Related
How high do you think we can clock the processors on the EVO 3D? I recall they are 1.5 ghz chips underclocked to conserve battery life. Think these can hit that magical 2.0? Or at least 1.8?
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's your opinion. I highly doubt a overclocking the processor to 1.8 would bring the phone down to one hour of battery life. It's not like it would be constantly running at that speed. I would prefer speed over battery life as I charge my phone every night and have plenty left over even overclocked to almost 1.3 on my EVO.
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is less about practicality and more about pushing our phone to the limits. overclocking on an already fast enough processor on a device which runs for the most part on battery, is not needed. however it is fun and nice to see the benchmarks soar.
I say 1.8ghz-2ghz
If they're anything like the EVO 4G, then it wont be a very high overclock
But assuming all are capable of 1.5 GHz, then it would be at least a 400-450 MHz overclock!
freeza said:
If they're anything like the EVO 4G, then it wont be a very high overclock
But assuming all are capable of 1.5 GHz, then it would be at least a 400-450 MHz overclock!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My g2x was overclocked to 1.6ghz and its only a 1ghz dual core phone...
Id say we could see maybe 1.8ghz if this phone is really 1.5 dropped down to 1.2
sent from anything but an iPhone
fmedina2 said:
Well that's your opinion. I highly doubt a overclocking the processor to 1.8 would bring the phone down to one hour of battery life. It's not like it would be constantly running at that speed. I would prefer speed over battery life as I charge my phone every night and have plenty left over even overclocked to almost 1.3 on my EVO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again for e-penis and bragging rights on benchmarks nothing more...
As for saying 1.8 oc would kill it in a hour I was joking...
And I bet dollars to donuts you don't see a change in "speed" past 1.6ghz other than a hot battery.
Ginger bread can't fully optimize dual cores it does the job but untill a new os is out
no point ruining a battery for "speed" you won't see
sent from anything but an iPhone
While performance is key, I'd say this phone is well above the bar of expectations for most Android Apps at the current time. I'm more interested in squeezing the most battery life I possibly can via Underclocking. It will be nice to see how far this can be pushed with Two Cores to spread the workload across.
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
btw the way i have the bigest e penis lol it is googolplex inchs
why are people saying such low numbers the second gen snapdragons can go to what 1.9? if ours is 1.5 stock dropped down to 1.2 then i think we can at least hit 2
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
hdad2 said:
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong, to lazy to explain for now.
toxicfumes22 said:
Wrong.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope so!
10char
toxicfumes22 said:
Wrong, to lazy to explain for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, a little less lazy right now. But simply the way that manufactures choose the speeds for processors is actually simple. In the case of the 3D it IS underclocked. The processor is an asynchronous dual core with clock speeds initially set at 1.5 by Qualcom and is used in Qualcom's phone they produce for developers. It is underclocked by HTC because of battery problems listed from the 4G and the unnecessary need of 1.5GHz in a F*ing phone. Manufactures for the most part do not underclock the CPU. The reason it is set at the level it is, is because it is most stable, efficient and meets the heat extraction needs (People forget CPUs are just circuits and produce heat with more voltage). OK lets back this up shall we. OK.
That is why I'm too lazy to post thing, I have to search up a link cause most of this is my general knowledge. Anyways, the QSD8650 found in the EVO 4G is clocked at 1GHz and has been posted to a stable 1.3GHz I believe by a recent post. Now the MSM8660 is posted to be a 1.5GHz CPU, so its overclocking potential is more near 2GHz but I would suspect it to get a little warm(sweaty palms anyone?) and I wouldn't know how stable it would be either (I don't know phones the best). Why is it underclocked? Because people kept *****ing at how much battery the EVO used and as technology improves so does the efficiency of CPUs so they go with the most recent and just underclock it. I've seen a comparison graph somewhere by Qualcom but I spent about 10minutes looking for it and couldn't find it but it was really nifty. If someone finds it plz post it, it shows the energy vs Clock speed and it is very cool.
