Note:
Great write-up from
@Mostafa Wael
HMP vs EAS - OxygenOS 4.1.3 stable
Right here we go!
First things first, this is a comparison between two kernels and NOT just two different scheduling systems. With the latter being undeniably the biggest difference between RenderKernel and the stock kernel, changes can extend to other default settings, should
@RenderBroken choose to do so. One of which is the default choice of BFQ I/O scheduler instead of the default CFQ I/O scheduler of stock kernel. If you want to have a quick debrief of what (the current implementation of) EAS is all about, read this post here
MMX Hill Dash
HMP - most of the time the game is mainly operated by the big cluster while the little cluster is mostly at the lower end of the frequency table, hovering around the absolute minimum frequency of 307 MHz for most of the time. The big cluster however was noticeably more active, hovering around 1.25 GHz to 1.55 GHz with rare dips below 1 GHz and slightly more often spikes to 1.7 GHz and above. So to sum up HMP's management of the CPU in this particular game, it is safe to state that the game is more or less solely operated by the big cluster, running mostly on the intermediate frequency steps between 1.25 GHz and 1.55 GHz with occasional spikes to 1.7+ GHz and much scarcer dips to sub 1 GHz. As far as performance goes, there are no major complaints. The game runs incredibly smoothly and the game is loaded in a reasonably quick manner; launching the game takes between 8s and 10s from the get-go.
EAS - It's remarked that all 4 cores are active when playing this game, unlike HMP, with the little cluster spending almost all of the time at the 1.11 GHz step with very rare dips to the minimum frequency. While that may sound like a bummer, there is an upside to the surprisingly increased activity of the little cluster. Apparently the big cores have some of the loaded lifted, since the big cluster is being utilised at noticeably lower frequency steps compared to HMP, staying on the 1.11 GHz frequency step much more often, otherwise roaming between 1.25 GHz and 1.55 GHz with very scarce spikes to the max frequency. Like HMP, the game runs flawlessly with no major complaints and surprisingly the game is loaded just as quick as HMP too, if not a tad quicker sometimes! Crikey!
True Skate
HMP - Both clusters are heavily fluctuating with no predictable trend. However, it is quite noticeable that the big cluster can hit the high end of the frequency table quite often. Little cluster is relatively less active, but it is not that dormant either. With that said, it is no wonder that the game runs silky-smooth. However, there were some instances where the frame rate would suddenly drop to around 40-45 fps for mere seconds, where the cause has been determined to be some background tasks being executed like Play Store checking for whether there are apps need to be updated, and social media apps refreshing in the background. Theoretically such an issue would not exist on EAS due to cleverer tasks placement techniques to avoid overstressing the CPU.
EAS - Both clusters spend most of their time at the 1.11 GHz frequency step, with the big cluster ramping up to the max frequency for a considerable amount of time. With that said, a natural consequence would be witnessing one of the most consistently smooth and fluid gaming sessions of that particular game. And even with lots of background processes taking their toll on the silicon, performance is not hindered by any means.
Browsing via Chrome
HMP - Flinging through the webpage will immediately crank up the big cores to max frequency straight away till the content is loaded. Should there be a video to be buffered, the big cores keep operating at medium high frequencies between 1.25 GHz and max frequency with rare dips to minimum frequency. Once all contents are loaded, the big cores gradually get toned down and caged into the lower end of the frequency table. The little cores on the other hand are not wrestling with the controls surprisingly enough, rather sitting most of the time comfortably at 0.96 GHz to 1.1 GHz, with a considerable amount of time spent on the lowest two frequency steps of 307 MHz and 422 MHz. Scrolling through the webpage is reasonably smooth, though sometimes it tends to be a bit unresponsive and wonky if a lot of interactions were present or a lot of content are being loaded while scrolling. As far as battery backup goes, there is no escape that such a task would sip a lot of juice from that tank. And at 18%/hr, there is a lot to be desired when it comes to efficiency, bearing in mind that such a high active drain rate does not guarantee you a flawless silky-smooth UI.
