I just wanted to know what everyones eris is oc to. I am currently overlocked at 806mhz, i cant go any higher than that.
Mines at 768 anything over that it overheats
mines at 768. I can go up to 806 if I wanted to but it sometimes causes issues so its better to stay at 768 to be safe at least for my eris and my fiances as well.
ive seen some ppl overclocked to 825mhz fine
3.5 Ghz
ten chars
wow thats some eris you got there
mine is very stable at 787, it can go to 806 but s**t starts to force close. I use cpuboost on smartass governor with minimum 787 maximum 787 with no sleep profile and surprisingly it doesnt get hot or get horrible battery life and im on it pretty much all day (except when im with my chick she will throw my phone out the window) lol
710. I haven't even tried going higher, my battery's reached 105-110F just at 710 (yeah I know just the battery, but still) so I'm too worried to try anything higher.
710 does me well.
On both my old and new Eris, I can go up to 806 but I set the max at 768.
Mine shutters and self destructs if I set it higher than 710
Edit: just for giggles I tried again. As soon as I touched 787 it restarted and would not restart till I flashed it again. ;-) oh well. I have liked this phone but can't wait till the Thunderbolt launches.
Sent from my Eris using XDA App
two eris at 768 no issues here...
linpack average of 5.178 on Koas gingerbread V8 rom
Downloads 860kbit/s and upload 1740kbit/s Max after enabling autokiller
Radio 2.42.02.10.29 See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=10748354&posted=1#post10748354
768 max is the highest it will go. Used to run it at 710 though recently I have found it is much happier at 768 on Smartass.
Autokiller: Ultimate
Linpack: 5.30 is the norm on Froyshedyo 10 w/ cfs v9
It ran about as smooth when I started running KaosFroyo back at about V34 at 710 max, though with Kaos busy with Gingerbread I hopped to a different rom until GB is a little more operational.
It does get a tad warm, though nothing I would fret about.
I just stick to 710-245 smartass
806 with colin's battery tweak.
CCCP4ever said:
I just stick to 710-245 smartass
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word.
There was a fellow over on Androidforums.com that liked the way his Eris ran at 806. That phone was dead within one week of his commencement of overclocking. (He may have set min=max, rather than mess with governors, I don't know all of the details).
When electronics break down, they do so for two reasons:
(1) intrinsic chemical processes such as corrosion, electromigration, whisker formation, etc. - these are all accelerated by heat.
(2) mechanical ruptures caused by prolonged mechanical strain or thermal cycling - both caused by heat.
In both cases, heat is the principal enemy.
Your Eris has no fan inside - just sayin.
While we're at it, have a look at the VDD_6 versus VDD_7 supply voltage definitions in this kernel code
If the voltage ramping is the same as in the note in the code (see "MSM7201A") a processor supply step-up occurs in the frequency table like this:
F >= 787 --> Vdd = 1.325 V
120 <= F <= 767 --> Vdd = 1.2V
Because the power dissipation per clock is proportional to Vdd^2, and the power rate is proportional to the clock frequency, the expected power dissipation ratio of 806 versus 710 is
(806/710)*(1.325/1.2)^2 = 1.384
You are burning up nearly 40% more power at 806 than at 710 - for a performance benefit of only (806/710) = 1.135 .... 14%
bftb0
bftb0 said:
Word.
There was a fellow over on Androidforums.com that liked the way his Eris ran at 806. That phone was dead within one week of his commencement of overclocking. (He may have set min=max, rather than mess with governors, I don't know all of the details).
When electronics break down, they do so for two reasons:
(1) intrinsic chemical processes such as corrosion, electromigration, whisker formation, etc. - these are all accelerated by heat.
(2) mechanical ruptures caused by prolonged mechanical strain or thermal cycling - both caused by heat.
In both cases, heat is the principal enemy.
Your Eris has no fan inside - just sayin.
