After a number of failing Android TV boxes, I began searching for something better. I had set up an openelec box for my buddy on a CN60, and figured I'd do something similar as the hardware seemed more than performant.
My needs: Plex, Kodi, Netflix. Much of my local content is 1080p.
After successfully installing Remix OS (3.0.7) on my upgraded chromebox (celeron 2955u w/ 8gb ram) everything seemed to perform fairly snappy. Apps load quick. The OS itself loads quick. The trouble began when I started setting up plex and kodi.
SD is fine. 720p is a bit choppy but fairly smooth but 1080p files basically don't play at all. They begin to play and are choppy as heck. Audio is ok, but the video frame rate is maybe 1 frame per 30 seconds, and sometimes just stops all together.
I assume this is a limitation of the code. Has anyone worked out a solution? Does remix perform like this on higher end hardware? I have some i5's kicking about, I just wanted to use this on a machine with a smaller power and size footprint.
Weak cpu for 1080p
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
joluke said:
Weak cpu for 1080p
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plays 1080p just fine via openelec, ubuntu, or gallium.
lucaslink said:
Plays 1080p just fine via openelec, ubuntu, or gallium.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe you should the dev team to get improved support for your device then
I've got a CN60 Celeron CPU and from what I've read the only sure way to get 1080P on these devices is with a core i3 or i5 option not the Celeron. As history proves, the Celeron is a pathetic CPU except for web surfing and document creation with occasional SD video watching.
jescott418 said:
I've got a CN60 Celeron CPU and from what I've read the only sure way to get 1080P on these devices is with a core i3 or i5 option not the Celeron. As history proves, the Celeron is a pathetic CPU except for web surfing and document creation with occasional SD video watching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I stated above, the Celeron proves more than capable of playing 1080p files (streams or local) on a number of other OS'. (Currently running Gallium w/ Kodi 17 beta, its fairly snappy.) I suppose its a limitation of the Android-x86 instruction set being more geared towards newer CPU's. It should be noted that Remix OS for PC is advertised as being built to 'bring old hardware back to life', so I figured I'd pose the question to see if there was a solution other than 'get a new computer.'
lucaslink said:
As I stated above, the Celeron proves more than capable of playing 1080p files (streams or local) on a number of other OS'. (Currently running Gallium w/ Kodi 17 beta, its fairly snappy.) I suppose its a limitation of the Android-x86 instruction set being more geared towards newer CPU's. It should be noted that Remix OS for PC is advertised as being built to 'bring old hardware back to life', so I figured I'd pose the question to see if there was a solution other than 'get a new computer.'
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then check which drivers are being loaded by the OSes and see if there's anything standing out.
Related
Just a quick question from someone who is new to this kinda scene, just curious if anyone knows if its possible to run LoL on my eee pad prime (not using a remote rdc though) if i installed linux and used wine would this work? (or are there any other possibilities)
Looking at the minimum system requirements:
Minimum System Requirements
2 GHz processor
1 GB RAM (Windows Vista and 7 users will want 2 GB of RAM or more)
750 MB available hard disk space
Shader version 2.0 capable video card
Support for DirectX v9.0c or better
Windows XP, Windows Vista, or Windows 7 (Mac OS is currently not supported)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't see being able to play this game on the Prime, especially via Wine.
Only processor speed will be questionable. We do have quad core though. Once we overclock even higher, 2ghz will be easily obtained, it will be possible. That will be dependent of how well a dual boot of Ubuntu will be. Right now it runs alongside android so it shares CPU power etc...Once we dual boot, then ubuntu will have full access to whatever CPU/gpu power it needs. Then it'll just be a manner of getting LoL to load/install on it. Those other specs prime already has or better. PRIME is a beast. Alot more powerful than people may realize. Especially now that we already overclocked to 1.6ghz without even a custom rom or bootloader unlocked. It'll only get better from here. I'd say we doing great, developement wise, in Prime first month of usage. OVERCLOCK, root, ICS, Ubuntu, Fedora, Linux(Backtrk5), added drivers, themes, n so on.
The problem here is you will be trying to run an x86 game on ARM. I'm not sure if x86 emulators even exist to the required standard to even attempt this, but even if they do then you'll likely need a machine with way more power than the prime. Probably 3-5 times at least.
Emulating is very resource demanding.
Thanks for the replies everyone im looking forward to seeing what the prime can do in the near future, i do really enjoy having one, i cant wait untill everything runs perfect with it (rdcs with keyboard bindings for the dock, alt/esc and left/right click working properly) thanks again everyone
Last summer, I decided to buy a Nexus 7 for using it mainly as an ebook reader. It's perfect for that with its very sharp 1280x800 screen. It was my first Android device and I love this little tablet.
I'm a fan of retro gaming and I installed emulators on every device I have: Pocket PC, Xbox, PSP Go, iPhone, iPad3, PS3. So I discovered that the Android platform was one of the most active community for emulation fans like me and I bought many of them, and all those made by Robert Broglia (.EMU series). They were running great on the N7 but I found that 16GB was too small, as was the screen.
I waited and waited until the 32 GB Nexus 10 became available here in Canada and bought it soon after (10 days ago). With its A15 cores, I was expecting the N10 to be a great device for emulation but I am now a little disapointed. When buying the N10, I expected everything to run faster than on the N7 by a noticeable margin.
Many emulators run slower on the N10 than on the N7. MAME4Ddroid and MAME4Droid reloaded are no longer completely smooth with more demanding ROMs, Omega 500, Colleen, UAE4droid and SToid are slower and some others needed much more tweaking than on the N7. I'm a little extreme on accuracy of emulation and I like everything to be as close to the real thing as possible. A solid 60 fps for me is a must (or 50 fps for PAL machines).
On the other side, there are other emus that ran very well: the .EMU series and RetroArch for example. These emulators are much more polished than the average quick port and they run without a flaw. They're great on the 10-inch screen and I enjoy them very much. The CPU intensive emulators (Mupen64Plus AE and FPSE) gained some speed but less that I anticipated.
So is this because of the monster Nexus 10's 2560x1600 resolution? Or is it because of limited memory bandwith? Maybe some emulators are not tweaked for the N10 yet. I wish some emulators had the option to set a lower resolution for rendering and then upscale the output. I think that many Android apps just try to push the frames to the native resolution without checking first if there is a faster way.
The N7 has a lower clocked 4 core CPU but has only 1/4 the resolution. I think that it's a more balanced device that the N10 which may have a faster dual core CPU but too much pixels to push. It's much like the iPad3 who was twice as fast as the iPad2 but had a 4x increase in resolution.
I am now considering going for a custom ROM on the N10 but I wonder if I will see an increase in emulation speed. Maybe those of you who did the jump can tell me. I'm thinking about AOKP maybe.
Any suggestion on that would be appreciated, thanks!
The emulators just need to be tweaked a bit to better perform on the completely different processor architecture. Really our processor is far more powerful than the Nexus 7 so the emulators should run faster. I too am a fan of the old games, and I play Super Nintendo and Game Boy Advance (and some Color) games quite often. I find performance to be perfect with no issues at all, but then again those arent exactly "demanding" emulators.
We do not have any sort of memory bandwidth limitation on the Nexus 10. The tablet has been designed to give the full needed 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth that is required for 2560x1600 resolution.
EniGmA1987 said:
The emulators just need to be tweaked a bit to better perform on the completely different processor architecture. Really our processor is far more powerful than the Nexus 7 so the emulators should run faster. I too am a fan of the old games, and I play Super Nintendo and Game Boy Advance (and some Color) games quite often. I find performance to be perfect with no issues at all, but then again those arent exactly "demanding" emulators.
We do not have any sort of memory bandwidth limitation on the Nexus 10. The tablet has been designed to give the full needed 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth that is required for 2560x1600 resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Having to render to that size of screen [2560x1600] will slow the game down. It’s called being ‘fill rate bound’. Even for a good processor it's a lot of work as the game uses quite a lot of overdraw.
The solution is to draw everything to a smaller screen (say half at 1280x800) and then stretch the final image to fill the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A sad true my nexus 10 get dam hot and i have to play games at 1.4 or 1.2 that sux
Sent from my XT925 using xda app-developers app
espionage724 said:
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But fillrate isnt memory bandwidth. We need both more MHz and more raster operations to get higher fill rate of pixels per second. We can overclock the GPU to get the MHz, and that will help, but we have to find a way to solve the higher heat output too from that. More ROP's are impossible as it is a hardware design for how many we have. If we ever get to overclock up to around 750 MHz then we should see a 30-40% improvement in fill rate. At that point we may have memory bandwidth problems, but we wont know for sure until we get there. But the 12.8GB/s of bandwidth that we currently have is enough to support 2560x1600 resolution at our current GPU power. Our Nexus 10 also has the highest fillrate of any Android phone or tablet to date, about 1.4 Mtexel/s. And if we have memory bandwidth limitations, then we would see no improvement at all from the current overclock we do have up to 612-620MHz because the speed wouldnt be where the bottleneck is. Yet we can clearly see in benchmarks and real gaming that we get FPS increases with higher MHz, thus our current problem is the fillrate and not the memory bandwidth.