EAS - Like HMP, flinging through the webpage will engage the big cores fully till the page contents are loaded. However, unlike HMP, the big cores do fade out quite faster when the page contents are loaded successfully. Things get much better when there is a video to be streamed, where the video is mainly handled by the little cluster while the big cluster is impressively tamed and utilised at sub 1 GHz frequencies, 0.7 GHz on average, while the little cluster lifts the burden from the furious big cores, operating at frequencies between 1.1 GHz and max frequency of 1.59 GHz. Scrolling through the pages is silky smooth with no hiccups of any sort, even when loading a lot of content while stubbornly scrolling the page, it does not stutter as much as it does on HMP. However, things are not all rosy when it comes to battery drain. Web browsing is undeniably demanding, which makes it logical to see a not-so-impressive 17%/hr drain rate. While it may sound marginally better, web browsing inevitably does take its toll on the battery for sure, and things are not that drastically better when it comes to battery conserving. However, when you couple that with the increased fluidity and consistency gained, EAS is the clear victor.
YouTube streaming
HMP - For such a medium/light workload, it is no wonder seeing the little cluster being noticeably more active than the big cluster, where it spends most of the time on the lower end of the frequency spectrum, with more than 60% spent on the lowest 2 frequency steps of 422 MHz and 307 MHz. However, there were some occasional bumps to a rather unexpectedly higher frequency of 960 MHz, taking around 11% of the total time. While the big cluster was relatively quite dormant, it was not asleep either. With around 7% of the time spent on 1.25 GHz, it is far from being asleep, which raises some eyebrows for sure. It's not that grim though. At 11.6%/hr drain rate, it's highly unlikely to find your phone depleted before lapping some 9 episodes of your favourite TV series, which in my case was the old Top Gear UK.
EAS - Surprisingly enough, there are almost no tangible improvements in battery life while streaming some videos on YouTube. With the consistently reported figure of 11.3%/hr by EXKM battery monitor, I am struggling to say anything other than the fact that battery life is very similar to that of HMPs. Moreover, the frequency distribution is not that all different either. Little cluster is expectedly sitting most of the time at the lowest two frequency steps with much shorter duration at the 480, 556 and 652 MHz steps. Same goes for the big cluster as well, with respective frequency steps considered of course. But rest assured, it is still as highly unlikely to miss out a season of your favourite TV series as with HMP.
Overall battery life
HMP - in the past couple of days, I often read a value between 14%/hr and 16%/hr in EXKM's battery monitor with my mixed not-so-light usage, which is pretty much decent though not perfect and definitely leaves something to be desired in that area. But since I get more than 5 hrs SOT at the end of the day with some little juice left in the tank at the end of the day, I think it is safe to say battery life is good enough for the overwhelming majority of users
EAS - While people may think this is pure EAS terrain, results are not dramatically different from what you get from HMP. Surprisingly enough, I often stumble across an active drain rate between 13%/hr and 15%/hr with approximately the same usage pattern, which is 3%/hr less than what you get from HMP in the best cases. This is a substantial improvement, make no mistake, but that may not live up to the expectations from an energy aware scheduling system. However, an area where EAS truly shines is screen-on idling. Not only does the CPU retreat to the minimum frequency quite quickly, but also remains utterly dormant with absolutely no random spikes, causing a dramatic decrease in the battery drain. This is purely e-book readers heaven for sure! The same cannot be said about HMP for sure.
let's get to the numbers...