While we're at it, have a look at the VDD_6 versus VDD_7 supply voltage definitions in this kernel code
If the voltage ramping is the same as in the note in the code (see "MSM7201A") a processor supply step-up occurs in the frequency table like this:
F >= 787 --> Vdd = 1.325 V
120 <= F <= 767 --> Vdd = 1.2V
Because the power dissipation per clock is proportional to Vdd^2, and the power rate is proportional to the clock frequency, the expected power dissipation ratio of 806 versus 710 is
(806/710)*(1.325/1.2)^2 = 1.384
You are burning up nearly 40% more power at 806 than at 710 - for a performance benefit of only (806/710) = 1.135 .... 14%
bftb0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bftb, I don't think I've ever seen you post something that I haven't learned something from. Very interesting to see how little you gain going up to 806.
I usually stick around 710 too, but I bump up the min to 480 cause at 245 my phone takes too long to wake up when I get a call.
I decided to set my max at 528 today just for kicks, and I was surprised to see that it actually still felt kinda snappy. Not quite as smooth as with 710, but definitely usable for me.
first of all I dont feel 14% is a small amount when pushing the envelope as we are trying to do with the eris. In any hobby I've been in people go thru great lengths and spend all kinds of money and time for 10% improvements much less 14%. Actually more than I expected and makes me feel alot better about going from stock 528 to 768.
Now having made that argument I'm going to turn around and rubuke myself because even if there is an actual verifiable 30%+ improvement going from 528 to 786 it means nothing to me if I cant feel any difference in the contexts of a phone and I just cant tell much difference. Its not like a car in which it may feel the same to you but you win a race you would have lost before. With a phone subjective improvements experienced by the user is all that really matters. Many a time I've flashed, forgot to set OC and later THOUGHT I was overclocked or overclocked higher only to realize I've been using the phone without doing so. Never ONCE has it been because I thought "man this is slow, maybe I forgot to overclock". Always the other way: "man I thought this thing was overclocked and I'm running stock speeds". that alone tells me what I need to know about overclocking (yet I overclock to my phones stable max of 768 anyway. go figure).
i keep it at 710/245. its not a noticeable difference to me when i clock it above 710. however, when i put it back down to 528 it is noticeably more sluggish (the only exception to this being KGB or vanilla 2.1).
710 here. I can go up to 767 with a certain set up...
I seem to have one of the weaker Eris'. But 710 is fine for me!
Related
Hi guys!For the last few days(that I have my Hero rooted that is) I'm using VillainRom 10 as my everyday ROM and have tried some others.Anyway,that's not the point!
Being one of the lucky ones whose Hero can happily overclock to 768 I came to use RaduG's extremekernel and ben39's no-bfs no-whining kernel.With the second,while configuring OverclockWidget I saw that it gives a 848MHz option with auto-detect frequencies.Is it possible?I'm not asking about stable daily use,but even for some minutes for benchmarking?Has anyone achieved it?Without making their phone catch on fire that is!
And secondly,why are we all using linux 2.6.29(for total newbies I mean the kernel) while there is 2.6.32-33-34?Can't a newer kernel be compiled for use with the Hero?Newer kernels would provide native ext4 support and would probably prove to be better overall.
Oh,forgot one more!I am currently running on minimum 176MHz-maximum 749MHz(after I got a couple reboots with 768 I abandoned 19MHz for stability) with screen on and minimum 123MHz-maximum 384MHz with screen off.Should I give it a higher minimum frequency?Sometimes it lags when waking up,the screen turns on but shows nothing but black and turns off again or it turns on and everything is distorted,colors are completely distorted,background is upside down and some other unnormal things,but everything is alright when turning the screen off and back on again.Does it have to do anything with the frequencies I am using?I am running on VillainRom 10.3.
Now I have set the minimums to 160 and 190 MHz to see what happens!
Thanks in advance!
About the high MHz... I have done it with over 800 but don't max it out at 848 or your phone will freeze but anything below works And that screen **** I've also had and it has something to do with the high MHz (don't know why) but it helped me to set the MHz lower when the phone sleeps in SetCPU And at last about the kernel... It runs on the old one on Android 2.1 but in 2.2 it will be upgraded to ....33 or ....32 don't remember which...