Also, the solution is not to render the game at half the resolution as that is a band-aid on the real problem. If the developer of a game would code the game properly we wouldnt have this problem, or if they dont feel like doing that then they should at least stop trying to put more into the game than their un-optimized, lazy project is capable of running nicely.
espionage724 said:
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With that logic you could buy any video card for a PC and it would run any game at the resolution the video card supports. That isn't the case because rendering involves more than just memory fill rate. There are textures, polygons, multiple rendering passes, filtering, it goes on and on. As EniGmA1987 mentioned nothing has been optimized to take advantage of this hardware yet, developers were literally crossing their fingers hoping their games would run 'as is'. thankfully the A15 cpu cores in the exynos will be used in the tegra 4 as well so we can look forward to the CPU optimizations soon which will definitely help.
Emulators are more cpu intensive than anything else, give it a little time and you won't have any problems with your old school games. Run the new 3DMark bench to see what this tablet can do, it runs native resolution and its not even fully optimized for this architecture yet.
2560*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth. Most emulators don't use 3D functions so fillrate, rendering, overdraw won't be a factor. Most emulators are single-threaded (correct me if I'm wrong) and the A15 should shine in this particular situation and even more so in multi-threaded scenarios. With its out-of-order pipeline and greatly enhanced efficiency it should be perfectly suited for the job.
We have the fillrate, we have enough CPU power and I'm still wondering why simple app like emulators aren't much faster than that. Is it Android? Is it the Dalvik VM? Or is it because some emulators need to be written in native code instead of using Java VM? I'm not a developer and I have only minimal knowledge in this department. I can only speculate but I'm curious enough about it that I started googling around to find why.
Lodovik said:
2560*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just curious but what is that calculation supposed to be? total bandwidth needed? Cause I don't see your bit depth in there, unless the 4 is supposed to be that? If that is true than you are calculating on 4-bit color depth?
And then the result would just be bandwidth required for pixel data to memory wouldnt it? It wouldnt include texture data in and out of memory and other special functions like post processing.
2560*1600 = number of pixels on the screen
4 = bytes / pixels for 32-bits depth
60 = frames / second
/1024/1024 = divide twice to get the result in MB
Actually, I made a typo the result is 937,5 MB/s or 0.92 GB/s. This is just a rough estimate to get an idea of what is needed at this resolution just to push the all pixels on the screen in flat 2D at 60 fps, assuming that emulators don't use accelerated functions.
My point was that with 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwith, we should have more than enough even if this estimate isn't very accurate.
Thanks for the explanation
If there really were a memory bandwidth limitation the newer Trinity kernels and newest KTManta should help. In addition to the higher GPU speed they both allow (KTManta up to 720MHz) both ROM's have increased memory speeds which increase memory bandwidth to 13.8GB/s, up from 12.8 on stock.
Thanks for the info. There's so many configuration options available for the Nexus 10. I really enjoy having all those possibilities.
EniGmA1987 said:
If there really were a memory bandwidth limitation the newer Trinity kernels and newest KTManta should help. In addition to the higher GPU speed they both allow (KTManta up to 720MHz) both ROM's have increased memory speeds which increase memory bandwidth to 13.8GB/s, up from 12.8 on stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
=Lodovik;40030*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth. Most emulators don't use 3D functions so fillrate, rendering, overdraw won't be a factor. Most emulators are single-threaded (correct me if I'm wrong) and the A15 should shine in this particular situation and even more so in multi-threaded scenarios. With its out-of-order pipeline and greatly enhanced efficiency it should be perfectly suited for the job.
We have the fillrate, we have enough CPU power and I'm still wondering why simple app like emulators aren't much faster than that. Is it Android? Is it the Dalvik VM? Or is it because some emulators need to be written in native code instead of using Java VM? I'm not a developer and I have only minimal knowledge in this department. I can only speculate but I'm curious enough about it that I started googling around to find why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are taking what I said out of context. I was responding to someone else, thus the "quote" above my post.
