Related
What is it? Purpose? How do you do it? How does it optimize my phone?
Sent from my Hero using XDA App
Google is your friend. Search CPU OVERCLOCKING.
Sent from my HTC Hero using XDA App
It's something cool, you could use SetCPU or Overclock Widget, and it's like adding rocket-fuel to a campfire.
ddotpatel said:
Google is your friend. Search CPU OVERCLOCKING.
Sent from my HTC Hero using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the time it took you to be a smart ass you could have just said what it did.
i did a search for it and yet it wasnt informative enough. hence why i came here and asked.
Google want enough? Wow! Over clocking increases the clock speed of your cpu making it calculate faster.
Sent from my Hero using XDA App
silver2kgti said:
the time it took you to be a smart ass you could have just said what it did.
i did a search for it and yet it wasn't informative enough. hence why i came here and asked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, then I'm sorry Google couldn't answer your question. (Which is odd, since overclocking is kinda popular.)
Anyways, Overclocking means to "Make the CPU go faster than it was designed for". Some devices "like the hero" can jump from 518mhz to a stable 691mhz by overclocking, this increases the speed of the CPU so that programs and the OS can work faster.
But overclocking is about finding the highest speed, while having the stability to use it. Since it's no use to overclock, if it makes your phone unusable to use. (Force closes, phone freezing etc.)
Overclocking CAN harm your device, if you take a too high value. But if you stay inside a stable zone, there shouldn't be any harm to your device.
You can experience that the phone is getting a bit hot, or that the battery is emptied faster than normal.
Since the CPU drains so much power, there are settings that allow to set a different clock (how fast the device should go in mhz) when the phone is at sleep. So that it can run at a much lower frequency, when you don't use it.
ROM developers normally post ( 691/197 ) or something at their thread, the first number is the CPU speed when it's on and you're using it. And the other is when the phone is at sleep.
If there's anything other you want the answer to, ask it here.
But, please use Gooogle search Before posting anything.
Overclocking increases the clock speeds of a CPU. And as a result means it can do *things* faster.
Overclocking on a desktop PC tends to increase the voltages to overclock the device over this isn't really an option on a phone as it has limited battery life. So overclocking on a phone is normally done by software changes. When CPU makers make a CPU they can not be 100% accurate on the performance of that chip - in fact its very much the opposite, so after each chip is made it is tested and then given a clock speed and locked to that, overclocking breaks that and allows you to manually increase the clock, however overclocking capabilities will be different on every device.
If you take an example of an Intel Chip, a 2.66GHz Core-2-Duo, this is exactly the same chip as the 3.06GHz however when tested it wouldn't run as fast so Intel sell it at a stable clock speed.
Overclocking the hero shouldn't really have any implications for the device, however overclocks can reduce the life-time of a CPU (and any other hardware you might overclock). You shouldn't notice much extra heat from the device as the voltages being used are not changing.
Hope that cleared some of it up for you.
silver2kgti said:
the time it took you to be a smart ass you could have just said what it did.
i did a search for it and yet it wasnt informative enough. hence why i came here and asked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you forget to press the search button?
Some of the top results from google:
Wikipedia
What is Overclocking?
What is overclocking?
What is overclocking?
Overclocking Guide
Really was that so hard?
So there is something that I'm trying to figure out.
I am currently running Virus' Infected Eternity 1.5 r31 and using RCMIX 3D v11 kernel. Regardless whether it is overclocked (which I usually run 1.51 ghz) or standard and regardless of whether running a govenor like lagfree or a SetCPU one like performance, when I open the app SystemPanel Monitor it shows only one core running. According to Freeza's thread, his kernel has "dual cores active" and it shows SystemPanel Monitor with two cores running. I switched to Freeza's kernel with Eternity ROM and and checked again and it only shows one core running.
So what I'm trying to figure out is, is this ROM related or am I really only running one core and the other is not used, or otherwise how do I know if both cores are running?