App launches
[HMP]
PCMark: (7.13 + 8.32 + 6.65 + 7.00 + 7.85)/5 = 7.39 sec
Slack: (1.60 + 1.78 + 1.79 + 1.65 + 1.75)/5 = 1.71 sec
YouTube: (1.40 + 1.44 + 1.41 + 1.44 + 1.45)/5 = 1.43 sec
Telegram: (0.65 + 0.72 + 0.70 + 0.54 + 0.61)/5 = 0.64 sec
WhatsApp: (1.28 + 0.72 + 1.27 + 1.34 + 1.28)/5 = 0.91 sec
Hangouts: (1.38 + 1.34 + 1.31 + 1.34 + 1.38)/5 = 1.35 sec
Dropbox: (1.25 + 1.26 + 1.37 + 1.22 + 1.21)/5 = 1.26 sec
Chrome: (1.18 + 1.36 + 1.19 + 1.50 + 1.38)/5 = 1.32 sec
Keep: (0.94 + 1.03 + 0.97 + 0.94 + 0.97)/5 = 0.97 sec
MMX Hill Dash: (7.56 + 12.87 + 12.09 + 11.60 + 10.81)/5 = 10.99 sec
Twitter: (1.69 + 1.81 + 1.90 + 1.66 + 1.91)/5 = 1.79 sec
True Skate: (1.60 + 1.69 + 1.62 + 1.59 + 1.54)/5 = 1.61 sec
XDA Labs: (1.41 + 1.53 + 1.47 + 1.48 + 1.52)/5 = 1.48 sec
Test has been done with no active Internet connections (WiFi and mobile data turned off) to ensure that the phone is not bottlenecked by anything but the I/O and the CPU
CPU governor is Interactive with stock settings and I/O scheduler set to CFQ with 512 KB read ahead buffer size
[EAS]
PCMark: (9.13 + 9.63 + 9.50 + 9.84 + 9.50)/5 = 9.52 sec
Slack: (1.66 + 1.79 + 1.69 + 1.75 + 1.85)/5 = 1.75 sec
YouTube: (1.66 + 1.69 + 1.63 + 1.62 + 1.69)/5 = 1.66 sec
Telegram: (0.69 + 0.66 + 0.63 + 0.59 + 0.78)/5 = 0.67 sec
WhatsApp: (0.75 + 1.19 + 1.16 + 0.97 + 1.21)/5 = 1.06 sec
Hangouts: (1.34 + 1.29 + 1.36 + 1.25 + 1.31)/5 = 1.31 sec
Dropbox: (1.40 + 0.84 + 0.86 + 0.85 + 0.87)/5 = 0.96 sec
Chrome: (1.32 + 1.37 + 1.39 + 1.56 + 1.32)/5 = 1.39 sec
Keep: (0.97+ 0.91 + 0.85 + 0.93 + 0.84)/5 = 0.90 sec
MMX Hill Dash: (11.31 + ---) the game refuses to launch seamlessly, to be investigated later..
Twitter: (2.25 + 2.53 + 2.50 + 2.57 + 2.37)/5 = 2.44 sec
True Skate: (2.00 + 1.58 + 1.71 + 1.75 + 1.74)/5 = 1.76 sec
XDA Labs: (1.72 + 1.44 + 1.47 + 1.53 + 1.43)/5 = 1.52 sec
Test has been done with no active Internet connections (WiFi and mobile data turned off) to ensure that the phone is not bottlenecked by anything but the I/O and the CPU
CPU governor is Schedutil with stock settings and I/O scheduler set to BFQ with 512 KB read ahead buffer size
.
Synthetic Benchmarks
[HMP]
AnTuTu: 148,471
Geekbench 4.1.0: 1733 + 4191
Vellamo - Multicore: 3215
Vellamo - Metal: 3541
Vellamo - Chrome: 4825
[EAS]
AnTuTu: 143840
Geekbench 4.1.0: 1740 + 3290
Vellamo - Multicore: 2511
Vellamo - Metal: 3569
Vellamo - Chrome: 4350
This test was conducted with RenderKernel-OP3-OOS-N-EAS-R1-WALT and OnePlus's inbuilt kernel. OxygenOS version used was OOS 4.1.3 STABLE
Coming up next is a brief technical breakdown of OOS's behind-the-scenes stuff and how OnePlus fiddled around with them by XDA member
@chinmai560621 .
Hope such an analysis benefits someone here. Sorry for the delay, but i have been double slapped by life for the past couple of weeks every day....