Since you posted I loaded up some Super Nintendo, N64, and PlayStation games on my n10 without any issues. It may just be your setup. There are a lot of tweaks out there that could easily increase performance. One great and very simple one is enabling 2D GPU rendering which is in developer options. Just do some searching. GPU Overclocking won't help much, as you said above your games are only 2D. I am sure you can get them running just fine.
will it finally support NVIDIA cards?
Same question
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I installed the Beta today on an sd card and it booted and runs great. I have a lenovo 510p which rocks nvidia gpus. The alphas had trouble booting, but the beta seems fine. I think they did this by disabling the the nvidia and enabling the intel gpubecause when I ran AnTuTu the gpu score was really low for nvidia gaming gpus.
ajayzone2 said:
will it finally support NVIDIA cards?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a 960gtx and it's working for me although I don't think it's using video acceleration, or if it is then it seems slow. Played Samurai Vengeance and it played but seemed laggy. Also can't play videos in mxplayer, it just closes.
Any android apps that can actually use the power of nvidia cards? Some 3d games that I thought looked great on phone looked well not so good on the big screen. The old intel integrated does not seem to have any issue running them.
I also have a GTX 960 and it doesnt work. It uses VMware graphics acceleration instead, which are very laggy. I enabled the onboard Intel HD gpu and this makes everything very smooth, including games.
Aerys said:
I also have a GTX 960 and it doesnt work. It uses VMware graphics acceleration instead, which are very laggy. I enabled the onboard Intel HD gpu and this makes everything very smooth, including games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know, if we want the RemixOS support Nvidia, we should waiting for Linux Kernel 4.6.
Based on http://phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-Blobs-In-Linux-Firmware Phoronix info. The new Nouveau driver that supported Maxwell will land for linux 4.6 kernel.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Aerys said:
I also have a GTX 960 and it doesnt work. It uses VMware graphics acceleration instead, which are very laggy. I enabled the onboard Intel HD gpu and this makes everything very smooth, including games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
huh....are you running RemixOS in vmware?
My Alienware X51 has an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660...which runs RemixOS at my display's native resolution, 1920x1080 using the nouveau flags.
My other PC has an NVIDIA QUADRO K2000 GPU which boots RemixOS fine without any error....without any extra flags at all.
Full HD videos plays without any problem....don't know about youtube and streaming videos as it does not detect my usb wifi dongle.
Most 3D (HD) games runs fine too.
Hi, I've tried running Remix OS off a USB stick on a pretty rubbish old emachines laptop with an AMD Athlon 2650e and a Mobility Radeon X1200. I get constant flickering and black triangles all over the screen. I get no issues if I boot with nomodeset but it is extremely low res and laggy. Any ideas on how to fix this? Cheers.
Yeah...no. Jide considers PCs as having Intel only hardware: Intel CPU and Intel graphics.
NVidia and AMD are not Intel so they are not PCs - so no support.
Really it should be called "Remix OS for old Intel laptops" instead of "Remix OS for PC".
Connor_Price said:
Hi, I've tried running Remix OS off a USB stick on a pretty rubbish old emachines laptop with an AMD Athlon 2650e and a Mobility Radeon X1200. I get constant flickering and black triangles all over the screen. I get no issues if I boot with nomodeset but it is extremely low res and laggy. Any ideas on how to fix this? Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, you're going to have to use nomodeset for the time being until more drivers are added to Remix OS.
-BoneZ- said:
Unfortunately, you're going to have to use nomodeset for the time being until more drivers are added to Remix OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But let's be complete in this answer. Using nomodeset when not having an integrated graphics card means CPU overheat as every simple and singular animation on the screen will be rendered by the CPU. Even if you have the best Intel Core i7 with Hyperthreading technology and latest overclocking ASUS or MSI gaming motherboards - it will be of no use. Your system will crawl while running Remix OS and the CPU will overheat.
Do not take lightly the overheat issue. I almost fried my CPU because I left it update all my Android apps with the Google Play Store on the screen. Remember all those download animations in the Google Play Store app while updating? Yeah...my CPU was screaming at 70-80 degrees for about 10 minutes. 10 minutes while updating 5 apps - because WiFi is also a ***** in Remix OS. Enjoy...
or29544 said:
But let's be complete in this answer. Using nomodeset when not having an integrated graphics card means CPU overheat as every simple and singular animation on the screen will be rendered by the CPU. Even if you have the best Intel Core i7 with Hyperthreading technology and latest overclocking ASUS or MSI gaming motherboards - it will be of no use. Your system will crawl while running Remix OS and the CPU will overheat.