Anyways, to respond to whoever said that the 1.5GHz is the max and that all manufacturers underclock the CPU based upon the silicon is WRONG, wrong WrOnG and Rong/wong (Im sorry I dont remember the exact response). Anyways, its the heat extraction and the silicon hurts it because it doesn't let all the heat through, which is one of the reason your PS3 may have yellow lighted on you(Yes its because of the CPU disconnecting from the Motherboard, but why do you think this extra heat was generated?).
Sorry this is so long and I got distracted a few times while writing it so it I messed up or something doesn't make sense I apologize but being lazy is really a pain in the ass.
hdad2 said:
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be the case if this wasn't an MSM 8660. You're thinking like when AMD makes chips for the HD 6970 and some are found not to be stable at 880 mhz so they bin it to use in the HD 6950 which runs at 800 mhz. These are actually sold as two separate products. In the case of the processor in the Evo it's an MSM 8660 which is sold by qualcomm to be run at speeds as high as 1.5 ghz. If they wanted to sell chips binned for lower speeds they'd have to sell it as a different model since it wouldn't be capable of the 1.5hz.
jersey221 said:
why are people saying such low numbers the second gen snapdragons can go to what 1.9? if ours is 1.5 stock dropped down to 1.2 then i think we can at least hit 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.9?
No sir it was 1.19stable...
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
donatom3 said:
That would be the case if this wasn't an MSM 8660. You're thinking like when AMD makes chips for the HD 6970 and some are found not to be stable at 880 mhz so they bin it to use in the HD 6950 which runs at 800 mhz. These are actually sold as two separate products. In the case of the processor in the Evo it's an MSM 8660 which is sold by qualcomm to be run at speeds as high as 1.5 ghz. If they wanted to sell chips binned for lower speeds they'd have to sell it as a different model since it wouldn't be capable of the 1.5hz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you explain this to me please.
toxic and donatom,
Your explanations make perfect sense. So I hope to be wrong. Does qualcomm sell a processor with that same architecture and a lower clock advertised?
Just seems like they're not gonna throw them away if they are stable and 1.2 or 1.4 but less stable at 1.5+. The 3vo seems like a good way for them to unload those processors.
hdad2 said:
toxic and donatom,
Your explanations make perfect sense. So I hope to be wrong. Does qualcomm sell a processor with that same architecture and a lower clock advertised?
Just seems like they're not gonna throw them away if they are stable and 1.2 or 1.4 but less stable at 1.5+. The 3vo seems like a good way for them to unload those processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To my knowledge, if this happens it gets recycled. But.....if this happens a lot then they need to change their manufacturing process or that the technology isn't there yet. Like now we have the technology to do 64GB MicroSD, but why do it because most devices can only do 32GB. For the companies that do sell them, well....I don't have good words for them, I also don't know of this happening. I can understand that it could be useful for donations to universities or others that could use them for damn near free prices, but not resold even under a different name.
toxicfumes22 said:
Can you explain this to me please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well in the case of AMD with many of their chip lines they produce a higher end chip. The ones that don't fully pass the tests at the higher speed get sold as a different model with a lower clock and voltage.
I have the most experience with the HD 6970 and 6950. They both use the same GPU, but the ones in the 6950 didn't pass AMD's tests at higher speeds so they are set at a lower clock and voltage than the 6970 (they also have some shaders disbaled). They are sold as two different models even though they were made the exact same way with the same silicone. This is not new chip manufacturers have been doing this for a while.
Think of it this way I make 100k chips out of those 100k I'm going to have a percentage that can't perform at their top performance, so instead of throwing them away I make a different model and underclock it and still make money on the chips that didn't pass at the higher speed. Now sometimes I will sell more of the lower end model so I actually have to take some chips that probably would have passed as the higher end model and sell them at the lower end. In this case the user gets lucky and can unlock their chip to the performance of the higher priced model.
EDIT: What HTC is doing here is buying a 1.5ghz chip but purposely underclocking it to save battery, since they figured most users wouldn't see the .3 ghz difference but would see the difference in battery life. Again in video cards you see this but usually the other way around. A manufacturer such as Asus, gigabyte, whomever takes the best of their chips they bought and overclocks them because again some were made even better than the standards set by AMD or Nvidia.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that ALL these chips should do 1.5 ghz stable without question, unless there isn't enough space inside for the cooling requirements at 1.5ghz (which I doubt), and most should easily go above 1.6.
