Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
blackbeast8 said:
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
justmpm said:
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every app I tried, including SetCPU and CpuSpy, shows 1,2 GHz as max frequency. As you can see on screenshots, Antutu benchmark shows in system info 1,8 GHz (1741 MHz actually), but in test it uses 1,2 GHz. TBH, the only place I saw 1,8 GHz was in Antutu, not anywhere else.
I contacted the seller, and he is trying to convince me that the phone has CPU Booster and that frequency is really 1,8 GHz. I now sent him screenshots in order to convince him that he is wrong...
I researched that cpu, mt5689 and its max freq is 1,2. mt5689T is 1,5 GHz, but this one is without T.
Kernel version is 3.4.5, from 19th June this year
Baseband version: MOLY.WR8.W1248.MD.WG.MP.V6.P4, 2013/05/04
Android version is 4.2.3
I found some info about ROM: 06_v89_hydy_dangdang_gemi
h ttp://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3662/kocl.png
h ttp://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4357/o0ph.png
If that anything means to you...
I am not trying to overclock my phone, I just want to be able to use what I've payed for. I could have bought 1,2 GHz, but I payed for this one and I want to use it, that's the poing...
Unfortunately, only after I bought it, I found all this. I didn't inform myself enough, before purchasing...
Thanks anyway
The seller is still trying to convince me that the max cpu freq is 1,8 GHz, with cpu booster, but I still cannot see or use it in any app, except that Antutu benchmark sees the 1,8 GHz as max, but still uses 1,2 GHz.
Chipset and cpu is rated to 1,2 GHz, as I saw on mt6589 reviews, so I think that I am fooled...
Good morning, my name is Jorge Martinez, I am another ezio buyer i95, I arrived with several flaws, the most serious the gps it is impossible to make it work, even after following many online tutorials.
The on / off button sometimes gets caught and resets.
The headphone connection is not good and sounds bad.
Reviewed this to the salesman told me they would give me support, etc, etc, told me I was going to wait to send another new model, gave me all kinds of options, but ultimately it only to gain time.
Once you pass the time of the vote, and has forgotten all its commitments and ripped me off.
I recommend everyone to not deal with the seller, who has only good words but deceives.
I hope my mistake serve for one to be saved from falling into this trap, but also effectively tells you it's quad core 1.8, it's actually 1.2.
Greetings all, I hope this information will be useful.
Demonstrating GPS reception via Device-Z-Test app. My S3 on the left and Ezio I95 on the right.
The latter, bought through eBay, was successfully returned to the Hong Kong exporter.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4
Ezio i95 Stock rom
Any one had ezio i95 stok rom?
ezio 95
hi,
I have read that some of the specs get rewritten within the operating system to fool antutu.
However I am also after a copy of the stock rom. I have a enzio s89 that I have bricked before I made a rom copy. This ezio i95 uses the same processor and is about the same size Maybe it will work in mine.
Are you able to download MTK droid tools and make a copy of your stock rom please. That is always worth doing in any case.
Related
So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
jonathan3579 said:
So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
greengoldmello said:
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I wonder why the app differentiates the two CPU's like that. I'm not able to come up with much info from searching for that exact CPU name other than info on the Motorola Droid X. Go figure...
I ran the benchmark and I was interested.
I hit up ARM's website and the ARMv7 falls under the Cortex A8 platform.
Now is there a difference in CPU's between the I9000 and the Vibrant I honestly cannot say. Very Very interesting though.
I wonder if anyone with a captivate can tell us what there's says I am interested in this.
Do you guys think that Samsung could have cheapened out and gave us a crappier CPU?
EDIT: I did some digging and found out that Apples A4 processor which is pretty much a hummingbird is under the ARMv7 instruction set which is a Cortex A8 processor.
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
jonathan3579 said:
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The processor will throttle itself based on demand, so yes it is totally normal to see a number less than 1000MHz
jonathan3579 said:
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Vibrant shows Current frequency as 1000MHz.
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
gsvnet said:
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So do we have any definitive answers on whether it's the same CPU that EU has? I've turned up with inconclusive results.
jonathan3579 said:
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Cortex A8 is from the ARMv7 family of processors.
