[KERNEL] 2.6.29, ~1600MHz, >1000 Quadrant - Fascinate Android Development
I removed the link as well as the kernel images. You would be better off running a kernel found in ROM manager. That being said, I would like to leave this along with a link to the Samsung S5PC110 technical document: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/13699504/S5PC110_EVT1_UM10.pdf
For those brave enough to tweak their own, I present to you the locations of things to change.
PART 1: CPU AND OTHER ARM SUBSYSTEM FREQUENCIES
First off, there are three files you will want to look at and become familiar with: s5pc110-clock.c is the code that will control the CPU frequency. s5pc11x-dvfs.c controls the throttling thresholds for switching from one mode to another. max8998_consumer.c controls voltage levels for the Maxim 8998 voltage regulator. Although it doesn't state granulatrity, I've assumed it to be 25-unit increments measured in mV.
s5pc110-clock.c:
Code:
/*APLL_FOUT, MPLL_FOUT, ARMCLK, HCLK_DSYS*/
static const u32 s5p_sysout_clk_tab_1GHZ[][4] = {
// APLL:1000,ARMCLK:1000,HCLK_MSYS:200,MPLL:667,HCLK_DSYS:166,HCLK_PSYS:133,PCLK_MSYS:100,PCLK_DSYS:83,PCLK_PSYS:66
{1066* MHZ, 667 *MHZ, 1066 *MHZ, 166 *MHZ},
// APLL:800,ARMCLK:800,HCLK_MSYS:200,MPLL:667,HCLK_DSYS:166,HCLK_PSYS:133,PCLK_MSYS:100,PCLK_DSYS:83,PCLK_PSYS:66
{800* MHZ, 667 *MHZ, 800 *MHZ, 166 *MHZ},
// APLL:800,ARMCLK:400,HCLK_MSYS:200,MPLL:667,HCLK_DSYS:166,HCLK_PSYS:133,PCLK_MSYS:100,PCLK_DSYS:83,PCLK_PSYS:66
{400* MHZ, 667 *MHZ, 400 *MHZ, 166 *MHZ},
// APLL:800,ARMCLK:200,HCLK_MSYS:200,MPLL:667,HCLK_DSYS:166,HCLK_PSYS:133,PCLK_MSYS:100,PCLK_DSYS:83,PCLK_PSYS:66
{200* MHZ, 667 *MHZ, 200 *MHZ, 166 *MHZ},
// APLL:800,ARMCLK:100,HCLK_MSYS:100,MPLL:667,HCLK_DSYS:83,HCLK_PSYS:66,PCLK_MSYS:50,PCLK_DSYS:66,PCLK_PSYS:66
{100* MHZ, 667 *MHZ, 100 *MHZ, 133 *MHZ},
};
#define DIV_TAB_MAX_FIELD 12
//yhkim hack from TR note. We got TechnicalReport-S5PC110_Android_DRAMin_DVFSlevel4.doc.
//please check it. we change last value to 7. original val is 4 in s5p_sys_clk_div0_tab_1GHZ.
/*div0 ratio table*/
/*apll, a2m, HCLK_MSYS, PCLK_MSYS, HCLK_DSYS, PCLK_DSYS, HCLK_PSYS, PCLK_PSYS, MFC_DIV, G3D_DIV, MSYS source(2D, 3D, MFC)(0->apll,1->mpll), DMC0 div*/
static const u32 s5p_sys_clk_div0_tab_1GHZ[][DIV_TAB_MAX_FIELD] = {
{0, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3},
{0, 3, 3, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3},
{1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3},
{3, 3, 0, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3},
{7, 7, 0, 0, 7, 0, 9, 0, 3, 3, 1, 7},
};
/*pms value table*/
/*APLL(m, p, s), MPLL(m, p, s)*/
static const u32 s5p_sys_clk_mps_tab_1GHZ[][6] = {
{266, 6, 1, 667, 12, 1},
{200, 6, 1, 667, 12, 1},
{200, 6, 1, 667, 12, 1},
{200, 6, 1, 667, 12, 1},
{200, 6, 1, 667, 12, 1},
};
PART 2: VOLTAGES
The only things I've found worthy of noting about how to enter values in here are:
1) The clock speed can be anything you want it to be.
2) The voltage in frequency_match_1GHZ (same line as frequency) might not be used to set the voltage gates. It may be used only to report to /proc/cpuinfo or other monitoring systems (SetCPU).
3) The third column is either 1100 or 1000. So far, it's always 1100 when not in the lowest power configuration. At that point, it's 1000. I think this has to do with the system-wide power configuration (not the CPU/GPU), and you may be able to increase it, but I have not tried. Please be very careful with this, as CPUs are generally more robust in terms of thermal compensation than other components.
4) dvs_volt_table_1GHZ is where you set the voltages (dvs_volt_table_800MHZ for boot mode). You set them by linking DVSARM# (1-5, 1GHZ / 1-4, 800MHz boot) and DVSINT# (1/2 for 1100/1000).