-------------------------------------
Sent via the XDA Tapatalk App
Thanks for your reply C0mpu13rFr34k!
I know Eclair is running on the old kernel.I just would like to know if it is possible to compile a newer kernel for it.
As for the frequencies...Are my settings alright?Some too high or too low?The way I see it there is a big gap between maximum and minimum frequencies when screen on which results on the CPU working at low frequencies most of the time,thus sacrificing performance.But it helps with battery life and presumably this and the screen-off underclocking reduce the overall damage caused to the CPU by the overclocking,which is said to reduce the CPU's total lifetime by 50% or more,depending on how much you overclock it.Working at 749 I sometimes get a nice 43 degrees Celsius while charging,but that's only when charging.Average temperatures are 30 for standby and 37 with screen on(average,can be lower or higher).
And one more question.At 800+ how hot does it get?Will it be stable for some minutes to do some basic benchmarking or nah..?
Thanks!
tolis626 said:
Thanks for your reply C0mpu13rFr34k!
I know Eclair is running on the old kernel.I just would like to know if it is possible to compile a newer kernel for it.
As for the frequencies...Are my settings alright?Some too high or too low?The way I see it there is a big gap between maximum and minimum frequencies when screen on which results on the CPU working at low frequencies most of the time,thus sacrificing performance.But it helps with battery life and presumably this and the screen-off underclocking reduce the overall damage caused to the CPU by the overclocking,which is said to reduce the CPU's total lifetime by 50% or more,depending on how much you overclock it.Working at 749 I sometimes get a nice 43 degrees Celsius while charging,but that's only when charging.Average temperatures are 30 for standby and 37 with screen on(average,can be lower or higher).
And one more question.At 800+ how hot does it get?Will it be stable for some minutes to do some basic benchmarking or nah..?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If your phone is stable your settings are just fine even though your phone might have problems waking up if the low freq is under 246MHz (something like that) Also if you want better performance you might want to test some other freqs and then benchmark... Sometimes it makes a BIG difference if your phone is running at 691MHz or 710MHz For me my phone works like **** if it runs at 749MHz but it works like a dream at 729MHz (I think the difference was 0.5-0.8MFLOPS) Im also pretty sure your temp is fine (OC shouldn't make your phone that much hotter since the voltages in all ROMs are adjustet). If you should compile a newer kernel you would first of all need a .32 (.33?) from HTC because of hardware capabilities and im sure there's is A LOT more things devs need to compile such a kernel but i don't know to much about kernels I don't really know that much about 800+ because I only did it once and benchmarked it (MFLOPS was **** and i couldn't get them high at all) actually it slowed down my phone but you should test it. Maybe your very lucky and your phone can take it
Well,I have set it to 653min-749max with screen on and 160min-352max with screen off.Testing only!But it runs like a dream if we don't take into account a small lagging when I turn the screen on and it has to change frequencies!But it's great so far.Will see how battery life goes!By the way,tried 800,806 and 848MHz,but none worked.It didn't crash or something,it just wouldn't change to it and stayed at lower frequencies(low as 246).
Thanks for your time anyway!
And a small question...How bad does overclocking affect the CPU's life?I asked around and was told that the maximum overclock for desktop PCs is 20-25%,depending on the CPU,while needing special cooling systems,and that it can reduce the CPU's life up to 50%.Given that we overclock over 40%,how bad do we damage our CPUs?
tolis626 said:
Well,I have set it to 653min-749max with screen on and 160min-352max with screen off.Testing only!But it runs like a dream if we don't take into account a small lagging when I turn the screen on and it has to change frequencies!But it's great so far.Will see how battery life goes!By the way,tried 800,806 and 848MHz,but none worked.It didn't crash or something,it just wouldn't change to it and stayed at lower frequencies(low as 246).
Thanks for your time anyway!
