Hi there,
I have searched the forum for a suitable answer but couldn't really find one.
after experimenting with different kernels and underclocking I have always wondered what the pro's and con's are for using 100 Mhz as lowest frequency.
thanks
using cm9 latest + neak 2.0.2
eC1990ho said:
Hi there,
I have searched the forum for a suitable answer but couldn't really find one.
after experimenting with different kernels and underclocking I have always wondered what the pro's and con's are for using 100 Mhz as lowest frequency.
thanks
using cm9 latest + neak 2.0.2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really 100mhz is useless, it uses the same voltages as 200mhz (so uses same amount of power as 200mhz) and you get a lot less performance. Also, from what it have seen I can be unstable for quite a few people. I really can't see any pros to 100mhz. I would recommend you don't use it. So you are using the same amount of energy for less performance and less stability. Hope this helps you
will give you 10 to 30 mins of additional battery life if you configure it properly.
Try siyah kernel and follow the guides in general section
I have a question related to this topic. I know that overclocking can reduce CPU life, but what effect does underclocking? Same CPU life? Maybe it increases the battery life but reduces the CPU life due to CPU not working in the native way?
Haven't found an answer for this yet. It would be useful to know about it since replacing a battery is way more easier and cheaper than anything you could do if CPU dies.
Edit: I'm refering to general underclocking (max and min frequencies, not only the min frequency).
GNRS said:
I have a question related to this topic. I know that overclocking can reduce CPU life, but what effect does underclocking? Same CPU life? Maybe it increases the battery life but reduces the CPU life due to CPU not working in the native way?
Haven't found an answer for this yet. It would be useful to know about it since replacing a battery is way more easier and cheaper than anything you could do if CPU dies.
Edit: I'm refering to general underclocking (max and min frequencies, not only the min frequency).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
underclocking wont affect the life of your cpu. the least underclock value will only be used when your mobile is almost idle or doing low intensity tasks, it will switch to higher frequency as needed by the task.
Related
As I understand solution for "998 MHz with screen on" bug is found: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1225411&page=17#post16944722
We need to replace only one governor.
I don't want to play with different ROMs and kernels and I'm looking for simplest solution.
Is it possible to compile it as a module ("ondemand_mod" for ex.) and add it to stock ROM?
Or any other (simple) way?
Wrong section ...
Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk
Why wrong Section, this is Development to get the CPU Governor working correctly
Wolfbreak said:
Why wrong Section, this is Development to get the CPU Governor working correctly
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, this is the right section for such request.
However, I can't help but wonder: is this really a "problem"?
No offence to anyone, but I find that the phone is very snappy
when on max frequency... The big problem for me, would be if it
didn't go into Deep Sleep immediately after turning the screen off
and stayed at min frequency for an extended period.
When the screen is on (aka using the phone) I'd like it to be as FAST
as possible. That's the reason I use the minmax governor.
Anyway, again, I don't mean to argue with anyone, I am just
presenting my point of view.
My_Immortal said:
However, I can't help but wonder: is this really a "problem"?
No offence to anyone, but I find that the phone is very snappy
when on max frequency... The big problem for me, would be if it
didn't go into Deep Sleep immediately after turning the screen off
and stayed at min frequency for an extended period.
When the screen is on (aka using the phone) I'd like it to be as FAST
as possible. That's the reason I use the minmax governor.
Anyway, again, I don't mean to argue with anyone, I am just
presenting my point of view.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it's really problem.
Higher frequency - higher power consumption. Moreover - with higher frequency CPU used with higher voltage so consumption is even more higher. So at 998 MHz CPU eats about 5 times more battery than on 246MHz.
With properly tuned governor I don't feel any real lags or slowdowns.
And, when screen is on CPU load is usually is lower than 20% at full frequency. So I don't want to waste my battery.
As I see it's possible to compile and use governor as module.
Could someone compile it? And assemble as xRecovery package?
Or point me where to read about compiling for arm, where to get tools and so on...
Karlson2k said:
Yes, it's really problem.