My phone with Eternity ROM is smooth and runs games and videos well with no choppiness so I think it is ok. I just want to know how we can know that both cores are running.
I would also like an answer to this question..
Its because of SetCPU if you remove it and install say CPU Master your second core will be activated.
I thought the latest SetCPU was setup for dual cores?
raptoro07 said:
I thought the latest SetCPU was setup for dual cores?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it working?
Yes it its working
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Download stability test...run the first, classic test...hit the home button..not the back button...open your system app and it will show you that both cores work, when needed, on the rom you think is only using one core.
Sent from my Nocturnal E3D using Tapatalk
raptoro07 said:
Yes it its working
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What version of SetCPU are you using? I use system panel it will show you both core running at the same time.
SetCPU 2.2.4 donate version
cruecu said:
Download stability test...run the first, classic test...hit the home button..not the back button...open your system app and it will show you that both cores work, when needed, on the rom you think is only using one core.
Sent from my Nocturnal E3D using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This Worked!! Thanks cruecu. Seems as though if the demand is not there the second core is idle for these particular govenors.
So this begs the questions.....Which is better (for speed and/or battery life), running mostly one core at full speed and then the second when only necessary, or running both simultaneously at half speed? I've seen some discussion on this but it's not real clear.
raptoro07 said:
SetCPU 2.2.4 donate version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes that version breaks full time dual core.
raptoro07 said:
This Worked!! Thanks cruecu. Seems as though if the demand is not there the second core is idle for these particular govenors.
So this begs the questions.....Which is better (for speed and/or battery life), running mostly one core at full speed and then the second when only necessary, or running both simultaneously at half speed? I've seen some discussion on this but it's not real clear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure one has been proven more effective. I personally don't want both cores running all the time...I don't notice a speed increase since clock speed is still the same. Not sure it matters either way, but I will only run a rom that uses second core only when needed
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
cruecu said:
I'm not sure one has been proven more effective. I personally don't want both cores running all the time...I don't notice a speed increase since clock speed is still the same. Not sure it matters either way, but I will only run a rom that uses second core only when needed
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the most part I agree with this statement. The reality is the device feels faster and will benchmark better. The better benchmarking is what sold a lot of people. The question still remains is if the device finishes processing the data in half the time is it using more battery? I personally have not noticed a drain on the battery and it may even be a little better. If you let the device decide when to use the second core it may never use it.
Also on some ROMs like my Fresh ROM you can just delete the dual core script in the init.d folder and it will return to single core mode.
Ok, I have side questions that pertains to this topic.
If we can enable the second core in init.d when the phone boots, AND it actually does useful work then HTC would have had to have put effort into supporting that in their kernel because ASOP Gingerbread does not naively support dual core, right? So that makes me wonder why HTC shipped the 3D with dual core inactive! Unless I'm flat out wrong somewhere HTC must have had a reason, and the only things I can think of are race conditions and battery life.
Full dual cores oc to 1.8 keep my phone nice and warm in the winter
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515a using XDA App
sprinttouch666 said:
Ok, I have side questions that pertains to this topic.
If we can enable the second core in init.d when the phone boots, AND it actually does useful work then HTC would have had to have put effort into supporting that in their kernel because ASOP Gingerbread does not naively support dual core, right? So that makes me wonder why HTC shipped the 3D with dual core inactive! Unless I'm flat out wrong somewhere HTC must have had a reason, and the only things I can think of are race conditions and battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our CPU was not designed to run this way (asynchronous CPU). That is why it is not active all the time. Now Nvidia Tegra processors (synchronous CPU) are designed to run dual core all the time. That also seem to produce better benchmarks.
HTC kernel is designed to run the way the processor was designed. HTC would not override the CPU specs like we would just to make the benchmark better. The theory is that asynchronous CPU would have better battery life. Reality is most XDA members only care about benchmarks so they can show their friends.
zone23 said:
Our CPU was not designed to run this way (asynchronous CPU). That is why it is not active all the time. Now Nvidia Tegra processors (synchronous CPU) are designed to run dual core all the time. That also seem to produce better benchmarks.