And a small question...How bad does overclocking affect the CPU's life?I asked around and was told that the maximum overclock for desktop PCs is 20-25%,depending on the CPU,while needing special cooling systems,and that it can reduce the CPU's life up to 50%.Given that we overclock over 40%,how bad do we damage our CPUs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't heard to much about that actually but from what I've heard it shouldn't damage the CPU at all because of the voltage adjustments but i find that very hard to believe... Talking from personal experience my phone runs as smooth now as it did when i bought it so my CPU has probably taken minamal- or no damage at all and I got it when it had just come out here in Denmark (Europe) which is about 8+ months i think? So I wouldn't care to much about the lifetime since It's probably like 1-2 years and by that time I don't think people are using the Hero anymore Keep up the good work with optimizing and your welcome
Hello..anyone can teach me how to overclock xperia x10
Bootloader is not unlocked. It's impossible at the moment.
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
satAxOnic said:
Hello..anyone can teach me how to overclock xperia x10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First, you crack the bootloader.
When you've done that, I'm guessing you allready figured out how to OC the CPU
Sent from my FreeX10i beta2.
satAxOnic said:
Hello..anyone can teach me how to overclock xperia x10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For now just use the overclock widget. set top two settings as high as you want up to 998 click on off screen frequency. set between 246 and next number you choose. set at boot save. define settings at what mhz you like and experiment. do not run on screen and off screen freq at max. i have had my battery sweating and even plugged in all day and not gained a single % of charge. until boot loader is cracked.... this is all you can do.
xperiax10a
2.2b2
Bummmod
gapps1901
quadrant 1800
linpack 40.XX
Although it's impossible today because of bootloader, note it's always dangerous and not great to overclock embedded cpus.
You can't overclock a lot, as you have a battery (X10 works about 5-10 hours with full speed - 998MHz), and the CPU only has passive elements to cool. Overclock can damage your CPU and your motherboard, stress all elements and low your battery life (battery charge and cycle of charge). (Even there's a self shutdown when too hot)
You can get an idea of overclock on Nexus forum, as we have the same CPU (Snapdragon 8250) - I saw overclock up to 1300 MHz, but it's really not looking safe to me
Thanx everyone..
Perceval from Hyrule said:
Although it's impossible today because of bootloader, note it's always dangerous and not great to overclock embedded cpus.
You can't overclock a lot, as you have a battery (X10 works about 5-10 hours with full speed - 998MHz), and the CPU only has passive elements to cool. Overclock can damage your CPU and your motherboard, stress all elements and low your battery life (battery charge and cycle of charge). (Even there's a self shutdown when too hot)
You can get an idea of overclock on Nexus forum, as we have the same CPU (Snapdragon 8250) - I saw overclock up to 1300 MHz, but it's really not looking safe to me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends also on the voltage (as long as your voltage isn't increasing as you overclock, it isn't really that harmful as long as you watch the heat), and what you have your underclock speed set to with screen off (as this can in some sense reverse some of the possible "damage")...
I had my htc hero overclocked to 710 with the screen on, and underclocked 176 with the screen off and it ran a lot better.
I digress, I see no purpose in doing so when you already have a 1ghz processor that is super fast. I only really see a point in overclocking if the possible benefit is greater than the possible harm, and in this circumstance, I really don't think you would see that much benefit.
fiscidtox said:
Depends also on the voltage (as long as your voltage isn't increasing as you overclock, it isn't really that harmful as long as you watch the heat), and what you have your underclock speed set to with screen off (as this can in some sense reverse some of the possible "damage")...
I had my htc hero overclocked to 710 with the screen on, and underclocked 176 with the screen off and it ran a lot better.
I digress, I see no purpose in doing so when you already have a 1ghz processor that is super fast. I only really see a point in overclocking if the possible benefit is greater than the possible harm, and in this circumstance, I really don't think you would see that much benefit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have seen considearable difference when maxed out. however the dangers are high of overheat. ive done it once and onetime only. kept on and off screen at 998 and hat it plugged in all day with out a single gain of battery. it was like on life support and was hot enough the phone was sweating even when sitting next to a fan blowing on it constantly.:-( since then i have made adjustments to run between 700 and 998mhz on screen and min 246 and 400mhz when screen off.
if looking for better performance without the overclock and good drain of battery, download and install sysctl from market and follow settings below.
min free kb: 900000
dirty ratio:500000
dirty background:200000
vfs cache pressure:10
Oom allocating: checked
On SetCPU there is Set on boot- to be checked or not?
Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk
it should be checked
OC can damage yo device. Id say its better to hv a lil slower device than a dead device
Sent from my X10x using XDA App
live4speed said:
OC can damage yo device. Id say its better to hv a lil slower device than a dead device
Sent from my X10x using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not in all instances. Depends on the quality of the chip. Lot of chips are capable of handling higher speeds and temps but are set lower quality assurance.
For instance, I've got a NookColor that has base CPU set at 800MHz and is now overclockable to 1.2GHz
We'll have to do stress tests on some to see what they're capable of.
andrewddickey said:
Not in all instances. Depends on the quality of the chip. Lot of chips are capable of handling higher speeds and temps but are set lower quality assurance.
For instance, I've got a NookColor that has base CPU set at 800MHz and is now overclockable to 1.2GHz
We'll have to do stress tests on some to see what they're capable of.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed.
My Motorola Defy has a Omap3630 that comes at 800MHz,stock but can be easily overclocked to 1.3GHz without a sweat.
Just depends on the chip's capacity of "Stress".
Respect
Hi!
While playing around with my hero more and more I've been experimenting with different roms, kernels and cpu clock speeds. While doing that I've been trying to keep below 710MHz, but after a while i thought "what the hell..." and kept it at 710MHz for a long time. At 710MHz my hero seems to work fine, a little faster then it used to be, and a little more battery consuming. My noob question is since most of the post in here says " be careful going all the way up to 710MHz" almost no one suggest trying anything above, am I doing something wrong? Is the increased performance and the decreased battery life all in my head? I'm using setcpu 2.24, been tested on most roms here, both flykernel 12 and 13 and LV 5.0 and LX 6.2 ++++, and of course i always give it SU.
also, if i'm doing this right, my phone does not get particularly hot at 710MHz, so could i go even higher?
There are differences in devices. Mine for example freezes totally at 710.
I have been using my overclocked hero for a year now, running at 730mhz with no problems, my maximum is 748mhz but approximately after 20 minutes of runing at so high freq the hero was doing really some weird things..730mhz is my ok freq where I can run it without freezing up or any errors, the back cover gets little hot only when doing hards tasks..oh and, dont enable auto apply overclock on boot when testing the highest overclock, did that you dont want to be there when hero freezes up I just pulled out the battery...
I can overcloking my Hero with no problem upto 748.8mHz. If i use 760mHz my Hero are freeze...
Overclocked to 729, it works fine but eats battery like anything. Speeds above 614 are too much for our Heros poor battery.
I'm overclocking to 691, cause it freezes at 710.
If the cpu is really running at 691 for a while it goes upto 40°C. Just use a temperature profile in setcpu.
691 Mhz - 176 Mhz too, moderately stable.
Mine is stable up to 729 MHz
Mine freezes at 710MHz. For everyday use i have 614/352 Screen On settings
172-691Mhz Smartass is good idea. My hero is freeze at 729Mhz.
I am not that aggressive, 352 - 633 MHz. So far very stable.
690 is optimal for me, it does not freeze at 710 but it becames slower if I do a benchmark.
264-633 smartassv2 works perfectly for me. I found at 710 it was a little faster/smoother, but my battery lasted less than a day - using gps at 710 would also cause my phone to reboot.
Mine works till 691, at 710 freezes after few minutes.
Hey all,
I've been noticing over the past few times I've been playing GTAIII and MC3 that the internal temp of my phone rises drastically, to a point where I can barely hold one side of my phone without having to let go every few seconds because it is so hot. From where the battery is positioned, I assumed it might be the GPU heating up, but other att gsII users said their batteries were heating up.
So,
1) Is anyone else experiencing these problems
2) If you are, has anything happened to your phone
I'm debating whether to trade it in for a new one, because I'm still under warranty.