Edit again since I just saw this post:
toxicfumes22 said:
To my knowledge, if this happens it gets recycled. But.....if this happens a lot then they need to change their manufacturing process or that the technology isn't there yet. Like now we have the technology to do 64GB MicroSD, but why do it because most devices can only do 32GB. For the companies that do sell them, well....I don't have good words for them, I also don't know of this happening. I can understand that it could be useful for donations to universities or others that could use them for damn near free prices, but not resold even under a different name.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is something that happens mostly in higher end processors because their tolerances at those speeds are less forgiving. No manufacturing process is perfect, you're going to have some that won't perform at those very high speeds, and recycling would cost more to the company and environment then simply selling them at lower speeds. These chips are not bad, and not defective, just found to not be stable at those highest speeds, but are perfectly fine at the speeds they are being sold at, so why throw them away. If they don't meet the standards at the lower speed then yes they would be recycled.
As many of us know, our chipset is already on Turbo to 800mhz. The recommended is 600. Most of us are on the belief that it can still be overclocked... is it possible? Anyone familiar with hardware here?
(It may be a waste of time for developers include it and test a phone being over-overclocked... not to mention probable damage too.)
XDA ♥
consegregate said:
As many of us know, our chipset is already on Turbo to 800mhz. The recommended is 600. Most of us are on the belief that it can still be overclocked... is it possible? Anyone familiar with hardware here?
(It may be a waste of time for developers include it and test a phone being over-overclocked... not to mention probable damage too.)
XDA ♥
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude if u would have done a simple search on ace xda u would have found many threads related to the topic which u trying to get answer..
Anyways coming to ur points ...
Ya its possible...1GHz is the max...and no developer right now its working on overclocking..and that 1 GHz will m make ur battery drain faster.....
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App
digkong said:
Dude if u would have done a simple search on ace xda u would have found many threads related to the topic which u trying to get answer..
Anyways coming to ur points ...
Ya its possible...1GHz is the max...and no developer right now its working on overclocking..and that 1 GHz will m make ur battery drain faster.....
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need to be so aggressive sir that would just sound trollish.
"simple search" arrives at a thread of your question about ace overclock, rumor of "1.3 Ghz" but can you include your source?
The chipset we're using, the Qualcomm MSM7227 chipset, is a 600mhz processor which samsung overclocked to 800.. If it's overclocked already at 800 I'm asking if it would be safe to do it further? Since some of us are under the impression that the processor is packaged for 800mhz as original.
it isn't overclocked, it's turbo boosted.
i know that these things are 2 different things.
shailo said:
it isn't overclocked, it's turbo boosted.
i know that these things are 2 different things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Weird though it runs "turbo" most of the time in use..
Do you know the difference? Google brings no results.
Qualcomm msm7227 turbo
I actually met a person working in Qualcomm and i had asked him that if the processor on our ace is overclocked or not. He told no. It seems that qualcomm uses a better processor on the chipset whose regualr clock frequency is 800 MHz. I have used a ZTE blade and tried to overclock it and it hangs at 729 MHz and it has msm7227 chipset. Our ace naturally is at 800 MHz so thus AFAIK it can be overclocked
tr.supradeep said:
I actually met a person working in Qualcomm and i had asked him that if the processor on our ace is overclocked or not. He told no. It seems that qualcomm uses a better processor on the chipset whose regualr clock frequency is 800 MHz. I have used a ZTE blade and tried to overclock it and it hangs at 729 MHz and it has msm7227 chipset. Our ace naturally is at 800 MHz so thus AFAIK it can be overclocked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is really helpful. X10 Mini Pro uses msm 7227 chipset too and the best people can push is 768 before it freezes... Okay I feel better now, this phone can get 1 Ghz in the future. Awaiting the maturing of the development of this phone!
This may help you..a thread about overclocking
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=5600295&postcount=1
Simple question. Is the 3VO's processor really 1.5 ghz underclocked to 1.2? I had seen this information floating around, but none of my searches are able to find anything firmly confirming or denying this.
Thanks
That's what I've also heard, however I still can't find anything to confirm or deny.
