm more interested in what the epic and lag fixes are doing and if there is anything that we could learn about either by understanding this aparent discrepancy. I don't care if quadrant is a good measure of performance or not.
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
You miss my point. I'm not worried about what you call a cheat (or about the Nexus One). I'm worried about the low score as comparisson to SGS. evidence

a) both epic and sgs have th3e same cheat scores.

Implication: aside from data writes they are otherwise equivilant.(which agrees also with what we expect.. so that's a solid confirmation)

b) Epic and SGS have about the same uncheated score (which is very diferent from the cheated scores and thus seems very sensitive to actual writing performance

Implication.. Epic and SGS write at about the same speed.

Contradiction: People claim SGS Epic writes much faster because of ONENand. (edit: and in fact that's supposed to be why epic doesn't need lag fixes)

Something is wrong.
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
And look it's not good enough to say it can be cheated ergo it's useless. You need something else to explain this.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
I am not understanding..are you saying that people are claiming the 16gb movinand inside the SGS is faster then our 1gb OneNand?
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
no--typo.. read it again.. sorry, with the names swapped and it should make sense.. it was corrected above while you were reading it.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
If I were to guess maybe this?

http://forum.sdx-developers.com/epic-development/samsung-clever-but-dirty-hack-used-to-fix-'lag'/
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
dbdata is a different issue entirely. dbdata is bascially ROM I think (with temporary modifications allowed). I don't see how that's related.
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
this is important because people think quadrant is doing exactly the operations that cause lag (fsync) and which measures true worst case write performance (when not quote "cheated"). If SGS lags and epic doesn't can't and quadrant is giving the same score... there might be something very important missing in the understanding.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
Well isn't the claim that it bypasses fsync..thus you would get the same score?
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
no the claim is loopback mounts bypass fsync thus 2500, the "CHEATED" score should be the same... and they are, which is the baseline confirmation for my comparrisson.

edited to put cheated in quotes.
[Epic 4G General] gTen:
The fsync is performed by using SQLite on Quadrant...obviously how the partitions are mounted Epic would perform better but with both lagfixed it would be based on the speed of the nand....

If this is not what your looking for then I guess I'm not understanding the way you phrase things :/..or maybe the other way around.
[Epic 4G General] appagom:
without lag fix edit:fsyncs are based on speed of nand (albeit nand with journaling) With some lagfixes fsync calls are still based on speed of nand but without journaling (better certainly and realistically maintable even for large files and anyway other things get better beacaue the fs does fewer fsyncs...but we're just talking about fsyncs), with loopback lagfixes, it's based on nothing but caching time (and so are actual sqlite CALLS! which is why it's not exactly cheating unless you need to make many of these real fast longer than the cache can hold. but thats beside the point).

SGS and epic should be the same for loopback or ramdisk and are. They should not be the same for un-lagfixed, as, this depends on the speed of the nand which is supposedly VERY different (not just a little or folks wouldn't claim one lags and one doesn't)
[XPERIA X10 Themes and Apps] goothu99:
not sure if this is possible with ADW
[XPERIA X10 Themes and Apps] SXUsr:
- http://jbthemes.com/anderweb/
[XPERIA X10 Themes and Apps] goothu99:
thanks man :)
[XPERIA X10 Themes and Apps] Zocker Tko:
thanks too :D
[XPERIA X10 General] 24karat^:
I know where the option to shut off the light for the Video recording is but it doesn't shut off. My question is: is there of shutting off the light when i am recording a video on my phone? Maybe and app perhaps? or a way of deleting the setting in video mode? or a work around? anything? Its annoying when the option is there for it to shut off and it doesn't work. Its the same for my gf's xperia x10 phone too, it didn't work for 1.6 after the small update in summer and now it was fixed either with the bigger update. help please?
[XPERIA X10 General] coldbird:
Take out the phone battery and re-insert. Hope this will solve the problem.
[XPERIA X10 General] 24karat^:
Yes, i have rebooted my cell phone several times. Thanks for trying to help out.
[XPERIA X10 General] awojtas:
I also have this problem, the video light stays on despite the setting saying "Off".

Using 2.1.
[XPERIA X10 General] ellokomen:
search for xperia x10 flash light on market, it should work
[XPERIA X10 General] AssyrianBLOOD:
Its on a low brightness. Just a privacy thing so other people know its recording. Kinda like the red light on most cameras
[XPERIA X10 General] 24karat^:
Oh really? thats too bad, i dont need the like all the time on, it kills my battery faster. I know before the update it used to be able to shut off once the setting was set on "OFF" mode. :( Ps other phones have the capability to record and have no light at all whats so ever. I dont think its a privacy issue
[XPERIA X10 General] Sewez:
I agree with AssyrianBLOOD, it's a privacy issue. And don't worry about your battery life, HD video recording will kill it way faster. (For me, Battery life on 2.1 absolutely sucks :( )
[XPERIA X10 General] iead1:
The amount of battery life that an LED takes is so pathetically small that it shouldn't affect anything.

Every phone I've owned has had some sort of light to indicate recording as a privacy measure.
[XPERIA X10 General] 24karat^:
Is it something the manufacture imposed or government regulation? Because i know for a fact not every recording device (smartphones/ipod touch) has a LED or any indicator when you are recording. Secondly, the off setting used to work when x10 originally came out until the so called privacy issue came up. I want to know of a way of shutting it off without trying to cover it. I know HD also drains the battery faster but i am not making HD videos here, i'm making youtube videos for my faceboook and i though my phone does a good enough job. I just dont like the light setting having an OFF setting NOT working. If its a privacy issue than why have the setting to switch it off in the first place?
[XPERIA X10 General] cvchetan:
hey.. Sorry for hijacking the thread

I just came up with a thought.

The photo light does two levels of brightness as we know i.e Low brightness as a privacy feature while recording video and high brightness while switched on manually.

Is it possible(when the 2.1 source is released) that we can make a module to further increase power to the led to make it glow brighter so that we can actually use it as a led flash?? Just a thought

cheers

chetan
[XPERIA X10 General] 24karat^:
I just want to know if there is any of shutting it off thats it. You can hijack all you want once i get my answer ill move on. Im sure someone here knows how to shut off by some means thst doesnt require covering it.