HTC kernel is designed to run the way the processor was designed. HTC would not override the CPU specs like we would just to make the benchmark better. The theory is that asynchronous CPU would have better battery life. Reality is most XDA members only care about benchmarks so they can show their friends.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree with you in principle, I do have both cores active at all times. I have not noticed any difference in battery life. Yet I have noticed a difference of quite a bit less lag while loading applications and flipping through screens than when CPU1 is idle.
Does it really matter in the long run daily use? Not really. It's a fun tweak and I learned something new by utilizing it.
I did not get a truly noticeable difference in benchmark though.
Is there a Kernel that Supports Dual Core for the 2.3.5 Roms (HydroBliss_3.5)?
PMGRANDS said:
Is there a Kernel that Supports Dual Core for the 2.3.5 Roms (HydroBliss_3.5)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure which, but I can tell you that I am running this 3.5 rom and both cores show active.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1373823
Just wondering if all the new ICS roms have full dual core support for the EVO 3d.
Not sure how you test this. Maybe some could explain.
Please Advise.
Thanks!
zcink said:
Just wondering if all the new ICS roms have full dual core support for the EVO 3d.
Not sure how you test this. Maybe some could explain.
Please Advise.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, they don't. If you want to enable dual core support just delete mpdesicion from System and edit a file(i don't remember the name). Also, after you booted on the ROM you can download Quadrant Advanced and make a custom Bench, select CPU and you will see if both cores are availables.
HTC Reseller said:
No, they don't. If you want to enable dual core support just delete mpdesicion from System and edit a file(i don't remember the name). Also, after you booted on the ROM you can download Quadrant Advanced and make a custom Bench, select CPU and you will see if both cores are availables.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I want to do this. Thanks.
.
Here you go zcink, check out this thread. Should be the info you are looking for.
netwokz said:
Here you go zcink, check out this thread. Should be the info you are looking for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This link was very useful and helpful to me. I'm going to print it out and do it to any rom I flash.
Just one more question on this.
Is this also what you would do for GingerBread roms also?
update:
found the answer here:
cobraboy85 said:
performance on 2.3.4 GB will not increase by having both cores on. this is a common misconception about dual core on that platform. the software is not programmed to utilize synchronized multi thread - they handle tasks independently. you are wasting battery, with no performance increase, when using dual core on gingerbread......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK I'm still learning Android.
What has been sort of puzzling to me now suddenly makes sense.
In most of the ICS threads I've been following, people are raving about how good the battery life is. People saying I watched 30 movies, made 118 phone calls and my battery is still 97% charged. Ok I'm exaggerating but anyhow making some unbelievable claims about battery life in ICS.
From what I've reading here at XDA and other forums, ICS taps more resources and uses more memory than GB did to run apps. So why so much better battery life?
Could it be that ICS not being dual core support unless you make it so is only using half the power of the CPU? Sort of like putting a 2 bbl carburetor on a Corvette engine where a 4 bbl would unleash the beast but use more gas?
zcink said:
OK I'm still learning Android.
What has been sort of puzzling to me now suddenly makes sense.
In most of the ICS threads I've been following, people are raving about how good the battery life is. People saying I watched 30 movies, made 118 phone calls and my battery is still 97% charged. Ok I'm exaggerating but anyhow making some unbelievable claims about battery life in ICS.
From what I've reading here at XDA and other forums, ICS taps more resources and uses more memory than GB did to run apps. So why so much better battery life?
Could it be that ICS not being dual core support unless you make it so is only using half the power of the CPU? Sort of like putting a 2 bbl carburetor on a Corvette engine where a 4 bbl would unleash the beast but use more gas?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Latest ics releases have finally fixed the cpu1 always online. System tuner pro can show you current states on CPU states. Again system tuner pro can also FORCE dual core CPU always on.