Nobody knows, eh?
Yes it is underclocked.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
Yes it is underclocked.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sources????
You can't be serious? This has been discussed and answered dozens of times... Google MSM8660..
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
You can't be serious? This has been discussed and answered dozens of times... Google MSM8660..
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't help, the MSM8660 comes in a 1.2 Ghz and a 1.5 Ghz variant.
poweroutlet said:
That doesn't help, the MSM8660 comes in a 1.2 Ghz and a 1.5 Ghz variant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
........
Appreciate my help? Thank me
It comes in two different factory clocks, which is what you said.. One is lower than the other because of manufacturer requests and the it being pointless to have 1.5 on a phone. If I were to pull the CPU's supported frequencies, it will say it supports 1512000, which is 1.5Ghz. The 8672 comes factory clocked at 1.5Ghz... They are all the same SoC, but with different applications. Such as one being CDMA support other being GSM. The ones that come in 1.2Ghz is because it is being used on a phone. If it were a tablet, or netbook, the clock would be 1.5Ghz which would be the 8672 or 8660..
Rest assured that 1.5Ghz is a frequency supported for the 8660...
In the end, they are the same SoC, running the same architecture. There is nothing different from the MSM 8260, 8660 and 8672 (which is cancelled). They are all under the 45nm process also.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
It comes in two different factory clocks, which is what you said.. One is lower than the other because of manufacturer requests and the it being pointless to have 1.5 on a phone. If I were to pull the CPU's supported frequencies, it will say it supports 1512000, which is 1.5Ghz. The 8672 comes factory clocked at 1.5Ghz... They are all the same SoC, but with different applications. Such as one being CDMA support of GSM. The ones that come in 1.2Ghz is because it is being used on a phone. If it were a tablet, or netbook, the clock would be 1.5Ghz
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too bad you can't be sure of that. That MAY be the case, but it may also be the case that the 1.2 MSM8660s are the lower binned chips and the 1.5 are the higher binned units. This is done all the time in the CPU world. Someone gave an example here of how AMD sold the Barton 2500+ CPU which was really just a lower binned 3200+, a CPU that was far more expensive.
Your point that they are all the same SOC is not relevant, Intel and AMD for example have sold many processors which are all identical in architecture and every spec down to TDP, and the only difference is the frequency. It is just that the higher binned chips become the higher speced CPUs and the lower binned ones become the lower end ones. This doesn't mean that a lower binned CPU can't exceed its specification but it does mean that its likely that the higher binned CPU can go even higher. In any case, they are certainly not equal.
Just because they are the same SOC, does not mean you can assume that the 1.2 and 1.5 Ghz units are the same. That's like assuming the Intel Pentium 4 2.4C and the 3.0C are the same. They are the exact same CPU, same architecture, same cache, FSB, etc except one is clocked a bit higher and is of a higher bin. The 3.0C was the superior unit (Higher bin, better ability to overclock, etc).
My point is, we don't actually know if Qualcomm is giving us simply downclocked versions of the 1.5 or if our 1.2s are just lower binned 1.5s. The latter would make more sense for them in terms of profits, therefore its not surprising that this is a common practice in the industry.
poweroutlet said:
Too bad you can't be sure of that. That MAY be the case, but it may also be the case that the 1.2 MSM8660s are the lower binned chips and the 1.5 are the higher binned units. This is done all the time in the CPU world. Someone gave an example here of how AMD sold the Barton 2500+ CPU which was really just a lower binned 3200+, a CPU that was far more expensive.
Your point that they are all the same SOC is not relevant, Intel and AMD for example have sold many processors which are all identical in architecture and every spec down to TDP, and the only difference is the frequency. It is just that the higher binned chips become the higher speced CPUs and the lower binned ones become the lower end ones. This doesn't mean that a lower binned CPU can't exceed its specification but it does mean that its likely that the higher binned CPU can go even higher. In any case, they are certainly not equal.
Just because they are the same SOC, does not mean you can assume that the 1.2 and 1.5 Ghz units are the same. That's like assuming the Intel Pentium 4 2.4C and the 3.0C are the same. They are the exact same CPU, same architecture, same cache, FSB, etc except one is clocked a bit higher and is of a higher bin. The 3.0C was the superior unit (Higher bin, better ability to overclock, etc).