Code:
/* frequency voltage matching table */
static const unsigned int frequency_match_1GHZ[][4] = {
/* frequency, Mathced VDD ARM voltage , Matched VDD INT*/
{1066000, 1175, 1100, 0}, // Mine tested stable at 1175. Your mileage may vary.
{800000, 1075, 1100, 1}, // Stable at 1075. YMMV.
{400000, 950, 1100, 2}, // Stable at 950. YMMV.
{200000, 950, 1000, 4}, // Stable at 950. YMMV.
{100000, 950, 1000, 5}, // Stable at 950. YMMV.
};
static const unsigned int frequency_match_800MHZ[][4] = {
/* frequency, Mathced VDD ARM voltage , Matched VDD INT*/
{800000, 1100, 1100, 0},
{400000, 1050, 1100, 1},
{200000, 950, 1100, 3},
{100000, 950, 1000, 4},
};
const unsigned int (*frequency_match[2])[4] = {
frequency_match_1GHZ,
frequency_match_800MHZ,
};
/* voltage table */
static const unsigned int voltage_table[16] = {
750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, 1050,
1100, 1150, 1200, 1250, 1300, 1350,
1400, 1450, 1500
};
extern unsigned int S5PC11X_FREQ_TAB;
//extern const unsigned int (*frequency_match[2])[4];
static struct regulator *Reg_Arm = NULL, *Reg_Int = NULL;
static unsigned int s_arm_voltage=0, s_int_voltage=0;
unsigned long set1_gpio;
unsigned long set2_gpio;
unsigned long set3_gpio;
/*only 4 Arm voltages and 2 internal voltages possible*/
static const unsigned int dvs_volt_table_800MHZ[][3] = {
{L0, DVSARM2, DVSINT1},
{L1, DVSARM3, DVSINT1},
//266 {L2, DVSARM3, DVSINT1},
{L2, DVSARM4, DVSINT1},
{L3, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
// {L4, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
// {L5, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
};
static const unsigned int dvs_volt_table_1GHZ[][3] = {
{L0, DVSARM1, DVSINT1},//DVSINT0
{L1, DVSARM2, DVSINT1},
{L2, DVSARM3, DVSINT1},
//266 {L3, DVSARM3, DVSINT1},
{L3, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
{L4, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
// {L5, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
// {L6, DVSARM4, DVSINT2},
};
const unsigned int (*dvs_volt_table[2])[3] = {
dvs_volt_table_1GHZ,
dvs_volt_table_800MHZ,
};
static const unsigned int dvs_arm_voltage_set[][2] = {
{DVSARM1, 1275},
{DVSARM2, 1100},
{DVSARM3, 1050},
{DVSARM4, 950},
{DVSINT1, 1100},
{DVSINT2, 1000},
};
That about concludes what I know about this. Thank you for the discussion, and happy hacking.
Hmmm. I seem a tad scared to try this out lol
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
I'm feeling squirrely, screw it I'll try it. Flash like anything else in recovery? All the rest is just if you want to alter your kernel correct?
Voodoo isn't included in this kernel, right?
jv
johnnyv5 said:
Voodoo isn't included in this kernel, right?
jv
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I don't believe so. Voodoo kernels routinely score well over 1500 in Quadrant, so this is likely just a stock Samsung kernel tweaked with some SERIOUS overclock potential.
I'm trying it. So is this at(or around) 1.6ghz? And tweakable so we can get our own OC?
Great stuff Hex
I just did a quadrant. Is the FPS cap removed? The graphics benchmarks were unbelievable.
Nice job, AgentHex. Its been interesting reading your progress on IRC and then see it released!
Yea, Not touchin this one till it's made for release, 1600 is a pretty serious speed to tinker with.
GoogleAndroid said:
I just did a quadrant. Is the FPS cap removed? The graphics benchmarks were unbelievable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What did you score?
saps said:
What did you score?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1172 and then 1128.
GoogleAndroid said:
1172 and then 1128.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that your 3D score?
saps said:
Is that your 3D score?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, overall.
OH DEAR GOD BLAZING SPEEDS.
We need to get voodoo integrated with this bad boy and we'll be rockin!
Thanks for your work!
Btw, the FPS cap is blown off. I hit 80 FPS in Quadrant
Does anyone know though, if this is the same as the Manhattan Project that was scrapped in the Vibrant forums for inaccurately blowing up the cpu/gpu scores, or is it actually working properly?
phoenx06 said:
OH DEAR GOD BLAZING SPEEDS.
We need to get voodoo integrated with this bad boy and we'll be rockin!
Thanks for your work!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Lagfix, ColorFix(with all fixes), and BLN.
GoogleAndroid said:
Agreed. Lagfix, ColorFix(with all fixes), and BLN.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could go without BLN. I must be the only one that doesn't want it. The kernels with it make a terrible buzzing noise while on the phone and having the button lights on all the time has to drain battery like crazy. But agreed on the others
aroy002 said:
Does anyone know though, if this is the same as the Manhattan Project that was scrapped in the Vibrant forums for inaccurately blowing up the cpu/gpu scores, or is it actually working properly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, not at all. This is just the OP doing it on his own
Related
Can we undervolt the overclocled phone like other Motorola s?