Higher frequency - higher power consumption. Moreover - with higher frequency CPU used with higher voltage so consumption is even more higher. So at 998 MHz CPU eats about 5 times more battery than on 246MHz.
With properly tuned governor I don't feel any real lags or slowdowns.
And, when screen is on CPU load is usually is lower than 20% at full frequency. So I don't want to waste my battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing is, on 245 MHz, you can't get any kind of decent performance.
Try this: set the minimum and maximum CPU frequency with SetCPU to 245 and attempt to use the phone normally.
Also, you might be right about voltage, but if the CPU is forced to work on lower freqs when it actually needs higher, there's definitely stress and increased battery consumption.
My phone lasts for more than 24 hours and it's always at max frequency when the screen is on. No lag, no freezes, no drain.
I do agree that the ondemand governor might not function as expected but I fail to experience the actual problem. That might be just me though.
Xperia X10i via Tapatalk
My_Immortal said:
The thing is, on 245 MHz with high load, you can't get any kind of decent performance.
Try this: set the minimum and maximum CPU frequency with SetCPU to 245 and attempt to use the phone normally.
Also, you might be right about voltage, but if the CPU is forced to work on lower freqs when it actually needs higher, there's definitely stress and increased battery consumption.
My phone lasts for more than 24 hours and it's always at max frequency when the screen is on. No lag, no freezes, no drain.
I do agree that the ondemand governor might not function as expected but I fail to experience the actual problem. That might be just me though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no need to work on 245MHz as proper governor rise frequency automatically when it's necessary.
And really no stress for CPU to work an low frequency at full load. Moreover - CPU will consume more power at 500Mhz with 45% load than at 250Mhz with 95% load.
Sometime I use phone for navigation - long time with screen on and very low load. In this scenario battery drains very fast.
And last one - I like to have everything working properly. In case that I'll really need high frequency all the time I'll use other governor. I just want to have a choice.
I need a simple solotion for this too..I use z kernel and I found that Thego2s kernel fixed this problem..I was going to flash that kernel but think that has a bug and stoucks on logo ..can some one sayas a simple way?
Yes, I think a lot of people would prefer to use just small and simple fixes rather than replacing the whole kernel with a lot of nice but (personally) unnecessary features.
I am waiting for developers to release a fix for this problam
Hello,
It's a well know 'fact' that our P500 draws the same amount of power when clocked at anything below 480MHz, so underclocking it below 480MHz brings no battery benefits.
I have been trying to find the reason for this, but I can't find the thread / post in the search that details the reasons for this and how it was tested. My guess is that it's buried in one of the many bloated development threads... If someone can point me in the right direction that would be great.
Cheers!
I know this thread has a quote of this post and that this is a well known information but, besides this community common knowledge (by which I'm very grateful), I also can't find any specific data on this matter.
I even found this thread that aks the same thing, but it has no answers.
So it would be great if someone could give us a bit more information about this.
Thanks in advance!
480MHz and below use the same voltage. It takes more battery to jump from say 245 to the max freq
InfiniteRisen said:
480MHz and below use the same voltage. It takes more battery to jump from say 245 to the max freq
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, we all 'know' this but where did this information come from?
This post shows that it is a general MSM7x27 'feature' that all frequencies below 600MHz use the same voltage. This is where we assume this to mean that it uses the exact same amount of power whether it is running at 122, 245, 320 or 480MHz, so we're taking a speed hit for no power benefit.
Does anyone knows of any benchmark tests to confirm this? I might try some tests this week, set the min/max MHz to the same value and run a program to keep the CPU at 100% and see how long it takes to drain the battery (perhaps a huge pi calculation or something).
Which do you value more, source of information or proof now?
InfiniteRisen said:
Which do you value more, source of information or proof now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Surely that's the same thing, a good source should also contain proof of the claims it is making...
I'm not saying it's wrong, but if nobody has tested it we can't be sure, right?
adfad666 said:
Surely that's the same thing, a good source should also contain proof of the claims it is making...
