FORUMS
Remove All Ads from XDA

[X51V] ROM WM6.5 Lite Classic (WWE) - optimized for a 64 M device

558 posts
Thanks Meter: 46
 
By makuu, Senior Member on 19th November 2009, 10:32 PM
Post Reply Email Thread
24th November 2009, 01:07 PM |#21  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Exclamation
Makuu here are some benchmark results for you.

Comparing E01 Lite, A11 Lite, and A11 Pro against your 6.1 A09 Gold1.

All benchmarked using SKTools on 64MB X51v.

Higher numbers are better except for SKTools loading time which you want lower.

The TCPMP test is testing video playback, higher the better.

Key:
1. Straight Test means 'straight after ROM flash'
2. After Setup means 'after making OS how I like' (did include disabling titanium and honeycomb)
3. Auto means 'CPU set to Auto'
4. Max means 'CPU set to Max'

As you can see;
Extendir does increase 'file listing' but look at the slower 'device memory read' and 6.5.x Lite can't match the 6.1 quick loading time.

In real world testing;
E01 Lite = Slow Acceleration, Average Screen Tap Response, Average hand writing in Notes, Some Jitter in Games, Screen coruption on wakeup, No taskbar Clock, QuickMenu feels Slow, Average CFCard to Device copy.
A11 Lite = Good Acceleration, Good Screen Tap Response, Good hand writing in Notes, Some Jitter in Games, QuickMenu feels Good, No taskbar Clock, Average CFCard to Device copy.
A11 Pro = QuickMenu feels Slow, Good Screen Tap Response, didn't test any further as began testing the Lite ROMs but may do these tests in future.
A09 Gold1 = Slow Acceleration, Good Screen Tap Response, Good hand writing in Notes, Good in Games, Sometimes Screen Tap would register as a double tap and also would lose 'grip' while scrolling.

Last Message;
I like the free RAM after the Lite ROM flash. I think extendir is either waste of time for 64MB X51v or is not set to right MB to gain performance. You are on the right track with WM6.5.x ROMs and A11 Lite was a major step forward. Maybe tweaking the pagepool might get the performance a bit higher, with titanium and honeycomb disabled I had 31MB to 32MB free. Although untested, if pagepool was set to 5MB then probably 29MB free, but possibly better performance? (Just speculating).

Can't wait to try your next ROM!!!
Attached Files
File Type: zip Lite Benchmarks.zip - [Click for QR Code] (188.4 KB, 115 views)
 
 
24th November 2009, 02:50 PM |#22  
OP Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Thanks for all the benchmark, so wich one is your favorite, A11 lite?

About the honeycomb, I'm not sure that it really eat memory, When I checked with or without I didn't see any difference.

I haven't test the extendir on a 64 M device so much but I can feel the value in a 128 M one.
24th November 2009, 03:09 PM |#23  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by jclampy

In real world testing;
E01 Lite = Slow Acceleration, Average Screen Tap Response, Average hand writing in Notes, Some Jitter in Games, Screen coruption on wakeup, No taskbar Clock, QuickMenu feels Slow, Average CFCard to Device copy.
A11 Lite = Good Acceleration, Good Screen Tap Response, Good hand writing in Notes, Some Jitter in Games, QuickMenu feels Good, No taskbar Clock, Average CFCard to Device copy.
A11 Pro = QuickMenu feels Slow, Good Screen Tap Response, didn't test any further as began testing the Lite ROMs but may do these tests in future.
A09 Gold1 = Slow Acceleration, Good Screen Tap Response, Good hand writing in Notes, Good in Games, Sometimes Screen Tap would register as a double tap and also would lose 'grip' while scrolling.

Last Message;
I like the free RAM after the Lite ROM flash. I think extendir is either waste of time for 64MB X51v or is not set to right MB to gain performance. You are on the right track with WM6.5.x ROMs and A11 Lite was a major step forward. Maybe tweaking the pagepool might get the performance a bit higher, with titanium and honeycomb disabled I had 31MB to 32MB free. Although untested, if pagepool was set to 5MB then probably 29MB free, but possibly better performance? (Just speculating).

Good and concise information jclampy, thanks.
In my opinion the beauty of these lite rom versions must be to can run WM6.5 or WM6.5.x as it is in a 64 Mb stock device, and having 27 or 28 Mb of free ram if possible just after flash in the first boot is the most important, but sure keeping all the hardware fully functional and with all of WM 6.5 graphic interface; in that way you can run the your programs in a 64 Mb device which clearly looks running a WM6.5. To tweak the system I had already reached before in my 64Mb device perfectly running A10-23060 (but with finger UI).
And hopefully we will can discover the truth with the size of the pagepool what is the real impact on the performance, because that is sure is that increase your available free ram decrease; so if 3.2 Mb pp perform good enough or basically not impact the performance may be this is the best size for a 64 Mb instead of 4.8 Mb or 5.0Mb; and if is real that a 16 Mb PP is the best choice for a 128 mb device, because in a 128 Mb device you will be locking or reserving 11 Mb extra a cost of this. Do you have any wider understanding of this? or have any data like your last benchmark?.
I don't my Ax's with me, are in the way to be ram upgraded (the very good A10-Build23060 let me take this decision), so at the moment I can not test anything.
24th November 2009, 03:19 PM |#24  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtal1

To tweak the system I had already reached before in my 64Mb device perfectly running A10-23060 (but with finger UI).