Do not take lightly the overheat issue. I almost fried my CPU because I left it update all my Android apps with the Google Play Store on the screen. Remember all those download animations in the Google Play Store app while updating? Yeah...my CPU was screaming at 70-80 degrees for about 10 minutes. 10 minutes while updating 5 apps - because WiFi is also a ***** in Remix OS. Enjoy...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With a crappy Athlon processor using nomodeset seemed like everything was running at less than a frame per second. The thing gets hot enough as it is. I've tried Chromium, Remix and Android x86 and every one has the same graphics issue. Guess I'll have to go back to something like Linux lite. Even that manages to lag.
Connor_Price said:
With a crappy Athlon processor using nomodeset seemed like everything was running at less than a frame per second. The thing gets hot enough as it is. I've tried Chromium, Remix and Android x86 and every one has the same graphics issue. Guess I'll have to go back to something like Linux lite. Even that manages to lag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I said before, go buy a Chromebook. It's cheap as a very old second-hand laptop and it works great. You will soon get Android Play Store so you'll be able to run all your favorite Android apps. Plus you will get guaranteed quality and an officially supported Google device. Throw away your old PC - you don't need it anymore. There's nothing to justify keeping it around. With Remix OS you'll always run into hardware issues. Get a new, cheap, properly supported device. 200 EUR for a new, good looking, fully supported and that will soon have all Android Play Store - what are you waiting for?
EDIT: sorry if that sounded like a bad and cheap commercial. It's just that I don't understand the need for a hacked, lacking, limited Remix OS when we have the official Google supported solution: Chromebooks.
Hi! I've installed RemixOS in my Asus Zenbook UX501VW and after dealing with NVIDIA incompatibilities and DPI scaling issues, I've finally booted it. While everything seems to work quite great, there's a strange problem that makes me turn off the laptop after a few minutes of usage: The fans start spinning at full speed (they don't do that noise even rendering 4K games in Windows). The laptop doesn't get warm or even make weird things, it just works fine! I can't live with that spinning because it's way too loud, more than the actual built-in, although crappy, B&O speakers. I don't do anything wrong for this, It just starts making noise right after finishing the boot process. The noise is pretty similar to the fan noise while upgrading a BIOS in almost any fan-powered laptop, which leads me to think that something between the BIOS and RemixOS is not communicating properly.
Laptop Specs:
CPU: Intel Core i7 (6th Gen) 6700HQ / 2.6 GHz
RAM: 16GB
DISPLAY: 4K IPS LG Screen
DRIVE: 512GB Samsung SSD
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M - 2 GB GDDR5 SDRAM
Model: ASUS ZENBOOK PRO UX501VW-DS71T
Thanks in advance!
The reason is mostly related to no use of GPU and your CPU is taking care of graphics rendering.
You are probably using the option:
androidboot.swrast=1
to boot.
Try EXTMOD=i915 in the grub.cfg instead of androidboot.swrast=1
maxiclo said:
The reason is mostly related to no use of GPU and your CPU is taking care of graphics rendering.
You are probably using the option:
androidboot.swrast=1
to boot.
Try EXTMOD=i915 in the grub.cfg instead of androidboot.swrast=1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your reply!
Nothing, just hangs right after the "android" word.
galaxynote2 said:
Thanks for your reply!
Nothing, just hangs right after the "android" word.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got you! If it boot with androidboot.swrast=1 however the fan spinning is due to CPU overloaded in managing the video.
You can search this thread for confirmation.
The option I suggested works if you have Intel internal GPU beside the NVIDIA.
Probably we need to wait next release. Remix team seems working to fix it.
maxiclo said:
Got you! If it boot with androidboot.swrast=1 however the fan spinning is due to CPU overloaded in managing the video.
You can search this thread for confirmation.
The option I suggested works if you have Intel internal GPU beside the NVIDIA.
Probably we need to wait next release. Remix team seems working to fix it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well yes, I have Intel integrated graphics (I think it's the Intel HD 530 IIRC) but it seems that the laptop forces the Nvidia chip to run first. Even forcing the Integrated graphics to run it will not boot, The only way to get it booting is by disabling both and let the CPU do all the work. Some laptops have an option to set the priority video mode, but mine doesn't seems to have such option. So yes, the best thing to do is wait until Remix OS team manages to fix this.. thanks!