I'm not saying it's wrong, but if nobody has tested it we can't be sure, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On my personal experience, i would actually say 245mhz consume less battery than 480mhz. But I still prefer the latter as it's a bit more speedy. On battery life, it's just a <1% difference between the two.
as far as what ihve read!!people say it takes infact more power consumption when we underclock very low frequencies like 122 ,since it takes more work for the phone to operate in a laggy state with very less cpu frquency ..and thats the reason i think(not sure) why we are asked to have a minimum of 480mhz frequency though i prefer 320
Test setup suggestion:
Test 1 = Idle
Set to 480/480 set to airplane mode overnight and look at battery drain.
Do the same for 245/245
Compare results
Test 2 = Intermittent load
Set to 480/729- test using on/off series of tests not 100% all the time. You want the governor to scale frequently during the test
Same test above but @ 122/729
Compare results
This will give you 2 conclusions
1 - 480 at idle does/doesn't drain battery as much as 245
2 - Increased scaling does/doesn't increase drain battery.
The longer the phone is awake the more it drains battery. Also take note of how long it takes to complete test 2.
**EDIT**
Intel has done extensive laboratory testing showing the results of Speedstep and the results carry over to ARM and governor scaling.
I'm inclined to follow the crowd on this one, no increase in voltage = no increase in power draw. That's scientific fact.
Increase in frequency will increase heat. Unnecessary scaling will also increase heat. Increased heat leads to shorter battery life, consequently overtime the battery can't hold as much of a charge. So again, nothing decisive here to make me change my mind.
If you still want to, then proceed with the tests above.
I've never OC'd any of my phones before but was keen to try it on the Galaxy Europa as the 600MHz CPU seems a bit weedy at times. What settings would people recommend? Ideally I would like good on-demand performance, good battery life and no frying of the CPU
Thanks
I not guaranted for the results but you can try to raise to 710. I tryeid and its work for me on any of cyanogen roms.
I use smartassV2 with a frequencies range of 122-480 Mhz. For me a longer battery life it's more important than waiting a second! And if I need to play something hard I set max to an upper freq..
my 2 cent..
First of all, I am totally new to this forum.(I mean as an registered user)
Before that I always had the thing from the forum what I needed.
Now here is my question,
If i overclock the processor speed of my android device to a higher position, isn't it gonna take more battery power than usual?
Phone model: Xperia Live With Walkman
Boot loader: unlocked
Root Access: Rooted
Kernel: Rage 3.2
ROM: Real ICS r6
overclocking is going to drain your battery obviously.
overclocking drains more battery but gives better performance,too much over clocking makes phone heat & even hardware issues
saqib nazm said:
overclocking drains more battery but gives better performance,too much over clocking makes phone heat & even hardware issues
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My phn's original capacity is 1 Ghz
How much overclocking can keep my battery level fair and also give smoother performance without causing me any hardware issue?
Btw, Thx for the ans.:good:
Saimoon said:
My phn's original capacity is 1 Ghz
How much overclocking can keep my battery level fair and also give smoother performance without causing me any hardware issue?
Btw, Thx for the ans.:good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Power consumption = Voltage x Voltage x cpufreq x some constant for your device. If you OC (raise the cpufreq) you will have more power consumption and more heat generation because most of the power is dissipated as heat and the heat is what damages your cpu. It is probably impossible to kill your cpu in one go, because your device should shut off when it begins to over heat (this will look like a random reboot). But you will slowly degrade the over all performance of your cpu and eventually you get to a point where you see a lot of random reboots. So if you decide to OC you probably want to also undervolt as well. This is because power consumption (and heat) scale with the square of the applied voltage. One rule of thumb is that your maximum cpufreq is actually determined by the voltage. For example, my cpu is rated to be stable at 1 GHZ and 1200 mV, so when I OC and UV, I scale the cpufreq as high as I can go, as long as the voltage is not greater than 1200 mV, for me this is 1.5 GHz.
Also remember that your cpu governor will have a big effect on your power consumption and it is probably doing a good job keeping the cpu running in the low range of the cpufreq table, so you are unlikely to see big effects of OC or UV on real life battery consumption.
every chipset is different, even though the brand and model is the same. noone can guarantee you any safe value to overclock.