Hello guys i wanted to know that can we undervolt the p500 to save battery power?? I have been reading alot about it in milestone forums. Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA App
No. I dont think you can. See this for more info.
If drellisdee or someone would make a relic for thar, then sure. Otherwise no
thanks kewlsid05 useful info......
Zerobarat1 said: If drellisdee or someone would make a relic for thar, then sure. Otherwise no Click to expand... Click to collapse yes.....
I know this tread its a bit old. Can't this be used of uv in our optimus one? https://github.com/doixanh/X8Features/tree/master/X8Undervolt Code: This is a module for x8/x10mini/x10minipro for undervolting the MSM7227 CPU. This is also an extraction from x8overclock for users who want stability. It can be applied to any kernel with CONFIG_KALLSYMS. To make it work with other kernel, just look up kallsyms_lookup_name offset and change it in the header. Code: // do some undervoltage standard_clocks[2].vdd = 0; // a little bit under voltage for 122880 standard_clocks[4].vdd = 2; // a little bit under voltage for 245760 standard_clocks[5].vdd = 3; // a little bit under voltage for 320000 standard_clocks[7].vdd = 5; // a little bit under voltage for 480000 standard_clocks[8].vdd = 7; // same voltage for max
[Q] Best SetCPU Settings for CM7 with Bali
I am currently running CM7 with the Bali kernel. I just recently installed setCPU and wanted to know what the best settings are for having decent battery life without taking away to much from performance. I'm pretty new to OC/UV so any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
anybody? any help would be great? I've been trying to search for settings but havent gotten to far.
Conservative is great 1000-100 an 4 speed On demand Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
Here is my settings on Voltage Control for Glitch. That may help you out a bit. Have you tried looking in the Bali thread to see if anyone posted any stable results? 1300: 1400mv -0mv = 1400 1200: 1350mv -0mv = 1350 1000: 1250mv -25mv = 1225 800: 1200mv -50mv = 1150 400: 1050mv -75mv = 975 200: 950mv -75mv = 875 100: 950mv -100mv = 850
Benchmarks on CM7
I was searching for full and comprehensive benchmark results of our O1, but was unable to find. So I benchmarked my O1, and thought I would share the results here. Tests done 3 times @787 Mhz, and the best run is displayed here. CM 7 6.5.5 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel v19.2 Linpack = 9.776 Quadrant Advanced = 1659 Quadrant Standard = 1256 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 366, Games Index 690 Antutu = 2019 Nenamark 1 = 40.6 Nenamark 2 = 12.7 Neocore with sound = 64.1 Neocore without sound = 65.7 CM 7 6.5.5 mik with minimal apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 9.691 Quadrant Advanced = 1661 Quadrant Standard = 1334 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 441, Games Index 603 Antutu = 2064 Nenamark 1 = 40.3 Nenamark 2 = 12.7 Neocore with sound = 65.2 Neocore without sound = 69.7 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps franco kernel v1.1-21082011 Linpack = 9.935 Quadrant Advanced = 1567 Quadrant Standard = 1280 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 496, Games Index 1036 Antutu = 2067 Nenamark 1 = 42.4 Nenamark 2 = 12.3 Neocore with sound = 73 Neocore without sound = 75.6 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps default kernel Linpack = 9.84 Quadrant Advanced = 1480 Quadrant Standard = 1285 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 475, Games Index 1034 Antutu = 1975 Nenamark 1 = 41.7 Nenamark 2 = 10.7 Neocore with sound = 62.8 Neocore without sound = 64.5 Tests done 3 times @600 Mhz, and the best run is displayed here. CM 7 6.5.5 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 7.782 Quadrant Advanced = 1262 Quadrant Standard = 1063 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 333, Games Index 487 Antutu = 1787 Nenamark 1 = 34.1 Nenamark 2 = 10.3 Neocore with sound = 52.6 Neocore without sound = 58.8 CM 7 6.5.5 mik with minimal apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 7.794 Quadrant Advanced = 1270 Quadrant Standard = 1176 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 284, Games Index 491 Antutu = 1821 Nenamark 1 = 34.1 Nenamark 2 = 10.3 Neocore with sound = 52.9 Neocore without sound = 58.7 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps franco kernel v1.1-21082011 Linpack = 7.962 Quadrant Advanced = 1224 Quadrant Standard = 1055 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 338, Games Index 825 Antutu = 1870 Nenamark 1 = 36.3 Nenamark 2 = 10.7 Neocore with sound = 61.4 Neocore without sound = 67.5 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps default kernel Linpack = 7.84 Quadrant Advanced = 1205 Quadrant Standard = 1038 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 391, Games Index 815 Antutu = 1782 Nenamark 1 = 34.4 Nenamark 2 = 8.5 Neocore with sound = 56.9 Neocore without sound = 61.7 For those who dont want to read all the crap and want the result~ CM7 6.6.1 mik with franco kernel v1.1-21082011 V/S CM 7 6.5.5 mik with franco kernel v19.2 = CM7 6.6.1 mik with franco kernel v1.1-21082011 wins with 7% overall advantage. The 3D score in quadrant for CM7 6.5.5 FK 19.2 was 510~520, in CM7 6.6.1 FK v1.1-21082011 it went up to 650~665. A 27.8% increase!! EDIT : CM 7 6.5.7 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel v19.2 Linpack = 10.039 Quadrant Advanced = 1684 Quadrant Standard = 1304 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 442, Games Index 699 Antutu = 2092 Nenamark 1 = 40.4 Nenamark 2 = 12.6 Neocore with sound = 65.3 Neocore without sound = 70.2 EDIT 2 : CM 7 6.5.7 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel v19.3 Linpack = 9.82 Quadrant Advanced = 1609 Quadrant Standard = 1384 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 437, Games Index 693 Antutu = 2021 Nenamark 1 = 39.8 Nenamark 2 = 11.7 Neocore with sound = 64.9 Neocore without sound = 67.5 If you think I helped you or you think this post was cool , please hit the Thanks button.