Better battery life comes from the 3.0 kernel which has better power management, amongst other things.
The second CPU kicks on as needed unless you force it always on, which drains more battery.
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk 2
scariola said:
Latest ics releases have finally fixed the cpu1 always online. System tuner pro can show you current states on CPU states. Again system tuner pro can also FORCE dual core CPU always on.
Better battery life comes from the 3.0 kernel which has better power management, amongst other things.
The second CPU kicks on as needed unless you force it always on, which drains more battery.
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it would seem by getting system tuner Pro you could turn this feature on and off like a switch.
When you want both cores running for maximum performance just turn it on in system tuner Pro, then turn if off when your done with it?
That would be alot better and easier than editing file commands.
zcink said:
So it would seem by getting system tuner Pro you could turn this feature on and off like a switch.
When you want both cores running for maximum performance just turn it on in system tuner Pro, then turn if off when your done with it?
That would be alot better and easier than editing file commands.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Something like that. System tuner pro can force dual core by init.d script or after boot completed. It has boot settings, which you choose. A reboot is needed after changing I believe.
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk 2
scariola said:
Something like that. System tuner pro can force dual core by init.d script or after boot completed. It has boot settings, which you choose. A reboot is needed after changing I believe.
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Well its fun learning all this.
Maybe down the road as things get fully developed someone will come out with an app or widget. One where you just click it and turns on both cores on the fly. Call it TurboThruster or something like that. The icon could be flames shooting out of a tailpipe.
As phones develop they'll have quad core and more and more..........
scariola said:
Better battery life comes from the 3.0 kernel which has better power management, amongst other things.
The second CPU kicks on as needed unless you force it always on, which drains more battery.
Sent from my HTC EVO 3D X515m using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been running ZR3dX (CDMA ICS ROM) which turns on dual core by default. My battery life is still amazing, especially with the screen off. One of the power management things it does is control the radios better too.
*********
I've read on several ROM forums that only certain apps utilize or dual cores. go to sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1 there is a file there. When using one of the above said apps it populated cpu1 with freq folders etc, changes that one file from 0 to 1 enabling it. without one if these apps there is no freq tables for cpu1.
****my question: using Linux and cpu i ran speed tests. Over 70 tests in total. There is zero performance difference in using one app versus another versus cm performance cpu menu. I understand how it looks like two cores are only utilized from certain apps looking at the folders. However it does not change performance at all. Tests show same speed any way to control cpu. Also feels the same. Is there really a difference our is it monkey say????
Also in my tests i found using "VR" versus sio or noob or cfq to be the fastest. I didn't feel a difference however changing i/o setting.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
Their are claims that Intel’s internal handset testing has shown multi-core implementations running slower than single core, however they did not cite any particular chip. If you take a look a lot of handsets on the market, when you turn on the second core or having the second core there [on die], the [current] leakage is high enough and their power threshold is low enough because of the size of the case that it isn’t entirely clear you get much of a benefit to turning the second core on. In some of the use cases they cited, having a second core is actually a detriment, because of the way some of the software engineers have not implemented their thread scheduling properly.......
That being said, one could argue the concept that a single core chip, running a slight overclock, would produce a far better result, than a dual core application. But again, thread scheduling detracts from any governor efforts anyway...IMHO....g
Hum. I would have to agree then that in our case and in my tests dual core doesn't help nor hinder performance results but does appear to reduce battery life. Now these are my tests using two different programs to test performance and using combo of setcpu/system pro/Cm10 performance built in/Tasker to control cpu. I have done enough testing to know that on cm10 roms dual core, or so the sys files indicate, is of zero performance upgrade and appears to drain battery faster.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
Yes ...I agree with your findings.
I suppose it's safe too say then, when using the AOSP rom source, within it's normal configuration, that unless development is done beyond the current schedules, the stated performance is well ....overstated ??
Of course , CM is in a constant state of change, and I suppose that after they are finished with the functional repairs, they may focus more on the kernel.
