[ENG] Comparazione tra i vari Custom KERNELS

[KURTZ]

Results for SpeedMod / Phenomenal / void / N.E.A.K. / Siyah / stock kernels

Everything is specific to my phone, my "normal" usage and my home location. Most values are exact results, but some are rounded. I usually have wifi, synch (three email accounts, calendar and news), Google Talk and Skype on.
For all custom kernels, I was running on Frankenstein XWKL1 ROM (Modem: XXKL1).
For stock kernels, I was running on the corresponding stock ROM.
Always using the Samsung's standard / stock 1650mAh battery.

I just flashed Siyah v2.6.4 (out-of-the-box => no manual customizations / on default settings) and have run some benchmarks.


Here are my current results:


Benchmarks

Quadrant Standard

Phenomenal 2.1 blue: 4784
SpeedMod K2-18 (XWKK5): 4716
Phenomenal 2.1 black: 4687
void.echo (XWKK5): 4604
Phenomenal 1.0: 4585
Phenomenal 2.0: 4520
N.E.A.K. 1.2: 4232
Siyah v2.6.4: 4140
Stock XWKL1 kernel: 4036
Stock XWKK5 kernel: 3899
Stock XWKK2 kernel: 3852


NenaMark2

void.echo (XWKK5): 50,6
N.E.A.K. 1.2: 50,5
Siyah v2.6.4: 49,2
SpeedMod K2-18 (XWKK5): 48,6
Stock XWKK5 kernel: 47,8
Stock XWKK2 kernel: 47,6
Phenomenal 2.1 black: 39,8
Phenomenal 2.0: 39,8
Phenomenal 1.0: 39,4
Phenomenal 2.1 blue: 38,9
Stock XWKL1 kernel: 38,1


Vellamo

void.echo (XWKK5): 1214
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lionheart): 1212
SpeedMod K2-18 (XWKK5): 1208
Phenomenal 1.0: 1195
Phenomenal 2.1 black: 1194
Phenomenal 2.0: 1193
Phenomenal 2.1 blue: 1180
Stock XWKL1 kernel: 1173
Siyah v2.6.4: 1160
Stock XWKK5 kernel: 1160
Stock XWKK2 kernel: 1080
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lulzactive): 679

Battery stats

Night use (wifi, synch, Talk and Skype on)

Phenomenal 1.0 Extreme: Battery loss of 0,86% per hour, Awake: 6,5%, Deep sleep: 93%
Phenomenal 2.0 Extreme: Battery loss of 0,97% per hour, Awake: 6,0%, Deep sleep: 93%
Phenomenal 2.0 Extreme (XWKK5): Battery loss of 1% per hour, Awake: 7,0%, Deep sleep: 92%
K2-18 (XWKK5): Battery loss of 1,04% per hour, Awake: 8,9%, Deep sleep: 89%
XWKK5: Battery loss of 1,09% per hour, Awake: 11,6%, Deep sleep: 88%
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lionheart): Battery loss of 1,2% per hour, Awake: 8,3%, Deep sleep: 91%
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lulzactive): Battery loss of 1,22% per hour, Awake: 7,7%, Deep sleep: 91%
Phenomenal 2.1 Extreme blue: Battery loss of 1,35% per hour, Awake: 9,6%, Deep sleep: 89%
void.echo (XWKK5): Battery loss of 1,36% per hour, Awake: 13,9%, Deep sleep: 85%
Phenomenal 2.1 Extreme black: Battery loss of 1,43% per hour, Awake: 11,8%, Deep sleep: 88%
XWKK2: Battery loss of 1,44% per hour, Awake: 9,9%, Deep sleep: 89%


Mixed (day and night) usage (*)

Phenomenal 2.0 Extreme (XWKK5): Battery loss of 2,34% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 20,6%, Deep sleep: 79%, Screen: 11,7% => loss*(1-screen): 2,07%
Phenomenal 1.0 Extreme: Battery loss of 2,35% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 17,6%, Deep sleep: 82%, Screen: 8,7% => loss*(1-screen): 2,15%
XWKK2: Battery loss of 2,37% per hour, Wifi: 81,9%, Awake: 17,4%, Deep sleep: 82%, Screen: 5,9% => loss*(1-screen): 2,23%
Phenomenal 2.1 Extreme black: Battery loss of 2,53% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 20,7%, Deep sleep: 79%, Screen: 11,5% => loss*(1-screen): 2,24%
Phenomenal 2.0 Extreme: Battery loss of 2,54% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 19,8%, Deep sleep: 80%, Screen: 10,1% => loss*(1-screen): 2,28%
K2-18 (XWKK5): Battery loss of 2,53% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 18,7%, Deep sleep: 81%, Screen: 8,1% => loss*(1-screen): 2,33%
Phenomenal 2.1 Extreme blue: Battery loss of 2,58% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 20,2%, Deep sleep: 79%, Screen: 9,4% => loss*(1-screen): 2,34%
XWKK5: Battery loss of 2,58% per hour, Wifi: 96,1%, Awake: 19,5%, Deep sleep: 80%, Screen: 9,0% => loss*(1-screen): 2,35%
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lionheart): Battery loss of 2,7% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 22,5%, Deep sleep: 77%, Screen: 11,3% => loss*(1-screen): 2,39%
void.echo (XWKK5): Battery loss of 2,62% per hour, Wifi: 95,9%, Awake: 19,1%, Deep sleep: 80%, Screen: 5,2% => loss*(1-screen): 2,48%
N.E.A.K. 1.2 (Lulzactive): Battery loss of 2,9% per hour, Wifi: 100%, Awake: 21,2%, Deep sleep: 66%, Screen: 11,6% => loss*(1-screen): 2,56%


(*) In order to get a value, which allows to compare test results with different screen on times for mixed usage battery tests, I tried to „normalized“ the battery loss per hour with the following formula:
loss*(1-screen): battery loss in % (per hours) * (100% - screen on time in %)
So, it would be the battery loss in % (per hour) for the screen off time.
That is how a kernel with the same battery loss per hour will get a better/lower value, if it has more screen on time. (And the other way round.)

My first impression of Siyah v2.6.4 kernel is: It is very stable, smooth and extremely configurable. CWM Manager app is fully supported and I have never seen more settings to configure in voltage control app on any other kernel ...
Thanks gokhanmoral for that brilliant kernel !

I am running battery test right now and will post my results as soon as all my tests are finished.

P.S.: As I said before, I am running with default settings only - so nothing customized/optimized yet.
Just to get better comparable results (for different kernel versions) which can be reproduced easily.

comparazione veramente interessante.