KaKkaR0T said: I was searching for full and comprehensive benchmark results of our O1, but was unable to find. So I benchmarked my O1, and thought I would share the results here. Tests done 3 times @787 Mhz, and the best run is displayed here. CM 7 6.5.5 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel v19.2 Linpack = 9.776 Quadrant Advanced = 1659 Quadrant Standard = 1256 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 366, Games Index 690 Antutu = 2019 Nenamark 1 = 40.6 Nenamark 2 = 12.7 Neocore with sound = 64.1 Neocore without sound = 65.7 CM 7 6.5.5 mik with minimal apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 9.691 Quadrant Advanced = 1661 Quadrant Standard = 1334 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 441, Games Index 603 Antutu = 2064 Nenamark 1 = 40.3 Nenamark 2 = 12.7 Neocore with sound = 65.2 Neocore without sound = 69.7 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps franco kernel v1.1-21082011 Linpack = 9.935 Quadrant Advanced = 1567 Quadrant Standard = 1280 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 496, Games Index 1036 Antutu = 2067 Nenamark 1 = 42.4 Nenamark 2 = 12.3 Neocore with sound = 73 Neocore without sound = 75.6 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps default kernel Linpack = 9.84 Quadrant Advanced = 1480 Quadrant Standard = 1285 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 475, Games Index 1034 Antutu = 1975 Nenamark 1 = 41.7 Nenamark 2 = 10.7 Neocore with sound = 62.8 Neocore without sound = 64.5 Tests done 3 times @600 Mhz, and the best run is displayed here. CM 7 6.5.5 mik with 100+ apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 7.782 Quadrant Advanced = 1262 Quadrant Standard = 1063 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 333, Games Index 487 Antutu = 1787 Nenamark 1 = 34.1 Nenamark 2 = 10.3 Neocore with sound = 52.6 Neocore without sound = 58.8 CM 7 6.5.5 mik with minimal apps franco kernel 19.2 Linpack = 7.794 Quadrant Advanced = 1270 Quadrant Standard = 1176 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 284, Games Index 491 Antutu = 1821 Nenamark 1 = 34.1 Nenamark 2 = 10.3 Neocore with sound = 52.9 Neocore without sound = 58.7 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps franco kernel v1.1-21082011 Linpack = 7.962 Quadrant Advanced = 1224 Quadrant Standard = 1055 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 338, Games Index 825 Antutu = 1870 Nenamark 1 = 36.3 Nenamark 2 = 10.7 Neocore with sound = 61.4 Neocore without sound = 67.5 CM7 6.6.1 mik with minimal apps default kernel Linpack = 7.84 Quadrant Advanced = 1205 Quadrant Standard = 1038 smartbench 2011 = Productivity Index 391, Games Index 815 Antutu = 1782 Nenamark 1 = 34.4 Nenamark 2 = 8.5 Neocore with sound = 56.9 Neocore without sound = 61.7 For those who dont want to read all the crap and want the result~ CM7 6.6.1 mik with franco kernel v1.1-21082011 V/S CM 7 6.5.5 mik with franco kernel v19.2 = CM7 6.6.1 mik with franco kernel v1.1-21082011 wins with 7% overall advantage. The 3D score in quadrant for CM7 6.5.5 FK 19.2 was 510~520, in CM7 6.6.1 FK v1.1-21082011 it went up to 650~665. A 27.8% increase!! If you think I helped you or you think this post was cool , please hit the Thanks button. Click to expand... Click to collapse Please do a test wit v6.5.7 not v6.5.5 cuz use the latest build... And title change to 'Benchmark results on cm7' press thanks if this helps for ur thread... Sent from LGE Secret phone using tapatalk app...
dax4182 said: Please do a test wit v6.5.7 not v6.5.5 cuz use the latest build... And title change to 'Benchmark results on cm7' press thanks if this helps for ur thread... Sent from LGE Secret phone using tapatalk app... Click to expand... Click to collapse +1 6.5.5 is outdated
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Everything is in my signature..
Updated 1st post with CM7 6.5.7 benchamrks.