My point is, we don't actually know if Qualcomm is giving us simply downclocked versions of the 1.5 or if our 1.2s are just lower binned 1.5s. The latter would make more sense for them in terms of profits, its not surprise that this is a common practice in the industry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you are talking about.. I forgot about bins. I know for it on PC's, but didn't think much of it for a smartphone.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
I'm going to say you may be right about the bins. There are some people on here who can't reach past 1.5 for the life of god.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
I see what you are talking about.. I forgot about bins. I know for it on PC's, but didn't think much of it for a smartphone.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, regardless though, our CPUs are already doing 1.8 stable and maybe even higher, that's plenty fast for me so I don't really care if the 1.5s are even better at clocking (well I might care if I start seeing the 1.5 phones breaking 2 Ghz haha).
poweroutlet said:
Yeah, regardless though, our CPUs are already doing 1.8 stable and maybe even higher, that's plenty fast for me so I don't really care if the 1.5s are even better at clocking (well I might care if I start seeing the 1.5 phones breaking 2 Ghz haha).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea me too
Appreciate my help? Thank me
You've been thanked for reminding me of the bins. Not once did that come into mind.
#fail
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
You've been thanked for reminding me of the bins. Not once did that come into mind.
#fail
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries man.
These are super limited. They were released on the 20th on the HP site at $599 then pulled before they sold many. I am not sure why they did this. Maybe they will relist them when the last wave of HP Touchpads go for sale.
Aside from it being 1.5 GHz and having 64 GB of space, what differences are there? Think it is a higher binned CPU? Maybe it will hit 1.9 GHz easily. Perhaps it even has better cooling since it is clocked higher. I also wonder if the PCB is different. Maybe it has a USB powered 4G "slot" somewhere on it. That would be a fun mod to give the tablet a USB port with a little soldering. Hopefully they used the same PCB as the 4G version.
I get mine Tuesday. Anyone else here get one and willing to disassemble?
If you are wondering what the hell I am talking about, you can refer to the post on SD that points to a site where 200 were sold.
slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3236371
wow, white would look amazing! is the digitizer white aswell? your lucky dude! does it have 3g?
No, my understanding is that it's the same SoC as the 16/32gb version. The same thing was going to happen for the HSPA+ AT&T version.
http://forums.precentral.net/hp-touchpad/287396-tps-apq8060-cpu-ment-clocked-1-5ghz.html
This is why OC'ing to 1.5ghz is virtually danger free.
jmhalder said:
No, my understanding is that it's the same SoC as the 16/32gb version. The same thing was going to happen for the HSPA+ AT&T version.
http://forums.precentral.net/hp-touchpad/287396-tps-apq8060-cpu-ment-clocked-1-5ghz.html
This is why OC'ing to 1.5ghz is virtually danger free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.7 should be virtually risk free as well.
Dual core Scorpions have a baseline of 1.2Ghz and a max of 1.5Ghz. Anything above 1.5Ghz is a risk.
wrong the 1.2 on our cpu is under clocked. 1.5 is normal and 1.7 is a super easy 200mhz OC
tazzmissionx said:
Dual core Scorpions have a baseline of 1.2Ghz and a max of 1.5Ghz. Anything above 1.5Ghz is a risk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While that may be true for some chips, its obviously not true here. No manufacturer will release a chip and use it to its max potential right off the bat. Not only is that dangerous (overheat/melting/high failure rates), but not good business sense.
All newer smartphones/tablets, especially ones running The snapdragon chip and the tegra 2 chip are ALL underclocked slightly.
In our case, HP UNDERclocked our chip. Normally it sees duty running @ 1.5ghz (as in the white TP), but they chose to run it at 1.2ghz in ours. Thats why its deemed safe to "overclock" our TP to 1.5ghz, and some like me, clock it @ 1.712.
sanvara said:
1.7 should be virtually risk free as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its possible for HP to be binning the CPUs for the 1.5ghz
(like how AMD bins the quad core CPUs. if it doesn't make the cut, disable that core and sell it as tri-core CPU)
paperWastage said:
its possible for HP to be binning the CPUs for the 1.5ghz
(like how AMD bins the quad core CPUs. if it doesn't make the cut, disable that core and sell it as tri-core CPU)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doubt it, they wouldnt go through all that trouble..