Welcome to high performance electronics. If you push the CPU/GPU hard it's gonna heat up. It's like a desktop, if you do something CPU/GPU intensive it'll heat up. It's a simple byproduct of inefficiency.
As to batteries heating up, that could just be because they're close to the CPU/GPU. Batteries will warm up under high current draw as well.
Do you have a case on your phone? Those tend to trap heat in as well.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
If your phone is overclocked, the processor will be running at the max clock you have set while playing the game, which is higher than what it's supposed to be running at, i.e., the stock clock. Prolonged usage at this higher-than-normal clock will generate excessive heat.
Sent from my SGS II.
Yeah I don't play GTA3 anymore because of this kind of stuff. It doesn't get to the point where I have to literally move my hands because of the heat though. I simply don't like my phone getting even remotely warm. I'm just really anal about stuff like that. I fear that doing it will shorten the life of the device and I love this phone way too much to let that happen.
I'm sure it's designed to run at these higher temps since mine is completely stock with regards to cpu speed and voltage. If I can't play a game due to this, then I simply pass on the game. Same with my computer but I digress...
Download an app to check the temperature. Yes, ideally cooler the better, but the phone is designed to handle a certain amount of heat.
From what the op is describing, that is definitely too hot. Over time the components life can be shortened. But what you'll see first is your battery life going down, even quit working all together.
Underclock the processor. That can help keep the heat down. Even as low as 500mhz can pay many games. 800mhz should be plenty for most high end games.
Sent from my páhhōniē
I'm not overclocked, but yeah, same thing happens with me when I play MC3. I got scaredish since it got a bit too hot, seemed more hot than it was supposed to be.
download the diagnosis app and set it to check your batt temperature, if that gets above 45c I would be worried and think about underclocking/undervolting.
As long as your phone is cool enough to handle, don't worry. There's a lot more to it, but the electronics can take a lot more than most people credit them for. The battery is the most sensitive to temp, but so long as it's not for terribly long periods of time, you shouldn't even notice any additional degradation over the long run.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
I have the Otterbox, which is probably the absolute worst case for heat efficiency
Kadin said:
Yeah I don't play GTA3 anymore because of this kind of stuff. It doesn't get to the point where I have to literally move my hands because of the heat though. I simply don't like my phone getting even remotely warm. I'm just really anal about stuff like that. I fear that doing it will shorten the life of the device and I love this phone way too much to let that happen.
I'm sure it's designed to run at these higher temps since mine is completely stock with regards to cpu speed and voltage. If I can't play a game due to this, then I simply pass on the game. Same with my computer but I digress...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree! I baby this phone to every extent and I hate that feeling I get when it gets warm because I just assume the worst. I keep thinking the gpu is going to blow up or some extreme thing like that
What temp ranges are ideal?
gr8hairy1 said:
Download an app to check the temperature. Yes, ideally cooler the better, but the phone is designed to handle a certain amount of heat.
From what the op is describing, that is definitely too hot. Over time the components life can be shortened. But what you'll see first is your battery life going down, even quit working all together.
Underclock the processor. That can help keep the heat down. Even as low as 500mhz can pay many games. 800mhz should be plenty for most high end games.
Sent from my páhhōniē
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What temp ranges are ideal?
Brodad said:
What temp ranges are ideal?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1372473
Average day to day operating temps are between 30° and 40° celsius.
Sent from my páhhōniē
If anyone's interested, I have pretty much eradicated the heat problem while also boosting battery life and conserving performance. This was done through setCpu: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=505419
The problem was that apps were just running the processor like crazy on the 1.2 GHz speed setting, and it used a considerable amount of juice that was unnecessary, heating up the battery to a ridiculous amount.