KaKkaR0T said: Updated 1st post with CM7 6.5.7 benchamrks. Click to expand... Click to collapse Cm7 6.5.7 results are very good. I am impressed. 6.5.7 seems much improved than 6.5.5. In fact quadrant scores are even better than 6.6.1. Astonishing! Sent from my LG-P500 using Tapatalk
lekhwani said: Cm7 6.5.7 results are very good. I am impressed. 6.5.7 seems much improved than 6.5.5. In fact quadrant scores are even better than 6.6.1. Astonishing! Sent from my LG-P500 using Tapatalk Click to expand... Click to collapse But 3D scores are very high in 6.6.1
Yes 3D on 6.6.1 is awesome, in quadrant 3D tests I got 80+ FPS steadily in the planet test and 16 FPS in the DNA test and it could reneder 310+ frames of the 1st 3D test. Whereas in 6.5.7, 1st test I hardly reneder 270 frames, the planet test I get about 70 FPS and in the DNA test I get rock solid 11 FPS Sent from my JetOptimus
OK, I am starting to distrust the random number generator such as Quadrant. I have only one benchmark: Run Avatar 3D game on your ROM+kernel. Who can smoothly run this thing in the later stage of the game(like Chapter 5), who won the contest hands down. Anyone?
Smartbench 2011 test is fairly nice. I tested at all stages with Gangstar Miami Vindication, and the smoothest was on cm7 6.6.1 with Franco kernel v1.1 . Although there was'nt any noticibale lagg on any ROM with the Franco kernel.
Updated 1st post with 6.5.7 FK v19.3 benchmarks, 3D performance has got down a bit that 19.2
Structured Undervolting Thread
Tegrapart - d00 Kernel - Faux's 0.18 CM7 Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3 Overclock: 1.3ghz 1.3ghz = 1175mv (-125mv) 1.2ghz = 1075mv (-125mv) 1.1ghz = 975mv (-125mv) 1.0ghz = 900mv (-100mv) 800mhz = 800mv (-100mv) 456mhz = 625mv (-175mv) 216mhz = 525mv (-225mv) Compile your information like this, if we can get 50+ voltage tables from users we should have enough to create some decent starting voltages that should work for most people. Being an insane computer geek, and overclocking my PC's like mad, I can tell you that your not all going to be able to use the same settings. Use these as a starting point if you wish, from what I have seen though, I have a great SoC for overclocking. I wouldn't expect to get those voltages with certainty. Phones are ridiculously easy to overclock though, the voltages adds a nice kick to the whole idea though. It's very easy to figure out what kind of overclock/voltage ratio your phone CPU has.... You can see it clearly in my table of voltages there. 1.0ghz and 800mhz seem to be the weakest, they require more voltage than any other high end frequency. So I knew that once I isolated those voltages I had an inkling where I would be in the end with all the other frequencies. Sure enough I couldn't get 1.0ghz to run -125mv. But it stopped there, 1.1,1.2 and 1.3ghz run @ -125mv. I suspect the voltage is already so high as it is you can adjust it a bit more. It only takes another 75mv to get to 1.1 and then another 100mv per 100mhz jump as per usual. Followed that all the way up and ended up with 1175mv for 1.3ghz and she's stable. Going to let it run for awhile, best to get some results, and test them out real world for awhile. I would try -50mv first on all frequencies to start. I cannot see much chance of instability doing this.
1.3ghz = (-50mv) 1.2ghz = (-75mv) 1.1ghz = (-75mv) 1.0ghz = (-75mv) (-100 was definitely not stable and had lots of freezes/reboots) 800mhz = (-175mv) 456mhz = (-225mv) 216mhz = (-250mv) Faux .19 Alien Rom d00 tegrapart I have only overclocked to 1.2ghz because I have no need for anything more and probably don't even need that sort of overclock. My undervolt settings are heavily tested for 1gz and down but barely tested above that.
tapeworm_george said: 1.3ghz = 1175mv (-50mv) 1.2ghz = 1075mv (-75mv) 1.1ghz = 975mv (-75mv) 1.0ghz = 900mv (-75mv) (-100 was definitely not stable and had lots of freezes/reboots) 800mhz = 800mv (-175mv) 456mhz = 625mv (-225mv) 216mhz = 525mv (-250mv) Faux .19 Alien Rom d00 tegrapart I have only overclocked to 1.2ghz because I have no need for anything more and probably don't even need that sort of overclock. My undervolt settings are heavily tested for 1gz and down but barely tested above that. Click to expand... Click to collapse Oh I totally left out the different tegraparts, nice reminder hehe. Looks like you have a really nice SoC there. Best one I have seen yet. Just tried your lower end settings for 456 and 216, no reboots yet. I was trying to come up with a way to test each individual clockspeed. Came up with this. Charge your phone up to 100% (gets her nice and hot) then set a profile for anything below 99% battery to lock at 216mhz, 456mhz, 800mhz, and so on. Then test using the stress test inside SetCPU, make sure to set your screen time out to "never" as well. I am quite sure this will work. I will test and re post.