Think of it like Intel i7 family of processors, and individual processors being i7 965 or i7 920 or i3, or i5 or i9, etc. or better yet like intel processors being x86, then with all the different things they add on like mmx and hyperthreading and the like being additional instruction sets. so over time x86 gets tweaked for better performance, and the other instruction sets allow for specific tasks to be run faster. hence the difference between the different arm families. that and price tag.
any mobile processor will also dynamically clock itself based on requirements at the time. I don't know the exact frequencies because I haven't cared enough to find out, but the processor downclocks itself to something like 250mhz with the screen turned off, then up to 400mhz ish with the screen on, and then up to 800-1000mhz when running any applications or games or what have you. It does this to save battery life and not run too ungodly hot.
Laptops do the exact same thing, and desktop computers as well if you enable those settings to save on power consumption.
also the cortex a8 is just the cpu itself as far as i'm aware, that does not include the dsp nor the gpu.
ALL SGS phones run the same exact processor, Samsung's custom Hummingbird processor, with the cpu being 45nm based on the Cortex a8 (ARMv7 series) with some customizations, along with the SGX 540, i don't know what their dsp is off the top of my head though.
This is interesting!
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
rench32 said:
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon is also an ARM v7 CPU. basically ARM v7 is the CPU core, Snapdragon, OMAP, Hummingbird are all SoC(Systems on a Chip), where the CPU portion is ARM based.
Motorola url: http://mediacenter.motorola.com/Fact-Sheets/Motorola-ATRIX-4G-Fact-Sheet-353b.aspx(Screenshot attached for those who are on device.)
Line of interest:
Processor: 2 processor cores running at 1GHz each
Nvidia url: http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html
Lines of interest:
CPU: Dual-Core ARM Cortex A9
Frequency: 1 GHz, per core
Does this mean we have an effective 2GHz processing power in this device.
On a side note, my laptop is a quad core 2GHz, with each core at ~500MHz adding up to 2GHz in all. So that line got be confused thinking.
I've never heard of a 500Mhz quad core processor, but I have heard of a 2Ghz quad core processor, effectively providing 8GHz of processing power.
Nah, it really doesn't work like that. Each core will only run at 1ghz MAX, the benefit to having a second (or more) cores is that while you are doing something the second core is doing background stuff and you aren't getting bogged down. Or if the app supports it it can use both. Here's where things get fun....if your app uses both cores running at 1 ghz each it can TECHNICALLY process as fast as a 2ghz SINGLE CORE but its more like you get 50%-75% more performance from the second core. So I guess TECHNICALLY it would be the same as a single core 2ghz CPU...but at the same time not really? A 2ghz single would do things faster on single tasks, but multitasking the dual core is way better IMO. Hope that helps some.
harolds said:
I've never heard of a 500Mhz quad core processor, but I have heard of a 2Ghz quad core processor, effectively providing 8GHz of processing power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check in any CPU analyzer. Mine is a quad core, and each processor gets noted as ~500 MHz. I think u can find it even in 'device manager'.
Initially I too thought that I was getting 8GHz of power in my CPU, only to find later that it was infact 500x4.
Strange, my office system (desktop) is a dual core, and shows it at each core at 3GHz. Will check once more on my laptop when I get home. This is crazy!
But good to know. Even the graphics part of it has 8 cores. Was going through the specs. It rocks!
diablo009 said:
Check in any CPU analyzer. Mine is a quad core, and each processor gets noted as ~500 MHz. I think u can find it even in 'device manager'.
Initially I too thought that I was getting 8GHz of power in my CPU, only to find later that it was infact 500x4.
Strange, my office system (desktop) is a dual core, and shows it at each core at 3GHz. Will check once more on my laptop when I get home. This is crazy!
But good to know. Even the graphics part of it has 8 cores. Was going through the specs. It rocks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure your processor hasn't been underclocked as part of some sort of battery saving feature? I don't think most applications can even utilize all 4 cores, which would mean individual applications would perform...pretty slowly. Right?
chbearsrock said:
Are you sure your processor hasn't been underclocked as part of some sort of battery saving feature? I don't think most applications can even utilize all 4 cores, which would mean individual applications would perform...pretty slowly. Right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has always been baffling me. I'll check today evening n update here. But now I am super happy abt the processor in atrix.
if you are in windows run cpu-z and post a screen shot.
skaboss610 said:
if you are in windows run cpu-z and post a screen shot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here u go.
its this processor. each core runs at a clock of 2ghz
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=40480
according that screen shot, you have
2GHZ * 4CORES = 8GHZ
so... you had 8ghz all along!