I'd be very interested to see your same tests against another kernel, say flappjaxxx latest JB build.
I do know that he, and several other developers have made some great improvements to the source kernels, and although there will likely always be bugs present, after running my own evaluation of them, the governors are functional and do make at least a perceived difference.
But as you stated, albeit at the cost of battery life.
I choose not to overclock, as I feel that the marginal reward , as proven by your testing , and by testing from several reputable sources, is simply not worth the risk ...g
I agree Greg, i will test other kernels... Samsung ROM is probably the only one i won't test... I also don't overclock, i do under clock at work and screen off using Tasker for battery life. That does help greatly. I'll post back after testing different kernels tonight.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
troyolson92 said:
I agree Greg, i will test other kernels... Samsung ROM is probably the only one i won't test... I also don't overclock, i do under clock at work and screen off using Tasker for battery life. That does help greatly. I'll post back after testing different kernels tonight.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent....
And I suppose, since this is the Premier development site, that it would be of great value to the community if you could perhaps publish your results here ?
These aspects of the android OS have been of great interest to me for some time.
Without doubt, many other users would enjoy this information as well in forming their decision regarding roms, kernels etcetera.
Thanks to you, for your inspiring thread. I look forward to the forthcoming information ....g
Ok with out posting tons of pics i tested all available kernels (new). Results were the same. No real difference in single core versus dual core...
The following pics show how to know whether the second core is online or not and my results and how i tested this time around... I was more through the first time but results the same.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
troyolson92 said:
Ok with out posting tons of pics i tested all available kernels (new). Results were the same. No real difference in single core versus dual core...
The following pics show how to know whether the second core is online or not and my results and how i tested this time around... I was more through the first time but results the same.
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am posting pictures for first time hope this turns out.
What do you use to disable the second core? Read this with some interest. Would like to try this with ics Rom. With oc'ing fRom 1.56 to 1.72 i see a consistent jump of 300-400 in my antutu scores. Currently on flapjaxx ics b4.
I know it is just a score, but is your score indicative of the cm builds? It just seems really low.
Here is my 'stock 1.56 speed' with ondemand governor. Want to a get a single core sample.to compare with it.
How interesting ....
I can say that both of your posted results lead toward our initial assumptions, that indeed we are seeing a consistent draw against the systems cores with little or no improvement upon activation of the second core.
Some Time ago, shortly after my note arrived, I began some simple tests with low speed dual core activation. My thought process was simply this.
Slow speed dual core operation (both cores running in the 650mhz range ) would ideally produce a faster process response.
My initial results were favorable, as I had a noticeably quicker device during screen transitions, and even in several multitasking functions.
I even went so far as to create a small script to handle this function for me. I'm no developer, and ultimately I didn't possess the programming skills I needed to complete and implement my script into an actual, flash worthy modification. And based on what we are seeing here , the results provided would indicate that my attempt is flawed due to chip current leakage, if the cores are allowed to ramp to high, and perhaps even the use of improper source schedule interference.
I'm so busy these days, I simply haven't time to explore the low speed theory further at this point.
But perhaps with your test bench already set, a simple test using my concept could be carried out??
As we know, CPU [current] thresholds are plagued by voltage bleeding at maximum CPU frequencies, but the thought has just occurred to me that [current ] bleeding is highly controllable when the CPU is driven at lower voltage inputs. And too combine a reduced frequency with reduced voltage over a multiple core platform, could, or should balance the loss and equal the output levels.
Are you up for another test ??
If so ....I suggest the following parameters.
Core "0" at 600/700 MHz
Core "1" at 600/700 MHz
Governor at "interactive "
Voltage at "-24Mv"
Then we'll see if the theory holds water.
P.S. thanks gents, I'm enjoying the heck out of this thread ......g
Mad383max, look at your folders from my pics to tell if two cores are running. Typically on after market roms one core is running until you enable the second from other software like from my pics.