Can SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me how to overclock this phone? I've looked all over kingdom come for a tut but can't find anything except the 1.4GHz kernel module that doesn't even work. Help would be much appreciated Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
Gfrt94yn said: Can SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me how to overclock this phone? I've looked all over kingdom come for a tut but can't find anything except the 1.4GHz kernel module that doesn't even work. Help would be much appreciated Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App Click to expand... Click to collapse That 1.4ghz kernel never worked. In order to overclock you need a kernel that supports it, there is one available in the dev section. Its made by faux.
Gfrt94yn said: Can SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me how to overclock this phone? I've looked all over kingdom come for a tut but can't find anything except the 1.4GHz kernel module that doesn't even work. Help would be much appreciated Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App Click to expand... Click to collapse Does nobody read the N00B Guide any more.
To clarify the -100mV thing..... does this -100mV range apply to reduction values or to the actual voltages all remaining within 100mV of eachother?
ChaosMinionX said: To clarify the -100mV thing..... does this -100mV range apply to reduction values or to the actual voltages all remaining within 100mV of eachother? Click to expand... Click to collapse Reduction values.
Tried your value but it hang and rebooted tapeworm_george said: 1.3ghz = (-50mv) 1.2ghz = (-75mv) 1.1ghz = (-75mv) 1.0ghz = (-75mv) (-100 was definitely not stable and had lots of freezes/reboots) 800mhz = (-175mv) 456mhz = (-225mv) 216mhz = (-250mv) Faux .19 Alien Rom d00 tegrapart I have only overclocked to 1.2ghz because I have no need for anything more and probably don't even need that sort of overclock. My undervolt settings are heavily tested for 1gz and down but barely tested above that. Click to expand... Click to collapse Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
xUmaRix said: Tried your value but it hang and rebooted Sent from my MB860 using XDA App Click to expand... Click to collapse Which tegrapart do you have?
d00 Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Not all phones will end up being able to handle the same undervolting or overclocking. These are guidelines only and it looks like my phone is very capable of extreme undervolting down low. I actually think I'm going to back these off just a little bit even though my phone remains stable just for peace of mind.
Tegrapart - 1100 Kernel - Faux's 0.1.9 CM7 Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3 Overclock: 1.3ghz 1.3ghz = 1175mv (-100mv) 1.2ghz = 1075mv (-100mv) 1.1ghz = 975mv (-100mv) 1.0ghz = 900mv (-75mv) 800mhz = 800mv (-250mv) 456mhz = 625mv (-275mv) 216mhz = 525mv (-300mv)
Tegrapart - d00 : 100 : 800 Kernel - Faux's 0.19 CM7 Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3 Overclock: 1.3ghz 1.3ghz = 1250mv (-50mv) 1.2ghz = 1150mv (-50mv) 1.1ghz = 1050mv (-50mv) 1.0ghz = 950mv (-50mv) 800mhz = 850mv (-50mv) 456mhz = 750mv (-50mv) 216mhz = 700mv (-50mv) Just trying undervolting out. Scored a 4500 on Quadrant. I'll keep trying different volts over the next couple days
d3athsd00r said: Tegrapart - 1100 Kernel - Faux's 0.1.9 CM7 Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3 Overclock: 1.3ghz 1.3ghz = 1175mv (-100mv) 1.2ghz = 1075mv (-100mv) 1.1ghz = 975mv (-100mv) 1.0ghz = 900mv (-75mv) 800mhz = 800mv (-250mv) 456mhz = 625mv (-275mv) 216mhz = 525mv (-300mv) Click to expand... Click to collapse your 800 and below uv's probably don't work unless faux did away with the 100mv stepping.
Tegrapart - d00 Kernel - Faux's 0.19 Unified Build - Alien Beta 4 Overclock: 1.3ghz 1.3ghz = 1175mv (-125mv) 1.2ghz = 1100mv (-100mv) 1.1ghz = 1050mv (-50mv) 1.0ghz = 950mv (-50mv) 800mhz = 850mv (-50mv) 456mhz = 750mv (-50mv) 216mhz = 650mv (-100mv) (still experimenting), this is 100% stable right now
spitefulcheerio said:
Tegrapart - d00 : 100 : 800
Kernel - Faux's 0.19 CM7
Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3
Overclock: 1.3ghz
1.3ghz = 1250mv (-50mv)
1.2ghz = 1150mv (-50mv)
1.1ghz = 1050mv (-50mv)
1.0ghz = 950mv (-50mv)
800mhz = 850mv (-50mv)
456mhz = 750mv (-50mv)
216mhz = 700mv (-50mv)
Just trying undervolting out. Scored a 4500 on Quadrant.
I'll keep trying different volts over the next couple days
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(dont know if I should make a new post but here's my new setup)
Tegrapart - d00 : 100 : 800
Kernel - Faux's 0.19 CM7
Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3
Overclock: 1.3ghz
1.3ghz = 1200mv (-100mv)
1.2ghz = 1100mv (-100mv)
1.1ghz = 1000mv (-100mv)
1.0ghz = 925mv (-75mv)
800mhz = 800mv (-100mv)
456mhz = 700mv (-100mv)
216mhz = 650mv (-100mv)
With this I ended up scoring a 4700 in quadrant. 200 better than my previous setup
Edit:
Tegrapart - d00 : 100 : 800
Kernel - Faux's 0.19 CM7
Build - CM7 Pre-Beta 3
Overclock: 1.3ghz
1.3ghz = 1225mv (-75mv)
1.2ghz = 1125mv (-75mv)
1.1ghz = 1025mv (-75mv)
1.0ghz = 950mv (-75mv)
800mhz = 825mv (-75mv)
456mhz = 725mv (-75mv)
216mhz = 675mv (-75mv)
New setup because my phone started getting unstable. This is much better. I'm gonna start testing each frequency seperately.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
pukemon said: your 800 and below uv's probably don't work unless faux did away with the 100mv stepping. Click to expand... Click to collapse Why is that? And is there a way to check the current voltage?
