Is it just me, or does just about every aosp Rom and kernel have some type of Lockscreen lag? My bolts currently running iBolt, with tiamats kernel. I've tried cm7, and onfgb, all with different kernels to no effect. Only thing that I haven't done is overclocking.
Sent from my iBolt. Don't mess with the power!
Are you underclocking with when you have the screen off?
No, running stock speeds, 245 _ 1036.
Sent from my iBolt. Don't mess with the power!
Alright, found the issue. Disabling logcat did the trick. Guess it was eating up tons of resources. Logcat is on by default on this Rom, so a quick disable and reboot eliminated Lockscreen lag.
Sent from my iBolt. Don't mess with the power!
I am experiencing the same. How did you disable logcat?
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
You might want to bump up to 386 as a minimum cpu, that has been the issue for most aosp users.
Sent from my SHIFTAO5P using xda premium
+1 to this
cj2566 said:
You might want to bump up to 386 as a minimum cpu, that has been the issue for most aosp users.
Sent from my SHIFTAO5P using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bumping up the min CPU frequency doesn't seem to have to much effect on this. I don't think this is the issue. it seems to me that the issue gets progressively worse as i use the phone. After a reboot it works great for a while and then the lag starts getting worse and worse as time goes on.
are you using auto-brightness?
i've found disabling auto-brightness reduces lockscreen lag quite a bit.
I switched to the unofficial cm7 builds and as of build 17 I don't have the lag issues any more. I'm still using auto brightness and everything else is configured the same as well.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Related
With CM7 my Batt = 40°C and CPU=53°C is that too hot. It happens after about 20 minutes of normal use. I'm on cm7 beta. i'm running everything default, which I believe is 1100 mhz. Let me know what you guys think.
Seems fine to me. I have setcpu set to lower clock speed at 65C, but rarely get to 60C. I see nothing wrong with your temps.
Assimilated via WinBorg 4G
I think as long as the CPU doesn't go over 60 you're good
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
IUH1991 said:
I think as long as the CPU doesn't go over 60 you're good
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's correct. Its only after you go beyond 60 that you start getting into trouble. You're fine if you're topping out at 53.
The only issue IMO is that above 40 on the battery is that the battery does tend to drain faster...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
After an hour of use or so, I got to 63C on the CPU? What should I do?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
jake.perkinsr said:
After an hour of use or so, I got to 63C on the CPU? What should I do?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What were you doing on your phone, which kernel do you have installed, and what radio are you using?
I was just randomly doing stuff, including surfing, Netflix etc. my kernel is 2.6.32.39-mb860-cm7-Karanalmod stock cm7 beta and my radio is N_01.77.30 P
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
jake.perkinsr said:
I was just randomly doing stuff, including surfing, Netflix etc. my kernel is 2.6.32.39-mb860-cm7-Karanalmod stock cm7 beta and my radio is N_01.77.30 P
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, try flashing the enhanced 1.0 GHz kernel and try some undervolting. Overclocking, while resulting in increase speed, leads to more heat production as the CPU is forced to do more work. Simply setting the CPU to 1.0GHz on setcpu won't cut it yet as the app only changes the clock speed for the main core. As the second core is switched on, the CPU reverts back to 1.1 (or whatever the highest speed is).
Where do I get that kernel?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Look up faux's thread in the dev section
This may be a dumb question but has underclocking a CPU been shown to damage it at all? Be it longterm or short? I know excessive overclocking can take it's toll on the life of a processor and was just wondering if the opposite was true also.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Well I'll answer with my common sense: I don't see a negative effect on the chip. Underclocking too much could effect your performance and might cause reboots. Best way to go about it is trial and error. Find a stable setting and go from there.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
radrian92 said:
Well I'll answer with my common sense: I don't see a negative effect on the chip. Underclocking too much could effect your performance and might cause reboots. Best way to go about it is trial and error. Find a stable setting and go from there.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not asking about stability...I'm asking about actual damage. I'm aware of what underclocking does to phone performanne. I'm asking if someone knows either from experience or from information available somewhere if it can physically damage the processor...not just an assumption...but thank you anyhow.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Underclocking does not damage anything hardware wise. In fact all recent processors do it very often for energy efficiency reasons. Your phone its probably doing it right now. It will go to its stock rated speed (1 GHz for photon) when you run a game or something else system intensive and it will clock back down to 216 GHz (lowest stock rated speed) when you quit or anywhere imbetween depending on load.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
EDIT: Meant 216 MHz. Sorry.
