Related
This is probably a stupid question but I'll ask it anyway. I've noticed my phone draining lately (or maybe it's not, I'm not quite sure what the battery life used to be xD), and I recently overclocked my phone to 1.25 GHz (my profile on SetCPU is ondemand), does overclocking affect the battery that much?
I run Froyo (rooted with wifi fix and the 1.25 GHz kernal)
I'm using an ultra low voltage kernal at 1ghz and haven't noticed a difference, if anything it seems like it's better.
I guess it probably largely depends on what kernal.
I've been overclocked for 4+ months. The first month before I rooted, I was getting around 16-18 hours on a full charge at the stock 550 speed. After I rooted, a lot depended on the rom (lesser so) and the kernel (more so). I think the best performance I got was on ChevyNo1's SS rom (2.1) with one of his kernels ... 40+ hours overclocked conservatively at 800. My first shot some time back with CyanogenMod got me 3 hours with the early Bekit kernels but the past several versions up through 5.0.8 I was getting about 30 hours clocked at 800 with a jdlfg kernel. Now on Froyo I'm getting close to 30 hours again conservatively at 800-1000 ... which on a 2.2. rom is more like 1200+ since its faster.
So, in short, my battery life has significantly improved while running faster than stock. But no 2 Droids are identical in terms of how a rom and/or kernel perform. With 2.1 roms my Droid seems to like jdlfg's kernels, while on 2.2 the P3droid kernels do good. But that's what I found out via a lot of trial and error, not anyone's post saying "You must try ______'s kernel (or rom) as its da bomb!"
I would like to include that the post above by "cvhovey" provides some valuable information that might interest you and suggest anyone untreated in this thread to read that post.
Using an application like SetCPU you can throttle down the processor speed when the screen is off, this reducing heat and gaining better battery life. This doesn't mean you will get better battery life if you use your phone all day and never turn the screen off. But is totally worth it because u feel like I'm getting awesome battery life, plus an amazingly fast phone because SetCPU will overall me to my personal preference of 1100mhz on demand.
The answer to your actual question depends on how well you set up your phone preferences according to what benefits you the most, and what method of adjusting processor speed. I only mentioned one here, there are mire ways than just an APK.
Sent from my Droid using XDA App
PetRiLJoe said:
Using an application like SetCPU ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1+ on that. But how one uses SetCPU can also make big differences, such as which governor is selected. SetCPU at 400-1250 with the Performance governor will essentially run at its highest speed all of the time (if I'm correct), whereas with the Conservative governor will ramp up from 400 to 1250 at a slower pace, or at a faster face with Ondemand.
This thread can give you some helpful tips: Battery Saving Techniques - Theories in Test
Alright, thank you for your help ^^
i used SetCPU and my phone had continuously reboots...
I just had to uninstall it..
Were you using profiles in any way? A specific ROM? I've had similar a experience with certain ROMs (specifically UltimateDroid).
Best guess is that it just didn't play nice with the modded kernel.
Sent from my Droid using XDA App
A few weeks ago when I still had my HTC Hero it was overclocked to 672Mhz (standard = 528Mhz). It gave me a little boost in performance on Froyo, also the batterylife wasn't decreased too much.
But with our N1 running on 1Ghz, will it give much difference when clocked to 1113/1152Mhz? And what about batterylife?
If SetCPU is used what are your settings then? Mine is currently running on stock speed, no SetCPU.
ZeppeMan said:
A few weeks ago when I still had my HTC Hero it was overclocked to 672Mhz (standard = 528Mhz). It gave me a little boost in performance on Froyo, also the batterylife wasn't decreased too much.
But with our N1 running on 1Ghz, will it give much difference when clocked to 1113/1152Mhz? And what about batterylife?
If SetCPU is used what are your settings then? Mine is currently running on stock speed, no SetCPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have my nexus one rooted and flashed to MIUI Rom and clock @ 690mhz I get way better battery power. Before I would only get 6hr to 8hr if lucky now I get from 9hr to 13hr depending how much I use it.
set to 1.13 ghz
then screen off to minimum 245mhz
josemedina1983 said:
I have my nexus one rooted and flashed to MIUI Rom and clock @ 690mhz I get way better battery power. Before I would only get 6hr to 8hr if lucky now I get from 9hr to 13hr depending how much I use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you underclocked it, what about the speed? It's not to laggy?
Nexus one can run reasonably smooth @ 600mhz and above. It might not open applications as fast as it will be @ 1GHz though.
i think 1Ghz is enough for n1
why do u want an overclock?
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
shreyas1122 said:
i think 1Ghz is enough for n1
why do u want an overclock?
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't said I want an overclock. It's allready very fast on 1Ghz (compared to my old Hero ), just wanted to know your thoughts about overclocking the N1.
im overclocked at 1152 mhz and profiles set for 245 max with screen off. Overclocking is nice because i like the snappiness but most people cant tell the difference between 998 mhz and 1152. its not needed to overclock but i think profiles help alot. just my two cents
Ok thx, I will try 1150Mhz and see (if it's stable and) what batterylife does. I'm also going to try underclocking.
I have my N1 only for a couple of weeks now and I must say, this phone is awesome. It's VERY fast compared to my old Hero. I remember when I was installing apps on my Hero it became very slow and couldn't do anything untill installing was finished. With the N1 you still can do things while installing apps without lag. The responsiveness and smoothness is also a lot faster. I loved my Hero Because it never let me down, ok it was all a bit slower, but it was getting there. Now with the release of Gingerbread (custom ROM) it became to slow for me and that's why I sold my Hero and bought the N1. It was very difficult to find one, because of the EOL (end of life). But eventually I found one and i'm very happy with it. The N1 is allready more 1 year old, but it still competes with the best phones out there.
I generally run overclocked at 1075MHz, which gives a good balance between battery power usage and processor power. My understanding is that a different voltage scaling method is generally used above 1075MHz, so power consumption will increase above that point.
Didn't knew the voltage would increase above 1075Mhz, will keep that in mind
ZeppeMan said:
Didn't knew the voltage would increase above 1075Mhz, will keep that in mind
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is, of course, dependent upon how the kernel is constructed, but this is what I have generally found to be true.
Give us some feedback
I overclocked it too 1075Mhz when screen is on (screen off 245Mhz). Will give my thoughts in a day or 2.
Just report that my battery drain is almost the same as on stock settings. I think it drains a tiny bit faster on 1075Mhz, but nothing major. On the other hand, I don't feel it's faster on 1075Mhz then on stock speed. Only benchmarks give me performance increase.
I'm now on CM6.1.1 with stock kernel (cyanogen), I tried other kernels like Wilmonks kernel,.. Although it was more responsive, battery was going down even faster. I get best battery results with stock kernel.
Hard to choose
more speed = more battery drain
less speed = longer battery
I think I stay with the last option (less speed = longer battery), because Wildmonks kernel doesn't give me enough performance increase over the stock kernel on stock speed.
I have mine at 998mhz, but overclocked 1152 while plugged into power.
Either way, its so easy to play with the clock settings, i'd just have a play with a bunch of different settings if i were you.
liam.lah said:
I have mine at 998mhz, but overclocked 1152 while plugged into power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd love a how-to fire that..
mind sharing the app?
Sent from my Nexus One
ZeppeMan said:
wanted to know your thoughts about overclocking the N1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well my thoughts: underclock!
so you can watch movies on it all night!
Sent from my Nexus One
shreyas1122 said:
I'd love a how-to fire that..
mind sharing the app?
Sent from my Nexus One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can use SetCPU to create profiles based on different circumstances.
Me, I have mine clocked to a max of 1075 and min of 245 with the screen on, 576 max / 128 min screen off, 998/128 charging (to reduce heat - overclocking while power is applied can make it silly hot), and a failsafe to clock down to 576/128 if the temperature gets over 50*C.
Fabulous app.
Correct me if I am wrong. When you use setcpu to "ondemand", the CPU speed can ramp up to max whenever necessary, otherwise the speed will tune down to min especially in standby mode. In that way, you can enjoy the advantages of overclocking and underclocking the CPU speed i.e. increasing performance when needed and saving power when not in use, right? When I loaded Rod's MIUI and Wildmonk's kernel, I can underclock down to 128Mhz and overclock up to 1.152Ghz. At the end of the day, I still have over 60% of power left after not so heavily use (some web browsing, checking email and listen some music). Overall, setcpu is a great app for me.
so, i am using the Fear Rom and with the OC karnel. i played around the max sittings to 1.4 and tried quadarant. amazing score of 4150. nice... but what will happen if i keep it at 1.4 ?
will it over heat the phone / burn the GPU/CPU when playing games for example ?
i understand the battery life will be shorter. but what other disdvantages ?
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
so, i am using the Fear Rom and with the OC karnel. i played around the max sittings to 1.4 and tried quadarant. amazing score of 4150. nice... but what will happen if i keep it at 1.4 ?
will it over heat the phone / burn the GPU/CPU when playing games for example ?
i understand the battery life will be shorter. but what other disdvantages ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could dmg ur cpu. But Tegra is known to run 1.8Ghz stable. So with 1.4 you should be good.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Oh!! Great 1.8Ghz but only 1.4Ghz is very drain my battery to much.
In the long run, your cpu might get affected but its shouldn't happen so soon.
That said, in my honest opinion, don't need to OC the chip.
The same OCing rules apply from the PC World. The same batch of chips have varying maximum OCing capabilities and thus different stabilities. Although you can stably run a chip at a higher clock, it will definitely shorten its life (Sometimes it could kill it in a year, sometimes beyond what we can measure.). Chip makers purposefully OC chips during tests to simulate the stress effects of using the chip over a long period of time (OCing that makes it seem like the chip is being used for months or years.). Nvidia sticks the Tegra at 1 GHz half because it's cheaper to do so (don't need to ensure higher clock rates which would mean a larger percentage of their chips won't last doing it.) and half because of marketing (At the time, no one has 1.2 GHz like we do now. From what I've seen, Tegra 2 can do 1.2 GHz easy.).
So what it comes down to is how long you plan on keeping the phone and how lucky you are. =)
Imo, in the interest of power savings (P = (V^2)/R), the gains of OCing having an exponentially worse effect on battery life.
imho theres currently no point in oc'ing the Tegra2 in Optimus at all.
Theres no real life benefit, only theoretical benefit when running benchmark apps for show off.
Theres not a single application or game out there today that require more processing power than what the Tegra delivers at 1ghz - and not a single one out there that will run any better or faster by oc'ing because the demand for processing power to run the application or game at its maximum capacity are allready met at 1ghz
Basically there are only negatives in terms of decreased battery and cpu life for nothing but a screenshot of a higher quadrant (or whatever) score
If at some time in the future you should run into a game that would not run smoothly unless the cpu are oc'ed then it would make sence to do so - but for now not.
The games available today either do run perfectly smooth at 1ghz or if they dont, then they dont because of poor programming or other factors and they would still run poorly even if the cpu are oc'ed
Actually there are real life benefits until you find a game which really lags when you run it. Meaning, you should leave it as it is until next year.
It may damage the CPU like what others say but since lower clocks are undervolt it might last as long as a non OC (Stock).
But it will kill the battery faster as you will have to charge more often due to the higher power draws.
A lot of people say that overclocking the Nexus 4 is useless as it's so fast to begin with, but that turns out to be false, yes, it's useless for making e.g. games run smoother, as they all already do, but it's very useful for reducing loading times, and it turns out that the % of time saved is close to the % of increased clock speed.
My setup: Nexus 4, franco.Kernel updater v9.3.3, Franco Kernel #666, Jelly Bean 4.2.2 JDQ39, Governor Interactive. Angry pigs HD 1.1.0 app loading. Fresh reboot for each speed. I did three measurements for each clock speed and left voltages at Franco's defaults. I would suggest looking into the undervolting threads to figure out how low you can go with voltages, undervolting is good underclocking is usually not.
1026 Mhz 1025mV default Franco
15.4s
15.9s
15.7s
1512 MHz 1150 mV default Franco
11.5s
11.3s
11.3s
1620 MHz 1175mV default Franco
11.1s
10.6s
10.6s
1674 MHz 1175mV default Franco
10.3s
10.6s
10.7s
1728 MHz 1200mV default Franco
10.5s
10.3s
10.3s
Conclusion
12.5% faster clock speed = 8.85% faster load time, which means increasing clock speed is 70% effective at reducing load time going from 1512 Mhz and upwards.
40% faster clock speed = 35% faster load time, meaning that people who think running their device at 1026 Mhz is as good as 1512 Mhz are wrong. Nearly doubling clock speed nearly halfens load time.
The reduction in loading time is reduced a bit as you reach higher frequencies, but it's still 70% effective so every extra Mhz helps cut down the wait. Overclocking the Nexus 4 is meaningless in terms of increasing smoothness IN APP, but meaningful in reducing load times significantly and in increasing the responsiveness of your system.
please tell me for saving the battery and still maintaining a little smoothness
the settings to use
i use faux123 kernel.. i just need the voltage,cpu clock n governer settings
so overclocking makes things faster.. really? who would have thunk. and you just found this out?
my brother uses a galaxy s3, and after using it for a few months he tried my n4... he was amused how fast things open and how smooth everything was, and it was all stock frequencies. i think it makes no sense overclocking this beast, it is already fast enough. +/- a few seconds doesnt make that much of a difference but drains the battery significantly more. just sayin'.
zakoo2 said:
my brother uses a galaxy s3, and after using it for a few months he tried my n4... he was amused how fast things open and how smooth everything was, and it was all stock frequencies. i think it makes no sense overclocking this beast, it is already fast enough. +/- a few seconds doesnt make that much of a difference but drains the battery significantly more. just sayin'.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but little OC can help you save more battery in day to day usage. (If you are not playing only games on your phone).
Sent from SpeedMachine i9100
alen1901 said:
Sorry but little OC can help you save more battery in day to day usage. (If you are not playing only games on your phone).
Sent from SpeedMachine i9100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not according to my experiences, and i did play with oc/uc and voltage quite a bit. i always ended up going back to stock on the n4 (not on my old motodefy though) because of the drainage.
So, a 50% increase in clock cycles pushes the performance by a bit.
Who would've thought...?
well that's normal, overclocking = more power draining, more speed; just like with CPU or ram on pc, no rocket science here.
alen1901 said:
Sorry but little OC can help you save more battery in day to day usage. (If you are not playing only games on your phone).
Sent from SpeedMachine i9100
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OC? Don't you mean Downclocking or Undervolting?
sigma392 said:
OC? Don't you mean Downclocking or Undervolting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope , also OC can (in theory) improve battery life because the CPU finishes its task faster.
a pigeon delivered this message.... ** your welcome **
gohan040 said:
Nope , also OC can (in theory) improve battery life because the CPU finishes its task faster.
a pigeon delivered this message.... ** your welcome **
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But er... Wouldn't it would theoretically need more power and therefore generating more heat than stock frequencies which in turn will have a negative effect on battery life?
sigma392 said:
But er... Wouldn't it would theoretically need more power and therefore generating more heat than stock frequencies which in turn will have a negative effect on battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It REALLY depends. I'd say most day-to-day usage, an overclock can actually help save battery by 'racing' to sleep (hurry up, finish, drop to deep sleep on cpu AND radio). I think being on 3g makes it even more pronounced because you're letting the radio drop back down to a lower power state as well as the CPU. So if you need to quickly open an email attachment, and cpu is the limiter, it can help it finish, get off the network, and back to idle state faster and save some battery. Now if you go on running benchmarks instead where you just keep throwing more work at it that's a seriously different story. There is also a point of diminishing returns (usually 1 or 2 steps before the absolute limit, in our case about 1670mhz) but in general, a moderate overclock can help.
sigma392 said:
But er... Wouldn't it would theoretically need more power and therefore generating more heat than stock frequencies which in turn will have a negative effect on battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with u, but remember its a theory.. U finish faster so the time it uses more power is less....
^^Look at the post above me, he got a good example^^
The best of both worlds (if your phone is capable to do this) is when u UV and OC. U would use less power on a higher frequency. Win-win in theory.
But I know what u mean and its hard to believe, but I think that's what @alan1901 wanted to say.
a pigeon delivered this message.... ** your welcome **
If you are lucky, you can overclock using STOCK voltage for the maximum clock.
IE, i see many undervolting their phones by alot. I would just try 1150mV (default voltage for 1.5ghz) for your highest speed (OC as high as you can with this voltage), which means you are not using more power, but still making your phone faster.
Haven't tried on mine, but say 1.6-1.7ghz should be possible with 1150mV for a few at least.
No, 50% OC is not = 50% reduced load time
Let me summarize:
OVERCLOCKING > UNDERCLOCKING FOR THE AVERAGE (POWER) USER
You load a lot of apps, you don't play games or watch videos for hours, productivity is your focus. Depending on use you could save probably 1 - 6 hours a year (see assumptions below). Battery gains won't be significant, but spending less time with the LCD/Wifi etc on could give you some gains as the CPU is one of the lower power drain components.
UNDERCLOCKING > OVERCLOCKING FOR THE 3D GAMER
You spent a lot of time playing CPU intensive games, keeping the CPU cores at max clock speed for extended periods of time. In that case you could get some battery life gains at the cost of responsiveness and app loading times - your call.
IN MORE DETAIL
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNDERCLOCKING + UNDERVOLTING PROs/CONs
+ Reduces CPU temperature, if that matters to you.
+ IF keeping the CPU at max clock speed for extended periods of time, a lower max voltage could give you enough extra battery life to negate the time lost waiting for apps to load - your call.
- Increased load times - even on the Nexus 4 a lot of apps take > 10 seconds to launch, and don't forget in-app load times, reboots etc.
- No significant battery saving in most cases, potential for loss (if doing a lot of app loading you could even get worse battery life as the screen, wifi etc has to stay on for longer, and the screen is the main battery drain).
- Time spent finding stable voltages.
OVERCLOCKING PROs and CONs
+ Potential small battery life gain, as your device spends less time with the screen/wifi etc ON.
++ SAVES YOU TIME. I'm estimating 1 - 5 hours a year depending on usage.
- Times spent finding stable voltages and clock speeds.
-/- Apps does not RUN smoother.
Why 50% CPU does not = 50% reduced load time and why you test things
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It'd be more like 40-30% depending on relative clock speed. I did a simple test as we did NOT know that app loading was mainly CPU limited, could have been memory. And If load times didn't go down there wouldn't be ANY reason to OC and underclocking would be a good idea.
Assumptions behind an estimated 1 - 6 hours saved a year by overclocking
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Say that you're on average waiting 4 minutes a day waiting for apps to load, rebooting your phone, waiting for web pages to load, waiting for in-app content to load etc.
Overclocking can cut down that wait time up to 10%, that's nearly 1/2 a minute saved every day, 3 1/2 minutes a week, 3 hours a year. This means you can get a good return on the time it took you to overclock your device, assuming you'll keep it for a couple of years. So if that's the case, why not do it? You'll save some time and you'll enjoy using your device a bit more.