Will test at lunch. I like this lower voltage idea. If i were a betting man i would guess with speeds you proposed and two cores i would guess similar to higher results. Let's see....
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
troyolson92 said:
Mad383max, look at your folders from my pics to tell if two cores are running. Typically on after market roms one core is running until you enable the second from other software like from my pics.
Will test at lunch. I like this lower voltage idea. If i were a betting man i would guess with speeds you proposed and two cores i would guess similar to higher results. Let's see....
Sent from my SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed......
I'm excited to see the results....and thank you !!...g
I have to reflash ROM so pics might be a little awhile. I messed up some things and somehow lost my Google account. reflashing gapps and ROM didn't fix it.
Anyway results were 2600 something at 700 both cores underclocked 25... Slightly more than half of normal speed at slightly less than half clock speed... For kicks i tried 1.5 clock speed undervolted 75 (most my phone will go without lockups) and got 5k results. Best yet.
You are on to something. Less voltage = more speed. I now need to try single core undervolted. Give me couple hours for pics etc.. Got to get phone working with Google again and spend time with wife. She hates me on the phone.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
No worries Troy. ...
Take all the time you need.....
I do appreciate the excellent testing you have undertaken. I know that the results are going to benefit the community.
And i am highly intrigued by your first run under the parameter set you've chosen...
It's leading down the exact path that i suspected. ..
I'll talk with you soon. ...g
A few additional items that I have failed to consider during my testing, could weigh heavily on our testing results and should be considered during testing.
They are, battery power levels, charger connection and type....(wall/PC), and rom power save levels.
I do know that the android OS will adjust itself during varying power levels, much like our setting the CPU to UC/UV settings, only on a much smaller scale.
I feel its important that we are able to control the input levels in the following way...
Battery to full charge, with no charger connection, and if the cable is needed we use a non powered port. Next would be controlling the rom power settings if the rom contains them, as found in most GB and ICS builds.
If these baselines are met, we should be able to greater rely on the mark scores we are seeing. These variables could explain why we continue to see so many peaks and valleys in scores when two users share the same builds, on like devices.....(speculation)..
Additionally, are we able to control the background processes to the extent, they will remain constant for testing?
Sorry for the rant.....Im just concerned about the ability to quantify our findings once testing is complete.
Ive started some tests on my end as well, and certainly do not want to give you the impression that I expect you to do all of the work.
After all, you did ask first....lol and I feel like Im dumping this effort into your lap.
And please forgive my pathetic punctuation in this post, as my keyboard of choice decided to fail tonight....g
Battery does effect performance greatly.... Also noticed none of the apps to test are very repeatable. Fluctuation seemed to be about 100.
Having issues up loading pics from phone, I'm away from laptop for a few days.
In the end i found -12 v single core to provide the best battery and performance that was equal to dual core. I tried over under voting many differences.... over voting did nothing, under voting a little made small preformance improvements. I believe some of fluctuations are related to app, battery, etc.... In the end it's too say dual core has no speed improvement. I would be cool to test an app that it's specifically for dual core. I am better off without the second core speed is same anyway, and battery is much better. There is definitely voltage leakage..
Let me know what y'all find in your tests....
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Outstanding !!
I appreciate the hard work !!
So it seems we are better off using the note running a single core and about 12mv under volt.
And I'm of the belief that our second core is rather pointless...unless it can be proven that the second core is absolutely needed to perform a function.
And so far, I haven't found anything I use that requires activation of the second core.
I'll continue my tests, but the way it looks now, Intel is right, and Samsung pushed a dual core chip to this device for nothing more than a market share increase. As it is quite clear that the device does "not " need it to function well, and at a Very respectable speed.
Now we have a quad core version, and I highly question the motivation behind that move, beyond marketing as well.
These statements may offend some, and folks will certainly disagree, but if you want a great running device and great battery life, you need a single core chip ...IMHO ....g
Agreed Greg. Someone will get upset when they do thirty own tests and realize what we see, and what you said, good marketing by Samsung. Numbers don't lie and i did tests as controlled as possible. Even my battery shows in the picks... A true second useful core would have easily bested the single core results. Plus undervolting tella the bigger story...