Techcruncher said:
according that screen shot, you have
2GHZ * 4CORES = 8GHZ
so... you had 8ghz all along!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aaah!!! No wonder I paid $1300 for this laptop in July 2009. And no wonder games released even in 2011 are playing so well without any frame rate issue.
Thanks for clearing this up kind sir.
[Discussion]
This thread is purely a discussion about our phone's processor ability to be overclocked.
Does anyone here have any idea how our beloved xperia mini/minipro/lww processor can be clock as high as 2GHz as opposed to its default clock speed(1GHz)? If you carefully goes beyond our phone subforums into the realms other phone you can see that much of the phone there can't be overclock as high as our phone can go. Eg; other phone with 1GHz processor can only be overclock to 1.3GHz.
Any ideas? Developers facts can be very helpful.
Sent from my Xperia Mini Pro using xda premium
Well 1600 mhz is stable for me,I will try 2000 mhz as soon I install supported rom.About 1300 mhz max for some models looks stupid to me,I didnt read post that says that.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk
XperianPro said:
Well 1600 mhz is stable for me,I will try 2000 mhz as soon I install supported rom.About 1300 mhz max for some models looks stupid to me,I didnt read post that says that.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tried 2GHz on my phone, seems to be okay w/o any instability issue.
Fortunately our phone isn't maxed out at 1.3GHz, almost all kernel for our phone support up to 2GHz, what I meant is, phone like x10 seems to be maxed out at 1.3GHz. Just small increment from 1GHz to 1.3. While our phone can go all the way up from 1GHz to 2GHz doubling its default clock speed.
Sent from my Xperia Mini Pro using xda premium
i've only tried to run benchmarks on my phone up to 1.6GHz,
did not try higher speeds because i am worried about the CPU might break...
as per x kernel latest release, they have set the limit to just 1.8GHz.
seems that would be the safest our CPUs would reach but still its not same for all units.
i am not completely aware about the technical specifics of the CPU but it seems that it could have been made that way.
the only thing that would limit the CPU capabilities is the temperature and the battery capacity, since running an overclocked CPU on a 1200mAh battery is not that efficient.
You're not exactly correct OP.
My Active, with the OC Spartan kernel, goes up to 2Ghz on my device and its perfectly stable.
On my Desire Z however, stock Mhz is 800, and i have oc'd it to 1.9Ghz stable, thats over 140% (russian election pun not intended ) oc. It is one of the most highly overclockable devices yet.
So it's not only our devices that go to 100% of stock speeds. Ill remind you that companies, take some "malfuncioning" processor chips that might have a specific part of them not working, lower their speeds to make them stable chips, and then ship them out to manufacturing.
That is why some devices dont go over 1.9Ghz. Its just a matter of quality of the CPU. I know this because back in the days of the ATI9500, which was actually a ATI9700Pro, just underclocked because a pipeline was malfunctioning, so instead of throwing them away, they locked the pipeline and sold them as a lower budget Video Card. With some tools though you could unlock the pipeline and if you were lucky you could have an ATI9700Pro in the price of a ATI9500
I have one question while we are on this topic.
Our phones have MSM8225 chipset while the Arc S has MSM8255T (clocked at 1.4 GHz). I'm curious, is there any noticeable difference between these two chipsets? If there isn't why aren't our phones clocked at 1GHz?
The reason these go by 8255 and 8255T are stated in the post i made above. Same chips, different quality. It seems that not all 8255 can be stable up to 1.4-1.5Ghz, so they released a cheaper 8255 line that is clocked at 1Ghz.
dumraden said:
The reason these go by 8255 and 8255T are stated in the post i made above. Same chips, different quality. It seems that not all 8255 can be stable up to 1.4-1.5Ghz, so they released a cheaper 8255 line that is clocked at 1Ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are completely right but I have to say that architecture has something to do as well on my old x10 mini arm6 I had a 600 MHz processor going at Max of 800 and something and now my lww arm7 can go as high as 2 ghz lol.
ginryu said:
You are completely right but I have to say that architecture has something to do as well on my old x10 mini arm6 I had a 600 MHz processor going at Max of 800 and something and now my lww arm7 can go as high as 2 ghz lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The maximum CPU clock frequency is placed by kernel developer, what he thinks is fine. It is not that phone's CPU can really put up with that high clock frequency.