Thanks Giving!
Thanks Everybody for helping me out!
I am applying 1.402 GHz :laugh:
Overclocking is not the only thing you have to think of in order to improve your phone's overall performance. The most important issue for me is choosing the right kernel and applying the right governor + I/O scheduler. From my experience with Mini (i have tried ALL available kernels and most of ROMs) I can surely say that now with my phone (ICS .587, custom ROM + kernel) overclocked to 1.5 GHz battery with minimal use (20 mins calls, 40 mins WiFi per day) lasts at least 60 hours. When I bought my phone (GB, no OC, all stock) battery was struggling to stay alive for 24 hours with the same minimal use. Conclusion: first pick the right kernel and ROM, then OC.
What is the difference between undervolting and underclocking? What does each do to battery life, performance, etc.
Also, what are the best, stable undervolting and underclocking value for the Rezound? I'm running Neo's Tron rom
gleggie said:
What is the difference between undervolting and underclocking? What does each do to battery life, performance, etc.
Also, what are the best, stable undervolting and underclocking value for the Rezound? I'm running Neo's Tron rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Undervolting is lowering the amount of power the processor draws at a certain frequency. Let's say, for example, a processor uses 1025mV at 1.18GHz normally. If you lower the voltage to 975mV for that frequency (using System Tuner or something similar) that's undervolting. If you lower the voltage too much the device will be unstable and reboot.
Underclocking is lowering the top speed of a processor. On our Rezound, the maximum speed of our processor is 1.5GHz stock. If you lower the maximum speed to 1.18GHz that's underclocking. Obviously lowering the maximum speed of the processor will decrease the performance of the device somewhat, depending on how much you lower it and what you're doing. Just getting on Twitter and XDA you might not notice the difference in speed, but during gaming it'll become more prevalent.
There isn't an established "best" amount to undervolt by, as each device is different. One device might be able to undervolt by 50mV with no problems, while another might not be able to handle any undervolting at all. If you're using the latest version of TRON ROM you should already be on Snuzzo's FunkyBean kernel, which has been undervolted by 50mV at every frequency.
Undervolting is also a subjective thing. Some people choose to go with 1.18GHz, while others may choose something higher than that, like 1.35GHz. It all depends on how you use your device and how you want it to perform. I suggest trying out something around 1.24GHz and seeing if it's alright with you. If it's too laggy just raise the speed bit by bit until you're satisfied with it.
I'm sorry for the long winded reply, but I wanted to make sure I covered everything.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
SteveG12543 said:
Undervolting is lowering the amount of power the processor draws at a certain frequency. Let's say, for example, a processor uses 1025mV at 1.18GHz normally. If you lower the voltage to 975mV for that frequency (using System Tuner or something similar) that's undervolting. If you lower the voltage too much the device will be unstable and reboot.
Underclocking is lowering the top speed of a processor. On our Rezound, the maximum speed of our processor is 1.5GHz stock. If you lower the maximum speed to 1.18GHz that's underclocking. Obviously lowering the maximum speed of the processor will decrease the performance of the device somewhat, depending on how much you lower it and what you're doing. Just getting on Twitter and XDA you might not notice the difference in speed, but during gaming it'll become more prevalent.
There isn't an established "best" amount to undervolt by, as each device is different. One device might be able to undervolt by 50mV with no problems, while another might not be able to handle any undervolting at all. If you're using the latest version of TRON ROM you should already be on Snuzzo's FunkyBean kernel, which has been undervolted by 50mV at every frequency.
Undervolting is also a subjective thing. Some people choose to go with 1.18GHz, while others may choose something higher than that, like 1.35GHz. It all depends on how you use your device and how you want it to perform. I suggest trying out something around 1.24GHz and seeing if it's alright with you. If it's too laggy just raise the speed bit by bit until you're satisfied with it.
I'm sorry for the long winded reply, but I wanted to make sure I covered everything.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the thorough response!