There is a 100 mv limit between steps. I.e. from one step is -75 the next step can't be more than -175. But as I mentioned faux might've overcome that. If not, then your low end voltages are only 100 less than lowest voltage above that. I voided my warranty and your mum.
tpart: d00 Kernel: Faux 1.7 build: gobstopper 2.3.4 o/c: 1.1Ghz -25 top to bottom causes hang/reboot as soon as I open the market.
[Q][Stats]What is your lowest stable undervolt?
Hey fellow SGS3 users. Several kernels have undervoltage capabilities for the Galaxy S III. With this poll I'm trying to get a statistical handle on what the lowest possible voltages are on an average S3 device. I am currently running at -100mV on all levels and I'm wondering if some people have already spent time testing the limits of the UV that is stable for their device. I haven't tried anymore that -100mV but since I have been running stable on that setting for more than a day, I am considering to decrease the voltage even further. So if you're using a flat UV on all frequencies, fill in the poll and add any info you think may be relevant. If you use a specific voltage for each frequency, vote for custom and post your values (and maybe how you reached/tested them) So for me: Max Freq: 1.4Ghz Min Freq: 100 Undervolt: Flat -100mV Kernel: SiyahKernel S3-1.2.6 Edit: Seems stock voltages are not necessarily fixed on the SGS3 so take these with 2 grains of salt. Stock Voltages in Siyah (in mV): 1400Mhz - 1287.5 1300Mhz - 1250 1200Mhz - 1187.5 1100Mhz - 1137.5 1000Mhz - 1087.5 900Mhz - 1037.5 800Mhz - 987.5 700Mhz - 975 600Mhz - 962.5 500Mhz - 937.5 400Mhz - 925 300Mhz - 900 200Mhz - 900 100Mhz - 900
These ones work for me: 1400Mhz : 1100 mV 1300MHz : 1050 mV 1200MHz : 1000 mV 1100MHz : 975 mV 1000MHz : 925 mV 900MHz : 900 mV 800MHz : 875 mV 700MHz : 850 mV 600MHz : 825 mV 500MHz : 800 mV 400MHz : 775 mV 300MHz : 775 mV 200MHz : 750 mV
Max Freq: 1200 Min Freq: 100 Undervolt: -100mV Kernel: S3-1.2.6 the limit in ExTweaks is -100, i have Voltage Control Extreme but im not comfortable going any further for now
my uv values are in my sig, though -25mv from the one in my sig worked its not that stable .
Right now I'm running stable with: 1400: 1287500 > 1187500 = -100mV 1300: 1250000 > 1137500 = -112.5mV 1200: 1187500 > 1112500 = -75mV 1100: 1137500 > 1075000 = -62.5mV 1000: 1087500 > 987500 = -100mV 900: 1037500 > 937500 = -100mV 800: 987500 > 900000 = -87.5mV 700: 975000 > 837500 = -137.5mV 600: 962500 > 825000 = -137.5mV 500: 937500 > 812500 = -125mV 400: 925000 > 750000 = -175mV 300: 900000 >737500 = -162.5mV 200: 900000 > 687500 = -212.5mV Although I might still be able to get one or two steps out of the upper middle frequencies, I spent several hours testing trying to find my voltages and it is annoying and tedious work, and I stopped at the above values. My chip is being attributed ASV5, so middle ground in terms of quality of the chip.
I tried to do -50 on all steps using ExTweaks and Siyah Kernel.. and my headset speaker stops working Works fine stock, but as soon as I reboot after a UV I have no headset speaker :/
AndreiLux said: Although I might still be able to get one or two steps out of the upper middle frequencies, I spent several hours testing trying to find my voltages and it is annoying and tedious work, and I stopped at the above values. My chip is being attributed ASV5, so middle ground in terms of quality of the chip. Click to expand... Click to collapse How did you find your chip number and how do you know about its quality? Cheers!
Fruktsallad said: How did you find your chip number and how do you know about its quality? Cheers! Click to expand... Click to collapse A stupid and simple way to do it is to check your default voltages and compare them to the ASV table.
Fruktsallad said: How did you find your chip number and how do you know about its quality? Cheers! Click to expand... Click to collapse I'm curious about that as well. I find Kevin's values to be completely stable so far. I'm impressed with the UV potential on the SGS3. On the SGS2 I rarely managed to take 100mV off the stock voltage while Kevin's values are significantly lower than 100mV off the stock. I'll put the stock voltages in the OP to make comparison easier.