I must say though. It had been very useful.. My battery life is so much better now!!!
For me the only true performance gain had been from v6 supercharger.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Fyi: same exact results using cm9 versus cm10. Neither ROM benchmarks faster than the other as of 9/16 cm9 and 9/15 cm10 builds. Dual core zero performance upgrade.
Tried quadrant again and result very up to 20% back to back so that app is useless to me.
Can someone try a Samsung based ROM. I'm curious add to a difference in roms. just use antutu benchmark and set cpu however you wish to whatever you wish just report cpu clock speed, type of test, and results
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Out of town this week Troy, but i'm gonna bump it for ya...g
Android Smartphones can somewhat act as a mini-computer and enable the user to do all the work on the go. Considering the advantages offered by the Android OS, the biggest drawback that comes to the mind is the limited battery life. All Android Smartphones whether low-end or high-end, have an average battery life of just 12-15 hours. And if the phone is used throughout the day, then the battery life is even less than 12 hours.
There are a number of ways of improving the battery life- setting the brightness to minimum, turning off the auto-sync, disabling 3G network etc. There is another technique for users having an Android with a dual core processor. The user can disable one core of the processor and increase the battery life. For this an app named XCore will have to be used.
XCore is a free app available on the Google Play Store. It has a very simple but effective UI. It is pretty easy to use it as well. Just run the app and choose “OFF” or “ON” options as per the user’s need. XCore needs root permissions so the device must be rooted. On running the app for first time, provide the root permission to XCore. The user can select the appropriate settings and then exit the app. The features of this app are- simple UI, optimized battery performance, easy to use. It is compatible with CM9 also.
Disabling the second core has an obvious disadvantage. It helps in improving the battery life but it comes at a cost of reduced performance. So an individual has to use XCore app wisely. It should be used when the phone remains idle for a longer period of time.
XCore was originally made only for the Sony Xperia devices. It has been successfully tested on Sony Experia U, Experia P and Xperia Sola. However it is known to work on many devices with a dual core processor.
Download XCore from here.
You should try this on the des x first and tell us the battery results, and also how slow is the performance would be if the app is enabled
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
I tried it doubles the battery life
Its not slow...
SaadCrackz said:
I tried it doubles the battery life
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not slow and if you want another solution try this app which disable the 2nd core only when the screen is off .
Here.
Tested it with Quadrant. First is with the second core enabled, second without.
All in all dual core is all about speed and multitasking, I symply don't know why would I want to disable any of cores?
And talking about screen off, it's absolutely pointless cause stock kernel supports deep sleep, so when the screen comes of with ondemand gouvernor it instantly goes to deep sleep.
Is there no hotplug governor available in the stock kernel? This one puts the second core to sleep when not needed.
i think its better just to lower clocks and not disable one of the cores...
Wouldn't be better that HTC make DX single core???
Why did you buy a dualcore phone when you want to disable one???
Men, if you want do to some seriously try to do some improuvments, not to disable one core. Its like on a car, if your motor runs only on 2 cylinders it will consume less gasoline but with less power...
The xcore soft seems fake to me. When I installed, and pressed on to disable the core, it showed the success message in the app, EVEN THOUGH the superuser permission dialog box was still open and I had not granted the permission yet.
I don't know, seems a script which generate a text message and starts a strange service . Maybe I'm wrong , but the app quality is questionable.
Regards
Sent from my HTC Desire X using xda app-developers app
MoshPuiu said:
Wouldn't be better that HTC make DX single core???
Why did you buy a dualcore phone when you want to disable one???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cause I'm not using both cores when the screen is locked, I'm not even using one core completely and it would be good to be able to reduce unnecessary battery usage.
Yet, I have certain concerns about this app, wouldn't want to end up realizing that it's just a fake.