But anyway, here's the profiles/voltage settings I use:
Main Governor: 200 MHz - 1200 MHz on demand
Profiles:
- Charging, 800 max, 200 min, ondemand, priority = 100
- Temp > 44.1 Celsius, 500 max, 200 min, conservative, priority = 100
(this is a conservative temperature, but most place the *dangerous* amount of heat at 50 degrees before battery life starts decreasing, the CPU/GPU components have solder that melts at 70 degrees)
-Screen Off, 500 max, 200 min, conservative, priority = 75
-Battery <25%, 800 max, 200 min, powersave, priority = 75
-In Call, 800 max, 200 min, conservative, priority = 50
Voltages:
(I was able to undervolt by 50-75 mV for each and still remain stable, these are tested btw)
1600 MHz - 1400 mV
1400 MHz - 1225 mV
1200 MHz - 1200 mV
1000 MHz - 1100 mV
800 MHz - 1025 mV
500 MHz - 950 mV
200 MHz - 875 mV
and that's it! It's working great, I don't have the heat issues I used to, now I can play graphically demanding games and the temp doesn't rise past ~42 degrees, pretty solid improvement. I also get 24-28 hours of battery life with 2-2.5 hours of screen on time per day.
No need to worry about this. That's nowaday phones designed to be. Just normal heat.
amtrakcn said:
No need to worry about this. That's nowaday phones designed to be. Just normal heat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that's how they're 'supposed' to be. But things mess up. AMD processors are designed to handle heat, but they are still known for getting too hot and damaging the graphics chip. Better safe than sorry.
Sent from my páhhōniē
Agreed. theory and actuality are two incredibly different concepts
I remember there was this long debate about ASUS/NVIDIA and how they took away the 107MHz frequency and how it affected battery life..
For the record, on my CPU Spy I have it at 120 hours with 35% at 370MHz and 0% (56 minutes) at 102MHz with the rest in deep sleep and 405 and up to 1300MHz with great battery life.
In any case, there's a discussion in EVO 3D about CPU that might have some bearing on the frequencies and how it affects battery life and why sometimes the lowest one isn't the best for battery life.
Now, of course we know the variances between all the devices posted on here so while a lot of folks might have been fine, some might not, but that seems to be the case for the Prime. Hence we saw posts from folks saying they were fine with battery when it was at a min of 370MHz while some had worse.
Also, the Prime does use a different CPU than the EVO 3D so that could be taken into account as well
Anyways, good read for those interested
-----
From http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=23384703&postcount=2110
Thanks for the feedback. I do appreciate it, but by the looks of your post, you didn't see my detailed description of why the frequencies are set to what they are now. I was more interested in what people are actually experiencing as far as performance and battery in real world tests and conditions. From your post, the information that I believe is relevant is that you think your phone runs fine at 192Mhz. I'll accept that for what it is (a data point) but I already know from experience that you are in the minority here. As soon as I released v1.1 with the 192Mhz min frequency, I immediately started getting inundated with people complaining that battery life was much worse, and the phone lagged more on occasion. Then when I brought the frequency back up to 384Mhz, the vast majority reported "thank you, battery life is back to phenomenal and lag is gone". Well, that's what got me on my quest to actually find and measure the needed frequencies.
No, neither HTC nor Qualcomm set these devices up to work as well as they actually can. They simply do not have the resources and the time. These things are rushed to market and updates are no better: they are designed to "make the device work". That's about it! So when I actually started testing these things, I found that 192Mhz was far too slow to make this phone work without lag. 384 fixed the problem but when I looked into it further, 486 worked even better, and without extra battery drain. I didn't pull these numbers out of a hat nor did I increase them for bragging rights. They are measured values of what the phone actually needs in order to keep up! I spent many hours testing different states, what frequencies are needed when the CPU wakes up when the screen is off, etc. Simply put, 192 doesn't cut it (not even close) and 384 doesn't quite cut it either. When you crunch the numbers, you find that the phone actually needed 432Mhz while running one core with the screen off and 540Mhz while running dual core with the screen on. Lowering those numbers caused the CPU to jump relentlessly between the min/max numbers and when you look at the time and crunch the numbers, it was always shooting for those figures: 432 with screen off and 540 with screen on!
