Charge vs. DINC2 Benchmark

I'm a little puzzled by the Charge's performance. It's quite low. So low that you think something must be wrong with either the benchmark software or the operating system. Very surprising. And I too have seen that Quadrant may not work correctly with the Charge.

But that SAMOLED+ screen does look amazing.
 
The most plausible explanation I've seen is that Samsung is using their (infamous) RFS filesystem on the Charge: this was identified as the reason Quadrant and other measurements were oddly low on the original GS series. Now whether this can be alleviated by a ROM upgrade remains to be seen (but logically it should be).

Note: Samsung uses EXT4 on the GS2, just released today. So on that phone at least, there won't be the same impediment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DolfanCole
The most plausible explanation I've seen is that Samsung is using their (infamous) RFS filesystem on the Charge: this was identified as the reason Quadrant and other measurements were oddly low on the original GS series. Now whether this can be alleviated by a ROM upgrade remains to be seen (but logically it should be).

Note: Samsung uses EXT4 on the GS2, just released today. So on that phone at least, there won't be the same impediment.

I did a little searching and I think you're right. It seems that the file system may be the culprit. I saw yesterday that the Charge has the same CPU as the Fascinate, so I'd expect the Quadrant scores to be similar. And from what I could find, they were if the Fascinate was using the stock kernel. However, when using a custom ROM, I saw people getting Quadrant scores around 1800-1900. One of the differences was the change to the EXT4 file system in the custom ROM.

If the GS2 is using EXT4, I wonder if an update to the Charge will come out that also uses EXT4. Of course, that's if there ever is an update. ;)
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
956,435
Messages
6,968,244
Members
3,163,546
Latest member
anthonycain127