Well, I started using it today. So far I have logging off, dev mode on, preware installed. I am not going to change the kernel because for all I know it bricks the 64GB versions. I think I will hold out until overclocking is as simple as an app like with the hd2.
If anyone has any specific questions or things that I can look up, please ask.
I've got a question - what on earth possesses someone to spend four times as much money to get a device that is a different color and comes with $10 more worth of storage?
;-)
Has anyone tried the kernel from the 64gb to the 16/32gb models?
Official speed up?
Just so I can say I have one of the super rare white ones. TBH, I tried getting the other ones and was out of luck. I was on vacation Friday-Sunday that weekend. I placed orders on Sunday night and this was the only one to go through. I was on them the second they were posted on SD. 260 shipped for a tablet that hardware wise is better than the Ipad 2 64GB is a good deal in my book. Right now it sucks for apps, but I am sure the android port will fix that within the next 6 months.
Supposedly someone has overclocked it. Go to page 41 on that thread I linked on my first post here. Someone claims to have overclocked it to 1.92 causing it to lockup. 1.7 seems stable. I guess that is no different than the 16 and 32.
Crucible1001 said:
Well, I started using it today. So far I have logging off, dev mode on, preware installed. I am not going to change the kernel because for all I know it bricks the 64GB versions. I think I will hold out until overclocking is as simple as an app like with the hd2.
If anyone has any specific questions or things that I can look up, please ask.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The touchpads are all the same except for the obvious 64 GB of space and the white shell.
Then what allowing the 64gb model to run at the stock clock and the rest running underclocked?
bigsnack said:
Then what allowing the 64gb model to run at the stock clock and the rest running underclocked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Frequency HP let them run at? 1.5 GHz is stock clocks for our processor. Which is why everyone can "OC" to it so easily. HP underclocked for battery/heat reasons.
1.84Ghz ****ers!
Nburnes said:
Frequency HP let them run at? 1.5 GHz is stock clocks for our processor. Which is why everyone can "OC" to it so easily. HP underclocked for battery/heat reasons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, then its not like in the kernel or anything HP programmed to make the 64gb run at the stock clock? Dang ya'll.
}{Alienz}{ said:
1.84Ghz ****ers!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same, just more politely .
You may want to sell this baby. I saw one on ebay that had a ending bid of $820.... a couple of days ago there was one that sold for $520.
[Discussion]
This thread is purely a discussion about our phone's processor ability to be overclocked.
Does anyone here have any idea how our beloved xperia mini/minipro/lww processor can be clock as high as 2GHz as opposed to its default clock speed(1GHz)? If you carefully goes beyond our phone subforums into the realms other phone you can see that much of the phone there can't be overclock as high as our phone can go. Eg; other phone with 1GHz processor can only be overclock to 1.3GHz.
Any ideas? Developers facts can be very helpful.
Sent from my Xperia Mini Pro using xda premium
Well 1600 mhz is stable for me,I will try 2000 mhz as soon I install supported rom.About 1300 mhz max for some models looks stupid to me,I didnt read post that says that.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk
XperianPro said:
Well 1600 mhz is stable for me,I will try 2000 mhz as soon I install supported rom.About 1300 mhz max for some models looks stupid to me,I didnt read post that says that.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tried 2GHz on my phone, seems to be okay w/o any instability issue.
Fortunately our phone isn't maxed out at 1.3GHz, almost all kernel for our phone support up to 2GHz, what I meant is, phone like x10 seems to be maxed out at 1.3GHz. Just small increment from 1GHz to 1.3. While our phone can go all the way up from 1GHz to 2GHz doubling its default clock speed.
Sent from my Xperia Mini Pro using xda premium
i've only tried to run benchmarks on my phone up to 1.6GHz,
did not try higher speeds because i am worried about the CPU might break...
as per x kernel latest release, they have set the limit to just 1.8GHz.
seems that would be the safest our CPUs would reach but still its not same for all units.
i am not completely aware about the technical specifics of the CPU but it seems that it could have been made that way.
the only thing that would limit the CPU capabilities is the temperature and the battery capacity, since running an overclocked CPU on a 1200mAh battery is not that efficient.