Just to refresh here, tweaking (the easy graphical tweaking and using a fake cprog) the full version of VOIP A10-Build 23060 I moved my free ram from 14 Mb after boot with cards installed (SD & CF) to 30 Mb. So in thes e classic version VOIP drivers are not an issue; A11 lite is which is leaving more free ram, keeping all the features of WM 6.5, so we have to see what will be the free ram on your latest A11 release (build 28002? or any other).
24th November 2009, 06:35 PM |#25  
OP Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by makuu

I've removed the download link because there's a bug in the contact application. I need to investigate why this bug appears at the en d of the rom finalization.

The link is back.
24th November 2009, 08:28 PM |#26  
Dark hanzo's Avatar
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 20
 
More
Thanks
to prove as the former manager had was contacts and is not compact with Spb Pocket Plus and discuss
greetings
24th November 2009, 09:36 PM |#27  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by makuu

Thanks for all the benchmark, so wich one is your favorite, A11 lite?

No favourite yet, I think you are on right track with getting 6.5.x working great with 64MB X51v. The free RAM straight after flash without tinkering is important in my opinion. You are nearly there, I need to try your new one now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makuu

About the honeycomb, I'm not sure that it really eat memory, When I checked with or without I didn't see any difference.

To disable honeycomb I install one of the quickmenu packages "that completely removes the honeycomb" not just hides it. Every 6.5.x ROM I have tested shows an increase in RAM from 4MB to 10MB depending on which ROM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makuu

I haven't test the extendir on a 64 M device so much but I can feel the value in a 128 M one.

Must be true, but at the moment I have not seen benefit on 64MB X51v.
24th November 2009, 09:39 PM |#28  
Dark hanzo's Avatar
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 20
 
More
Makuu
the problem with the contact manager as usual puedee not fix it you can access the
greetings
24th November 2009, 09:55 PM |#29  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtal1

And hopefully we will can discover the truth with the size of the pagepool what is the real impact on the performance, because that is sure is that increase your available free ram decrease; so if 3.2 Mb pp perform good enough or basically not impact the performance may be this is the best size for a 64 Mb instead of 4.8 Mb or 5.0Mb; and if is real that a 16 Mb PP is the best choice for a 128 mb device, because in a 128 Mb device you will be locking or reserving 11 Mb extra a cost of this. Do you have any wider understanding of this? or have any data like your last benchmark?.

Pagepool does make a difference to 'Real World' performance and in benchmarks. Even a change of 1MB or 2MB can have a noticeable impact on 64MB X51v. I have done extensive testing under WM6.1, problem is every ROM needs to be taken in its own light. IE; each ROM version release from each chef needs to be checked individually. There is no 'global' best size and no 'chef' best size. I Almost found the ultimate size for the Dynamite 6.1 A02, but have been testing Makuu's releases since his first 6.5.x ROM came out.

I have not done any pagepool testing with WM6.5.x as of yet. Although Raynda has said that the pagepool performance size is different than with WM6.1 and from what I have seen from my benchmarking I believe him.
24th November 2009, 10:04 PM |#30  
tabatt13's Avatar
Junior Member
Flag Teaneck, NJ
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
I just want to thank makuu for keeping busy and making these great ROMs for us. I have been using http://rapidshare.com/files/30745803...lassic.nb0.zip since it was dropped and am super happy it is the most rock solid WM6.5 ROM I've ever used. I was using A11: WM6.5.x VOIP Pro (23085) WWE Extended
but WM6.5.1 broke to many programs. It was super fast but older apps struggle with these later builds. I can't wait to see what will be cooked up by chef makuu next!
25th November 2009, 04:16 AM |#31  
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by jclampy

Pagepool does make a difference to 'Real World' performance and in benchmarks. Even a change of 1MB or 2MB can have a noticeable impact on 64MB X51v. I have done extensive testing under WM6.1, problem is every ROM needs to be taken in its own light. IE; each ROM version release from each chef needs to be checked individually. There is no 'global' best size and no 'chef' best size. I Almost found the ultimate size for the Dynamite 6.1 A02, but have been testing Makuu's releases since his first 6.5.x ROM came out.

I have not done any pagepool testing with WM6.5.x as of yet. Although Raynda has said that the pagepool performance size is different than with WM6.1 and from what I have seen from my benchmarking I believe him.

As there are not many data of comparison of the same rom with diffent Pagepool size, just re-checking the values of the Makuu's benchmark on the first page of this thread for A11-21876 rom with 16 Mb on a 128 mb Ram device vs the same rom-build lite version with 3.2 Mb PP on a 64 Mb device do not show that boost on performance on the base of that benchmark, in fact A11-21876 lite 3.2 Mb PP looks a little better; so may be still there is a room to make smaller PP on a 64 Mb device freeing up 1 or 2 mb more of RAM, I can say why not 1.2 Mb PP; I don't know is there is a minimum PP for Windows Mobile given by microsoft, but may be this size of PP running a lite rom version can still provide a good performance on the device, of course understanding that a 64 Mb device is not a multitask PDA. This is just more speculation, but those values of the benchmark for the two different PP sizes given by the A11-21876 is telling us something.
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread

Guest Quick Reply (no urls or BBcode)
Message:
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes