Related
Ok so how in the world are these people getting such a high overclock? I've been doing some research and I just cant figure it out.
Check this link: http://www.greenecomputing.com/apps/linpack/linpack-by-device/ and scroll down to the eris section. There is one guy in there who actually pulled off a 864MHz Overclock. I know thats a hard thing to do because the highest I've ever got was 760MHz and that lasted like 30 seconds before my Eris just gave up. I've accedintly put my phone in the 800MHz range and it just froze instantly. So far the highest stable range has been 748MHz.
Does anybody now something I dont? Is there a trick to getting that high of an overclock with the Eris?
From what I understand, there's a range in the stable clock cycle range that any chip/processor can run at. When the Eris was built, the "sweet spot" (stable) speed was apparently 528MHz (although this certainly could have been selected for marketing purposes too).
Most, but not all, Erii can run safely at 710MHz and be stable. However, we have seen instances where folks have installed ROMs that were overclocked to 710MHz as a default and their phones would not complete booting-up.
Others have indeed "pushed the envelope" by running in the high 700s and even in the high- to mid-800s as you've reported. However, there is usually a cost associated with doing this in terms of decreased life-span of your CPU. That being said, there are some members that have reported having a stable phone running 800MHz or higher. Your mileage will vary, as you have seen -- it really depends on your phone.
Cheers!
I can run 806 just fine, but most of the time I just choose to run at 767 or even 748, mainly because I don't need *that* much speed versus the larger battery drain at such high speeds.
Flashing GB has recently given me the ability to OC to 806, haven't tried any further.
Well, there are two things going on.
The first is that your phone hardware is like any other macroscopic object in the universe - they have variable characteristics. Go to the store and look carefully at the apples they have for sale - pick a given variety, and you'll notice that every one of them is just slightly different from the next.
If you were to zoom in and have a look with a good microscope at the transistors in your processor chip - you would first notice that: (a) there are millions of them!, and (b) they all look very similar, but are not exactly identical. That's just the nature of things - the manufacturing processes have some amount of (hopefully well controlled) variations.
But, when it comes to computer chips executing software instructions, we definitely want them to all behave identically. So, what to do? The answer is, run them all at a sufficiently low enough speed (and a large enough voltage) that the small natural variations from transistor to transistor never make a difference in how the outputs from those transistors are interpreted.
You've heard the expression "timing is everything", yes? Nowhere does this expression apply better than in computer chip design. I'll use a stupid analogy to illustrate how this works.
Suppose you had a marching band ... not like the ordinary kind, but instead, a band full of morons. So stupid, in fact, that you teach them to play songs like this:
"You nearest two neighbors will hand you a note just before each beat of the kettle drum, and you will decide based on those notes what note to play yourself after you hear the next kettle drum beat - and then you will hand that note to your neighbor".
In this analogy, each (transistor) logic gate in the chip is a moron band member, and the kettle drum is like the system clock.
Well, each moron (transistor logic gate) in the band will need to take some time to decide what note to play next. And it is plainly obvious, that if the moron's neighbors (other morons/gates) don't hand their notes off by the time the kettle drum beats, the wrong decision will be made. Chip designers call this "setup time".
Also, since we presume that the band members are morons, they actually need to some amount of time to stare at the notes from their neighbors to make up their mind - sometimes so slowly that the beat of the kettle drum has already been heard some time ago before they make up their mind. If the neighbor moron band members were to "yank their notes away too quickly", the receiving moron band member (logic gate) might again make the wrong decision. Chip designers call second sort of timing measurement "hold time".
So, this is a very simplistic view of chip design: the designer needs to make sure that the inputs (notes) to every gate (moron band members) arrives well enough ahead of the clock (kettle drum beat), and stay stable for a short period of time after the clock (kettle drum) beat. And they also have to consider how slowly each gate (moron) can "make up his mind" - because of course, that introduces delay in passing off information to other gates (morons) at the next beat of the clock (drum).
If you followed this analogy closely, the question might have also occurred to you, "what happens if the morons in the band don't all hear the kettle drum beat at precisely the same time?" In the analogy to chip design, this is the problem of clock distribution - because at each moron (gate), the decisions are made when they individually hear the kettle drum (clock) beat. So, there could be some major trouble if a moron (gate) was supposed to receive notes (signals) from other morons (gates) that were hearing the kettle drum (clock) either much to early, or much too late, compared to their neighbors.
Now, marching bands are only a little bit like this, especially since we said in our example that only nearby neighbor morons (gates) were involved; but in chip design, both clocks and signals may need to be passed great distances away, not just to nearest neighbors.
A major part of chip design revolves around exactly these concepts: trying to compute exactly what the "setup", "hold", and "delay" time min/max values are for millions and millions of gate and signal paths in the chip, and also knowing exactly how long it will take for the signals and clocks to travel from their source to destination(s).
If only a single one of the millions of morons (gates) gets this wrong, the whole song is ruined.
So, it should be clear that if you run the system clock really, really slowly, you generally won't bump in to any setup or delay hazards (hold is a little trickier, but we can ignore that). The clock beats so slowly that signals have plenty of time to reach their destinations, and also the amount of delay through each gate is negligible compared to the long amounts of time that using a slow clock grants you.
But as you increase the clock faster and faster, you start shaving away available time for signals to get to their destinations, and come closer and closer to one of these hazards - a "setup" or "hold" violation. Not only that, but the delays across the chip - which are negligible for a slow clock - start to become really important.
Now, I spent a lot of words up there to illustrate something: the timing problem only very weakly depends what software is running on the phone, it is a function of the hardware alone. You can't "install some software" to make this problem go away. Your microprocessor will run flawlessly up until a certain clock speed, and then disaster!.
And that disaster could be the fault of a single transistor out of tens of millions - generally, a transistor which for some reason, is "weaker" than most of it's neighbors - or it has to push a signal through a line which is oddly more resistive than it should be - and therefore slower.
The second thing to be aware of is that these benchmarks are being run on a multitasking operating system - if you run them 5 times in a row, you will see that you get a different benchmark value each time you run them - because other activities on the phone and the kernel's scheduler conspired to give your benchmark app slightly less or slightly more total attention during the elapsed (wall) clock time of the benchmark.
So, since that website records the "best of the best" - make sure you run your benchmark twenty to fifty times, see if you can diddle the oom_adj value of your process while it is running, and delete all other applications from your phone so that it is the only thing running.
To illustrate that there's no "magic" going on here, I'll give you a concrete example. Two days ago I ran that Linpack app on my Eris. Here's what I did:
OS: GSB v1.2
min cpu = 748 Mhz
max cpu = 748 Mhz
governor = performance
JIT on
killed off most idle apps
And I got linpack scores that varied from 4.8 to 5.1 over two or three runs.
Now, let's compare (the best of) those results to the ones reported in the Benchmark results, but scaled to a different frequency:
(844 Mhz / 748 Mhz) * 5.1 = 5.75
Note that this is plenty close the the value reported at 844 Mhz.
If you want to convince yourself that your phone is fine, set the cpu speed min=max = whatever. Then run the benchmark a couple of times, and compare your result
(844 Mhz / whatever ) * your_best_result
And you will see that your phone is no "different" than the best Eris out there - except that it can't run at 844 Mhz. That latter part is just the luck of the draw.
bftb0
Not all CPUs are created equal. Some are stable at higher frequencies than others. This because many of the steps in CPU production rely on chemical processes. Doping, silicon wafer growth, electroplating, etc. Manufacturers use a technique called CPU binning to help them sort out the better chips.
Where I learned this:
http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/514-intel-cpu-processor-core-i7.html
@bftb0...that was beautiful...
If you're going to try higher rates, leave logcat running and watch for errors.
I love that analogy. Mostly because it's fun to make fun of morons, and the more the better!
bftb0, could I have your permission to repost that (up through "and therefore slower.") on FaceBook? I will note before the quote that this applies to any kind of computing device, but I wouldn't change anything you said. I would, of course, also give a linked credit to you, this thread, and XDA.
I was going to ask you in a PM, so I didn't put you on the spot in public, but you must have used to get way too many PMs since you disabled that.
I won't be offended if you say no, just thought I'd ask.
Actually most of those are faked.
There used to be 1ghz scores for the eris. They're quite easy to fake. While some phones can get quite high due to the way CPUs are processed... the linpack website is incredibly easy to fool.
roirraW "edor" ehT said:
could I have your permission to repost that (up through "and therefore slower.") on FaceBook? I will note before the quote that this applies to any kind of computing device, but I wouldn't change anything you said. I would, of course, also give a linked credit to you, this thread, and XDA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure.
+10char
bftb0 said:
Sure.
+10char
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bftb0, I never took the time back then to say thank you for your explanation. I'd like to do that now. Thank you. Obviously I know more about Android and the phones its installed on now. I have a better understanding of this subject and others you have helped with.
Also I haven't seen you around lately. I certainty hope your ok and hope to see you around again.
DINC|CM7|INCREDIKERNEL
I see him all the time. Well I don't actually see him but I do benefit a lot from his advise and insites. Also I've been able to run my Eris at 787mhz without issues but as a norm run at 710mhz.
Question for all GB users, which is a pretty high number here. I ran MIUI Lithium and loved it except the battery was pathetic. I can deal with generally bad battery life since i came from an HD7 but it got out of hand. Anyway since there are a lot of GB roms out there and pretty active i suppose a lot of u found a way to handle it better. How do you u GB users get the most out of battery on a GB ROM? (ROM, Kernel, tweaks, etc.)
please share your setup since it can help a lot of others that want to manage battery better
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
Try using the Bali-CM (For CM7/MIUI/OMFGB) kernel. It was designed around improving battery. I'm currently not using it however when I did I had much better battery life when I was... Also remember to undervolt, as that should further increase battery life without loss of performance. "Screen off" profiles in overclock apps like SetCPU also help in battery conservation.
An app that really helps battery life is called Juice Defender Plus. You should try it out! Here's an overview of the app posted by "Woodrube" that should help you get started...
This is how the JD Plus works (no need for JD Ultimate b/c we don't have many of the functions it supports. I just copied this from another thread the OP started awhile ago and I was trying to helps him out there.
If you set it to custom, the go into the settings tab on the right and then all the way at the bottom, there is two buttons to push, The first in Interactive which will pull up Juice Defender for up for any app that isn't already configured and the other is Configure Apps. This is the one that you can customize on an app-to-app basis where if you are no using an app and the screen is locked, it kills the radio/data traffic for that app.
Say you are listening to IHeartRadio, this you would want either Enable or Enable/off (which means the screen will be locked but the radio/data will be working). Now take the browser. It you are not using the browser, then you don't need it transmitting data right? So you would set that one to Enable (which means that it will only enable data traffic when that app is being used).
Juice Defender only works when the screen is locked, don't forget and all widgets are battery drains b/c all they really are is a monitoring app and if it is tied to something like FB or G+, then that data will be running constantly.
Examples:
Gmail = Enable (not enable/off b/c then it will keep your radio/data open)
Beautiful Widgets = Enable/off
mClock/Clockr = Enable/off
Angry Birds = Disable (with this and something like Adfree, no more ads in Angry Birds even though the ads are embedded in the .apk)
SMS/MMS = Enable or Do Nothing (why would you push disable)
Enable = Radio/data on when app is in use (front)
Enable/off = Radio/data on for background apps (when screen is locked)
Disable = Disables radio/data traffic completely when that app is running
Do Nothing = What is says.
I have been using JD+ for over a year on 3 different phones and have noticed a considerable difference in battery life, even on a crappy Motorola phone. Just takes some time to figure out YOUR settings and what YOU like. I have also used it on Stock kernel and had no problems either.
---
Under status I have Profile>Customize (this one lets you configure your apps) Notification> Text
Under settings I have
Mobile and Wifi are both set to Enable,
Options>Auto Disable,
Location>disable,
Schedule>Enable:frequency>1h,
Night>Enable :12am6am (b/c I am asleep but if I am on, user takes priority),
Apps>Enable;
Configure>Interactive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, don't forget that our Vibrant's screens are huge power drainers. Keeping it on a lower brightness level helps save a lot of battery. Hope this helps!
---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:31 PM ----------
By the way, whenever you flash a new rom you are going to want to do a battery re-calibration. This will help excessive battery drain. However you only need to do it once when you flash a new rom! Use this app to easily do a re-calibration.... http://www.google.com/search?gcx=c&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=battery+calibration+nema
Here are some screenies to give you an idea of how JD+ can be set up. Noob, thanks for the tag, buddy.
+1 on the screen settings too. Plus when you are pulling on-line music for extended time and notice the phone getting hot, it isn't all the processor, it is the screen that is causing some of the heat. Hence my enable/off for MLB or Tune-in in the shots below.
Noob, thanks for the tag, buddy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem, bro.
Which version of Lithium were you running? Try Prime 360 (Miui 2.3.7). With heavy usage, I usually get around 16-20 hrs. With light usage, I had 29hrs with it. Let your battery drain, fully recharge and you should have remarkable results.
I tried NB-360 ROM, it had decent battery life, with many battery saving features included, but it didn't compare to Prime if you need longevity out of your battery. It currently uses the Neo R18 Kernel.
Let me know how it goes.
mike21pr said:
Question for all GB users, which is a pretty high number here. I ran MIUI Lithium and loved it except the battery was pathetic. I can deal with generally bad battery life since i came from an HD7 but it got out of hand. Anyway since there are a lot of GB roms out there and pretty active i suppose a lot of u found a way to handle it better. How do you u GB users get the most out of battery on a GB ROM? (ROM, Kernel, tweaks, etc.)
please share your setup since it can help a lot of others that want to manage battery better
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So my Setup is basically running CM7 (with 2.3.7), and having a kernel which supports something called "undervolting"
right now, I have a kernel called glitch kernel.. which basically gives me an app where i can set my own custom voltages (like undervolting it -50 mv from the original voltage). THis can help save TONS of battery, but always refer to your kernel guide on how low to set the voltage.
We don't want any bootloops or bricks now do we
I also use an app (in conjunction with my kernel) called screen filter. This dims the LEDS inside youe phone individually so it saves a ton of battery.
i get 1.5 days on full charge listening to music and going on the internet constantly
thanks a million guys. im currently running cm7 stable and flashed glitch v13 kernel. set leakage to medium (honestly still dont understand the difference very well) and undervolted like you guys recommended. ill see how battery treats me.
^^ BTW i had Lithium 11/11/11 update with default kernel
If i see a significant increase in battery, ill give MIUI a go again with Prime since it seems to have good battery. Ill keep u updated, thanks again
Edit: quick question. is it true that the solid white colors still kill much more battery with our screens? or was it mostly a first gen amoled issue?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
update: glitch v13 with undervolting really did the trick!!! after a full work day on which on a GB rom my phone would be begging for mercy with about 20% remaining more or less, today i finished with just over 70%, and that was after i realized that the undervolting settings did not stick after boot when i unplugged it and i applied it again (my phone was at 90% when i did this)
speechless...
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
I discovered something that drastically improved my battery performance even with it sync on all day. If your rooted get the CPU master pro app, and under profiles enable the screen off profile and set the max cpu freq to 918, or lower if you want your battery to be better, i found that 918 keeps me charged all day though, it will depend on how much you use your phone cause you'll only be saving battery when its not in use, if you use your phone alot then just go to the main profile and set it to around 1200mhz
Edit: I'm using RezRom1.6
Thanks for trying to help others but this belongs in the general thread or apps one.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium
and im pretty sure just about anyone who has been here more than a few months already know this
Thanks for the tip. But I have to agree with everyone above me.
Also..
The title of the post made me think you were making your battery longer... I was like "why on earth would you try to do that???"
*********
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
Hi all
I'm working on an academic project and I need to measure how much energy is consumed by my application.
But my requirements are annoying and I have not found anything that cover all my requirements.
I like to know if you know anything that can help me.
My requirements:
1-I need to calculate energy consumption per sensor/device for my application. For example I need to see how much energy is used by GPS or Wifi in my app.
2-I need to results in mAh. Percent results are somehow ambiguous for my tests(they may be good in normal usage to see what has spent most of your energy,but not in my case).
3-I want to get these work on Galaxy S5. Then Android 4.4.2 and its limitations.
4-I don't want to use rooted device.
I have tried powertutor(even though I'm not sure if it works correctly in android 4.4.2). Rather than this tool do you know anything else?
I thought if there is any app that can run another app in an isolated environment to calculate its energy consumption.
Because I'm writing my target app, even I can add additional codes in it for calculating energy costs.
I have seen several papers for calculating energy cost in various journals, but I prefer a simpler approach.
Any idea if it is possible to do so at all?
Regards