MultiDev said:
Underclocking does not damage anything hardware wise. In fact all recent processors do it very often for energy efficiency reasons. Your phone its probably doing it right now. It will go to its stock rated speed (1 GHz for photon) when you run a game or something else system intensive and it will clock back down to 216 GHz (lowest stock rated speed) when you quit or anywhere imbetween depending on load.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy crud, 216 ghz????
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
You cant underclock below what it was designed for and my regular kernels keep voltage below safe values so.....
Sent from my MB855 using XDA App
MultiDev said:
Underclocking does not damage anything hardware wise. In fact all recent processors do it very often for energy efficiency reasons. Your phone its probably doing it right now. It will go to its stock rated speed (1 GHz for photon) when you run a game or something else system intensive and it will clock back down to 216 GHz (lowest stock rated speed) when you quit or anywhere imbetween depending on load.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now this makes sense...thank you.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
magui43212 said:
Holy crud, 216 ghz????
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its 216 Mhz...lol
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Yeah it shouldn't really have to much of an effect seeing as you are basically allowing it to do less. Just as long as you are not running to much for it to handle at its underclocked speed.... In theory at least.
I run both OC and UC setups depending upon what I'm doing IE "Charging" or "Screen off". And I've yet to see any negative effects.
Well seeing uderclocking makes it so its "walking" instead of "running" so it should be able to keep its "breath" longer.. less stress does usally me longer life. So i would say it helps your phone life overall and battery life longer overall
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
No its like running with less weight
Damanis1 said:
Well seeing uderclocking makes it so its "walking" instead of "running" so it should be able to keep its "breath" longer.. less stress does usally me longer life. So i would say it helps your phone life overall and battery life longer overall
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my MB855 using XDA App
Would I get better speed if I disabled 1ghz frequency and left 1.2ghz the default Max frequency?
Would it be faster?
Or slower? Or nothing?
Don't like the 1ghz frequency. But I notice my phone is a little slower when disabling. It.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
I thought you were making a kernel with 1.9 ghz overclock? That should be fast enough
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Appl
Kidding, correct?
1.2 > 1.0
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA App
Good to see enyo has found where he belongs in xda. Asking questions and learning.
This is a big improvement enyo.
as to 1.2 feeling slower, your putting a massive undervolt on it. Try backing it off a bit and see if responsiveness comes back. Also, higher clock speeds can lead to better battery in theory by completing tasks faster and allowing the CPU to govern back down to a idle state.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using xda premium
neh4pres said:
Good to see enyo has found where he belongs in xda. Asking questions and learning.
This is a big improvement enyo.
as to 1.2 feeling slower, your putting a massive undervolt on it. Try backing it off a bit and see if responsiveness comes back. Also, higher clock speeds can lead to better battery in theory by completing tasks faster and allowing the CPU to govern back down to a idle state.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Your right. Backed to -75mV on 1.2ghz and faster response came back.
Also it because really fast after switching to the Medium Leakage.
I rarely let my phone sleep, so 1.2 is the maximum I'll go for speed/battery.
But, the more you UV, you get laggy if its too low, but stable?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Enyo. said:
Thanks. Your right. Backed to -75mV on 1.2ghz and faster response came back.
Also it because really fast after switching to the Medium Leakage.
I rarely let my phone sleep, so 1.2 is the maximum I'll go for speed/battery.
But, the more you UV, you get laggy if its too low, but stable?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly -50uv across the board yields the best performance, battery life and reliability.
droidstyle said:
Honestly -50uv across the board yields the best performance, battery life and reliability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a advantage if it's undervolted 100+ mV?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Enyo. said:
Is there a advantage if it's undervolted 100+ mV?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that would be called overvolting... yes performance may increase, but inturn added heat, less battery life and instability can occur with it.
droidstyle said:
that would be called overvolting... yes performance may increase, but inturn added heat, less battery life and instability can occur with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So -50mV is just enough?
I'll do that. Your good with setups of oc/uv.
Seems really stable for me.
Trying Low leakage for better battery. But Medium is perfect right
Now.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
droidstyle said:
that would be called overvolting... yes performance may increase, but inturn added heat, less battery life and instability can occur with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
just tried your setup. And I didn't know how slow my phone was till I used yours. So undervolting to much does slow down your phone. And it Got hot out of no where.