In other words, if you crank it down to even 384Mhz while the screen is on and IDLING (not even running any games or other apps: what you called "waiting for input"), it'll hop up to 1188 much more frequently and in fact, crunch the numbers for the amount of time it spent at 384 and 1188 and get an average and you'll find that on average, the CPU was using about 540Mhz of power with the screen on and about 432Mhz with the screen off. I will add a disclaimer here that yours may be slightly different (up or down one notch in the time table) from the 432-off/540-on numbers, but I did test a variety of configurations as I said in my description when I released 2.0 and 432/540 minimum frequencies were the good middle ground that worked well under all setups from clean install to heavily loaded down. Part of the need for higher minimum frequencies is because with the screen off, there's an initial "crunch" when the CPU is awakened and that often requires more CPU power than when a longer task is being performed. And with the screen on, it is always doing more than just waiting for input from you! There's a lot more going on in there than you think. Even bumping the min screen-on frequency from 384 to 486Mhz caused a dozen posts saying "Wow, lag is completely gone" and "apps seem to open before I even touch the screen". This is not placebo. This is noticeable and even measurable in benchmarks! No, the phone CANNOT and will not instantly crank up to 1188 Mhz from 192 (or 384). I've proven this many times. It doesn't work that way.
You have to remember that the decision to ramp up to 1188 is made at 192Mhz! It only measures CPU load 20 times per second. And it will never be able to ramp up to 1188 in 1/20 second! The reason is that by the time the service reports a high CPU load (high enough to trip the up-frequency), you've already experienced 1/20 second lag minimum. At that point, it takes at least one more cycle to actually increase CPU frequency at which point you've experienced at least 1/10 second of lag. That is almost always noticeable. To complicate matters, if you look at the code for the daemon, you'll notice that it is a "nice" process which means other high priority system processes can actually "steal" time from the daemon and that can actually greatly increase the amount of time it takes for the daemon to actually raise CPU frequency once it notices the phone is lagging. By that time, you've already noticed additional wait to open an app, a "hiccup" while scrolling, etc. The reality is, your phone can lag at 192Mhz (or 384) for several 1/20 second cycles before the CPU is actually ramped up to the full 1188 and THAT is what causes the lag.
So long story short (I know, too late now) I have to discount all your questioning about whether or not I got the numbers right because your assumptions about the numbers are quite frankly all dead wrong! Your scale of the numbers in your car analogy doesn't fit either. I actually do performance tuning on (among other setups) Hemis. The analogy is more like: set your idle to 192 RPM and see if you can keep it running. If it does, it'll be loping like hell and then when you hit the gas, what happens? It bogs. It's because the system wasn't ready for the load. Set it to 540RPM and see how much better it responds. That's a better analogy here.
So I'm really interested in actual results more than people pulling their own numbers out of a hat and saying "these make more sense to me". A lot of testing went into the CPU tweaks in this ROM and I'm aware of "theories" about how people think 192 might be better or 384 is better. Been there done that. That was the boardroom stage... kinda where HTC and Qualcomm left it. We're already out on the track racing and making adjustments.
Oh, and the frequencies are no more "locked" now than they've ever been. I intentionally set up the init.post_boot.sh so that they can easily be changed. So if you want to run yours at the laggier, less efficient 192Mhz, the choice is yours. Just follow Lrod's instructions above. I was going to post those but he did a fine job.
Edit: I also notice you said at one point "So I don't understand why the decision was made in v2.0 to raise the minimum frequencies to 432mhz for core0 and 540mhz for core1.". CPU0 is never run at a different minimum frequency than CPU1. The numbers for min/max are:
- Screen off: CPU0 = 432/648, CPU1 = offline
- Screen on: CPU0 = 540/1188, CPU1 = 540/1188
And again, these numbers came from actual measurements and number crunching. Didn't matter what you used for minimum frequency: you could set it to 192 and run the phone for a day, and then set it to 384 and run the phone for a day. What you'd find is that regardless of what you picked, the CPU was always "hunting" for about 432Mhz with the screen off and about 540Mhz with the screen on. And with screen on, I mean the screen forced on but the phone doing nothing but idling on the home screen. The CPU was doing nothing but typical background tasks with an occasional email or SMS message coming in and maybe a stray screen scrolling thrown in infrequently.
Mike