You're not exactly correct OP.
My Active, with the OC Spartan kernel, goes up to 2Ghz on my device and its perfectly stable.
On my Desire Z however, stock Mhz is 800, and i have oc'd it to 1.9Ghz stable, thats over 140% (russian election pun not intended ) oc. It is one of the most highly overclockable devices yet.
So it's not only our devices that go to 100% of stock speeds. Ill remind you that companies, take some "malfuncioning" processor chips that might have a specific part of them not working, lower their speeds to make them stable chips, and then ship them out to manufacturing.
That is why some devices dont go over 1.9Ghz. Its just a matter of quality of the CPU. I know this because back in the days of the ATI9500, which was actually a ATI9700Pro, just underclocked because a pipeline was malfunctioning, so instead of throwing them away, they locked the pipeline and sold them as a lower budget Video Card. With some tools though you could unlock the pipeline and if you were lucky you could have an ATI9700Pro in the price of a ATI9500
I have one question while we are on this topic.
Our phones have MSM8225 chipset while the Arc S has MSM8255T (clocked at 1.4 GHz). I'm curious, is there any noticeable difference between these two chipsets? If there isn't why aren't our phones clocked at 1GHz?
The reason these go by 8255 and 8255T are stated in the post i made above. Same chips, different quality. It seems that not all 8255 can be stable up to 1.4-1.5Ghz, so they released a cheaper 8255 line that is clocked at 1Ghz.
dumraden said:
The reason these go by 8255 and 8255T are stated in the post i made above. Same chips, different quality. It seems that not all 8255 can be stable up to 1.4-1.5Ghz, so they released a cheaper 8255 line that is clocked at 1Ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are completely right but I have to say that architecture has something to do as well on my old x10 mini arm6 I had a 600 MHz processor going at Max of 800 and something and now my lww arm7 can go as high as 2 ghz lol.
ginryu said:
You are completely right but I have to say that architecture has something to do as well on my old x10 mini arm6 I had a 600 MHz processor going at Max of 800 and something and now my lww arm7 can go as high as 2 ghz lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The maximum CPU clock frequency is placed by kernel developer, what he thinks is fine. It is not that phone's CPU can really put up with that high clock frequency.
Someguyfromhell said:
The maximum CPU clock frequency is placed by kernel developer, what he thinks is fine. It is not that phone's CPU can really put up with that high clock frequency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure then the cpu had nothing to do when you clock a 600 mhz cpu to 845 mhz and it crashes?? come on that is a lame thing to say in this thread
ginryu said:
Sure then the cpu had nothing to do when you clock a 600 mhz cpu to 845 mhz and it crashes?? come on that is a lame thing to say in this thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I ment, was that the actual maximal overclock frequency, where you can set it, is set by kernel developer.
You can set the CPU max frequency 1Ghz, 1.2Ghz, whatever. But the really maximum, which you can set, for example 2Ghz in Rage Kernel, 1.8Ghz in X Kernel, is set by kernel developer.
It is not tested that phone can put up with that high frequency. That is your own responsibility to try and risk.
Imagine cpus being made like cookies.Although you use the same ingredients not all cookies are baked the same, not matter how good your oven is.Cpus get out of the "oven" and tested for stability.The less stable are clocked lower, the more stable higher and that depends from the voltage they need to run and the maximum safe temperature that is allowed so the chip can last long time.So they say that chips which fall between A and B specifications (temp voltage etc...) are going to clocked to 1 GHz and those that range between C and D to 1.4 GHz.But those who are close to A are not the same as B, same with C and D.That's why some cpus clock better than others even though they're clocked at the same speed.At least that's how computer cpus were made if i recall correctly.
Its marketing trick.
Why should I buy WT19i when I can buy Arc S with higher clock rate.
Same processor because if processor is diffrent they would need to make new S1Boot,if in arc s is new bootloader patch wont work.
Sent from my WT19i using Tapatalk