AndreiLux said: Right now I'm running stable with: 1400: 1287500 > 1187500 = -100mV 1300: 1250000 > 1137500 = -112.5mV 1200: 1187500 > 1112500 = -75mV 1100: 1137500 > 1075000 = -62.5mV 1000: 1087500 > 987500 = -100mV 900: 1037500 > 937500 = -100mV 800: 987500 > 900000 = -87.5mV 700: 975000 > 837500 = -137.5mV 600: 962500 > 825000 = -137.5mV 500: 937500 > 812500 = -125mV 400: 925000 > 750000 = -175mV 300: 900000 >737500 = -162.5mV 200: 900000 > 687500 = -212.5mV Click to expand... Click to collapse This was a good starting point to get rid of my -100 blanket UV, but using that as a firm base. 1704: 1275mV 1600: 1225mV 1500: 1175mV 1400: 1150mV 1300: 1125mV 1200: 1050mV 1100: 1000mV 1000: 950mV 0900: 925mV 0800: 875mV 0700: 837mV 0600: 825mV 0500: 812mV 0400: 750mV 0300: 750mV 0200: 750mV 0100: 750mV Seems stable so far. Its always those bottom 3 which I have as a screen off profile that worries me. I can ascertain the other frequencies by using the device, but these 3, the only real test is whether it falls over when Idle. Are any of today's kernels using AXI does anyone know? Not seen it mentioned in any of the threads.
I am at: GHZ mV 1.4 = 1100 1.3 = 1050 1.2 = 1000 1.1 = 975 1.0 = 925 0.9 = 900 0.8 = 875 0.7 = 850 0.6 = 825 0.5 = 800 0.4 = 775 0.3 = 775 0.2 = 750 I can't believe how far the s3 can under volt. I haven't had any problems with these voltages all day. I haven't and don't dare go any lower
Currently running these frequencies and everything is perfectly stable, no a single lockup or crash so far. Basically dropped all the frequencies by 100 mV then pushed 200mhz down as far as i dared as i figure undervolting is most useful for extending standby time. From other peoples settings it looks like I can lower most of these a lot more without any problems. Freq - mV 1500 - 1200 1400 - 1150 1300 - 1137 1200 - 1100 1100 - 1050 1000 - 1000 900 - 950 800 - 900 700 - 875 600 - 862 500 - 850 400 - 850 300 - 825 200 - 720
GHZ mV 1.4 = 1100 1.3 = 1050 1.2 = 1000 1.1 = 975 1.0 = 925 0.9 = 900 0.8 = 875 0.7 = 838 0.6 = 825 0.5 = 813 0.4 = 750 0.3 = 738 0.2 = 675
AndreiLux said: I spent several hours testing trying to find my voltages and it is annoying and tedious work, and I stopped at the above values. My chip is being attributed ASV5, so middle ground in terms of quality of the chip. Click to expand... Click to collapse How did you work out your setup? Seems that my UV is not stable and I had 2-3 SOD. This is what I did: undervolted the cpu step, then kept stuck the cpu on that step and tried for a while. I did this for every passage, and tested untill the phone freezed. So for exemple, I started from 900 mv, then went down 875-850 etc. If my phone dies on 825, I setup 850, or the previous valid voltage step. I did this for every cpu step, from 1400 to 200, but when I stopped keeping the cpu stuck on a single step and let it go between 200 and 1400, I started to have loads of reboots etc. Any hints? Since I've just spent like 2 hours of my life for nothing
TMaLuST said: I did this for every cpu step, from 1400 to 200, but when I stopped keeping the cpu stuck on a single step and let it go between 200 and 1400, I started to have loads of reboots etc. Any hints? Since I've just spent like 2 hours of my life for nothing Click to expand... Click to collapse I went through this same procedure and the same thing happened. Unstable as hell, wasted hours of time... I ended up just using extweaks to undervolt all clocks to -50mv by default and that seems to save me a decent amount of power. Also set sleep clock to 100mhz. Saves even more during sleep. Getting runs of 30 hours with moderate useage, browsing texting calling photos etc. Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
I think the higher steps don't all undervolt quite as well as lower ones. To get 1.6 stable on mine needs quite a lot of juice and then it heats up a bit and benchmark scores drop so I guess there's some thermal throttling. I'll just keep it at 100-1400MHz 725-1200mv.
What app/program are you guys using to undervolt this? you wouldn't happen to be using setcpu right? This seems much more advanced than what setcpu offers?
Enigmani said: What app/program are you guys using to undervolt this? you wouldn't happen to be using setcpu right? This seems much more advanced than what setcpu offers? Click to expand... Click to collapse I use setCPU. All we are doing is setting a voltage for each clock frequency. Set CPU has a voltages tab.
doi its fine
rootSU said: I use setCPU. All we are doing is setting a voltage for each clock frequency. Set CPU has a voltages tab. Click to expand... Click to collapse thanks for the reply and screenshot, what version are you using of setcpu? i don't seem to have the voltages tab there.. My only tabs are: Main|Profiles|Governor|Info|About. maybe i'll see if I can update my version maybe...