Someguyfromhell said:
The maximum CPU clock frequency is placed by kernel developer, what he thinks is fine. It is not that phone's CPU can really put up with that high clock frequency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure then the cpu had nothing to do when you clock a 600 mhz cpu to 845 mhz and it crashes?? come on that is a lame thing to say in this thread
ginryu said:
Sure then the cpu had nothing to do when you clock a 600 mhz cpu to 845 mhz and it crashes?? come on that is a lame thing to say in this thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I ment, was that the actual maximal overclock frequency, where you can set it, is set by kernel developer.
You can set the CPU max frequency 1Ghz, 1.2Ghz, whatever. But the really maximum, which you can set, for example 2Ghz in Rage Kernel, 1.8Ghz in X Kernel, is set by kernel developer.
It is not tested that phone can put up with that high frequency. That is your own responsibility to try and risk.
Imagine cpus being made like cookies.Although you use the same ingredients not all cookies are baked the same, not matter how good your oven is.Cpus get out of the "oven" and tested for stability.The less stable are clocked lower, the more stable higher and that depends from the voltage they need to run and the maximum safe temperature that is allowed so the chip can last long time.So they say that chips which fall between A and B specifications (temp voltage etc...) are going to clocked to 1 GHz and those that range between C and D to 1.4 GHz.But those who are close to A are not the same as B, same with C and D.That's why some cpus clock better than others even though they're clocked at the same speed.At least that's how computer cpus were made if i recall correctly.
Its marketing trick.
Why should I buy WT19i when I can buy Arc S with higher clock rate.
Same processor because if processor is diffrent they would need to make new S1Boot,if in arc s is new bootloader patch wont work.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk
Hi all,
I have a problem with my 5770d tab.
The cpu only makes 1,2 ghz max. But it must have 1,5 ghz.
I had rooted it but any cpu app dos'nt work.
also it shows me the cpu is a arm v7 but it must be a cortex a8 i think.
can someone tell me what is wrong!?
Thx for your help and sry about my english.
Scootsch
Scootsch said:
Hi all,
I have a problem with my 5770d tab.
The cpu only makes 1,2 ghz max. But it must have 1,5 ghz.
I had rooted it but any cpu app dos'nt work.
also it shows me the cpu is a arm v7 but it must be a cortex a8 i think.
can someone tell me what is wrong!?
Thx for your help and sry about my english.
Scootsch
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking at the specs of the device it says up to 1.5 GHz max the manufacturer likely limited the max frequency to battery life and performance. To get the CPU frequency to 1.5 GHz and higher you would need a custom kernel that allows for the higher CPU clock speeds. Also the processor that is used is based on the cortex a9 architecture and uses the arm v7 instruction set (Hence where the arm v7 comes from). Let me know if you still have questions .
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Hey, thank you very much! :good:
Then i know that everything is ok.
It´s too bad that there are no Custom Kernels and Roms up today.
Hope this will change in the future.
THX and BB
Hello community,
I have installed on my Droid DNA CM10.2, without problems.
UNLOCK
S-OFF
Root
But unfortunately, I have seen that works only one of the four cores!
After a long search I found a CPU Editor for DualCores and Beta QuadCore. But unfortunately this does not at all - the version for DualCore works fine.
Has anyone similar experiences or can someone give me a tipp?
It is this mod: "CPU Editor QC Beta 1" from Smokin1337
It shouldn't need all four cores on unless you're running something that's cpu intensive. Normally it's set to use one core and as workload ramps up the other cores come online.
I run AnTuTu Benchmark and switch to CPU-Z = one core at 1512 MHz overall 25% Load!
CPU Benchmark the same result, one core and the rest ist "stopped".
Any idea?
knie said:
I run AnTuTu Benchmark and switch to CPU-Z = one core at 1512 MHz overall 25% Load!
CPU Benchmark the same result, one core and the rest ist "stopped".
Any idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's were your scores?
It seems to be a stock kernel problem, try running crpalmers kernel.
AnTuTu score (without CPU Editor) 11247 and with DualCore Fix 13978
Edit: Problem solved! Kernel update crpalmer 3.5.1 = AnTuTu score ~20.000
Thx @orangechoochoo!