Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: A10 versus A20 versus A20 , gtkperf result.

2014-04-22 Thread Siarhei Siamashka
On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 03:15:06 +0530 Rajesh Mallah wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Siarhei Siamashka < > siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 03:23:54 +0530 > > Rajesh Mallah wrote: > > > > > I also observed that a clone of the rootfs from Mele M3 to another > >

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: A10 versus A20 versus A20 , gtkperf result.

2014-04-02 Thread Rajesh Mallah
Dear Siamashka & List , executing Xorg and gtkperf in different cpus using taskset does makes a difference. It was possible to cut down from 25secs to 17secs. Now I am happy with my new toy (board) :) I will also take a closer look at your other suggestions of investigation. Thanks & Regds mall

Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: A10 versus A20 versus A20 , gtkperf result.

2014-03-26 Thread Siarhei Siamashka
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 03:23:54 +0530 Rajesh Mallah wrote: > I also observed that a clone of the rootfs from Mele M3 to another > A20 based TB Box consistently performed slower than Mele M3. > > MeleM3 :18.95 secs > Other A20: 25 secs > > the dump from a10-meminfo-static were same in bot

[linux-sunxi] Re: A10 versus A20 versus A20 , gtkperf result.

2014-03-24 Thread Rajesh Mallah
I also observed that a clone of the rootfs from Mele M3 to another A20 based TB Box consistently performed slower than Mele M3. MeleM3 :18.95 secs Other A20: 25 secs the dump from a10-meminfo-static were same in both the cases except for dram_zq param Can anyone pls explain why the dif