Thanks
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
I am interested in undervolting to save some battery life. But don't know much about it. If you use system tuner pro could you screen shot some good stable settings?
Thank you
Sent from my SGH-I717R using Tapatalk
kevinjgray88 said:
I am interested in undervolting to save some battery life. But don't know much about it. If you use system tuner pro could you screen shot some good stable settings?
Thank you
Sent from my SGH-I717R using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read up on undervolting. Everyone had a different phone.what is stable for one person might not be stable got your phone. you got to learn the limits of your phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
OK thanks could you point me in the direction of a reliable source
Sent from my SGH-I717R using Tapatalk
kevinjgray88 said:
OK thanks could you point me in the direction of a reliable source
Sent from my SGH-I717R using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best way to undervolt is to set your values and use the phone for a day or two. If it runs normal without freezing or resetting etc... Low the values a little more then use it for another couple days. Just got little by little and eventually you'll have it stable but still saving a ton of bat life. Personally i like to use setcpu and have it limit the cpu to like 400ghz with the display off. It makes the phone lag if you're trying to listen to music with the screen off but i don't do that very often. Saved me a decent amount of bat life on my OC'd atrix
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using XDA
I've used a variety of CPU control apps (Set CPU, No Frills, Android Tuner) and none of them really seem to govern my CPU. I can set the governor, but eventually I will watch a core shoot up past the limit under a load (switching home screens fast, pulling notification bar up and down fast, etc). This is while using eco-mode and while not using eco-mode, so that doesn't seem to be the problem.
One thing to note: I got this phone from eBay from a tester, I suppose, at least that's what the seller told me, and it has not for sale on the side, and originally came with E97000J. Obviously, that's changed since I've flashed Nocturnal. Could this be the issue? I would assume it's still the same hardware to control.
Sent from my LG-E970 using xda app-developers app
Same issue here, it seems that the CPU does whatever it wants.
Sent from my LG-E970 using xda app-developers app
If you have eco mode on it'll constantly reset to eco modes default. 1.18GHz. Even if you're using sk8's kernel that doesn't have 1.18GHz.
Sent from my LG-E970
Neroga said:
If you have eco mode on it'll constantly reset to eco modes default. 1.18GHz. Even if you're using sk8's kernel that doesn't have 1.18GHz.
Sent from my LG-E970
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okie doke, thanks. This has happened with Eco-mode off though. I haven't tried turning it off, rebooting, and leaving it off and watching it though. I'll try that.
EDIT: Still doesn't work. The cores shoot up and override the governor settings.
N12X93R said:
Okie doke, thanks. This has happened with Eco-mode off though. I haven't tried turning it off, rebooting, and leaving it off and watching it though. I'll try that.
EDIT: Still doesn't work. The cores shoot up and override the governor settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you done anything to modify the kernel? Tweaks that affect the kernel could cause that. Also, what app are you using to monitor CPU usage? I use Android Tuner and even though it appears to show my CPU maxing out frequencies, when checking time in state it shows that that's not what is happening.
Sent from my LG-E970
Nope, no mods or kernels. I'm using Android Tuner to look at the frequencies. I did get it to work by turning off the cores individually and governing off of eco mode. However, only using 1-2 cores at a cap of 912mhz drained my battery faster than just using eco mode. I'll do a little more playing around to see what's going on and if I can improve battery life.
Sent from my LG-E970 using xda app-developers app
I was able to reproduce this "bug" 10/10 times. After flashing a ROM, mods, or kernel, don't wipe dalvik-cache after. Only wipe dalvik-cache BEFORE installing a different kernel.
Sent from my LG-E970
Neroga said:
I was able to reproduce this "bug" 10/10 times. After flashing a ROM, mods, or kernel, don't wipe dalvik-cache after. Only wipe dalvik-cache BEFORE installing a different kernel.
Sent from my LG-E970
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I did wipe dalvik after an installation. I'll reflash and check if things get fixed.
Sent from my LG-E970 using xda app-developers app
That seems to have worked. I'm running one core at 918 now. The settings are still buggy when booting up, but take control of the cores shortly after. All makes sense. Thanks a lot for your help!
Sent from my LG-E970
N12X93R said:
That seems to have worked. I'm running one core at 918 now. The settings are still buggy when booting up, but take control of the cores shortly after. All makes sense. Thanks a lot for your help!
Sent from my LG-E970
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem. Glad I could help lol. I'm a stickler for battery life so I can understand how frustrating that probably was.
Sent from my LG-E970