Currently I'm OCd at max 1674 Mhz @ 1225mV, otherwise using default Franco voltages and interactive governor. Stable and very snappy Might be able to reduce voltage and retain stability but this is fine.
zakoo2 said:
not according to my experiences, and i did play with oc/uc and voltage quite a bit. i always ended up going back to stock on the n4 (not on my old motodefy though) because of the drainage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sigma392 said:
OC? Don't you mean Downclocking or Undervolting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I said little OC. Example. Stock cpu clock is 1000mhz and 1000mv. Now, you OC your phone to 1200,1300mhz without changing voltage, or by increasing it a little bit(+25, +50mv, to make phone stable), it will use higher cpu frequency with the same voltage like on lower frequency or with a little higher voltage. So it would finish tasks faster, going to idle faster without getting any heat and give you more battery. On my nexus s and galaxy s3, galaxy s2, i tested it, and it helped (about 30min more screen on time for me). But if you play games a lot and doing some heavy tasks then underclock and undervolt are best for you. But on that beast of phone, i woldnt underclock it beyond 1.2, 1.3, not sure what frequencies are there. If you UC that phone a lot, you can easyly go with some weaker phone.
Sent from SpeedMachine i9100
is there any kernel that can overclock with 4.3?
Andre_Vitto said:
is there any kernel that can overclock with 4.3?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, most of them. some even overclock up to 2052mhz :victory:
simms22 said:
yes, most of them. some even overclock up to 2052mhz :victory:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
like?
Check the Development sections.
This thread makes my head hurt.
Hi,
I saw BravoMotolora's article about CPU binning, and I thought that it would be great if we compare CPU bin and voltages.
It will be great to know the relationship between voltage and PVS number.
Please follow this procedure
1. Install a custom kernel that lets you do undervolt, e.g. franco.Kernel
2. Do what BravoMotolora said
3. Undervolt your N5 by 25MV
4. Run Antutu
Then, you might see your N5 rebooting or giving you a Antutu score.
If you get the score, go and try the procedure again
I got to -50MV with PVS1 N5.
Please post your results(undervolt that you did and your N5's PVS) here!
Can you not do this?
Do not do what? I mean most of guys here will do undervolt to save battery anyway so won't it be good to share some intel?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Premium HD app
I'm the same as OP... I have PVS 1 and the max I can UV is -50mV.
you do realize that many custom kernels set their voltages different than default/stock, and differ among themselves? for example, if you go -50mV less on using franco kernel, and go -50mV less using trinity kernel, it means nothing because their voltages differ to begin with. i mean you cant really compare each others voltages that way. you would need to write your voltages in real numbers, and cpu speed steps.
I honestly never saw a huge benefit in undervolting. It can also cause errors which lead to worse battery life.
Sent from my AOSP on HammerHead using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
johndrmr said:
I honestly never saw a huge benefit in undervolting. It can also cause errors which lead to worse battery life.
Sent from my AOSP on HammerHead using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed. i personally do better with underclocking, than with undervolting.
simms22 said:
agreed. i personally do better with underclocking, than with undervolting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's a lot easier to underclock 20% than to undervolt 10%, which approx. gives you the same active power savings. It's a lot safer too, if you don't have a spec sheet for the CPU handy.
underclocking does nothing to idle power (or leakage power) though
This phone does pretty well arlt idle I think. Can't imagine you would see much gain from UV.
Sent from my AOSP on HammerHead using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
klin1344 said:
I'm the same as OP... I have PVS 1 and the max I can UV is -50mV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a PVS 2 and can undervotl -75mV accross the board and -87.5mV at 300Mhz.
So 2,26Ghz I can run at 0.975 Volt.
CM11 with Bricked Kernel.
Together with Sync off, Google hotword off and optimized automatic brightness I get constantly 5 - 5,5 hours screen on time with websurfing, mail and music stream.
Marcel
menting said:
it's a lot easier to underclock 20% than to undervolt 10%, which approx. gives you the same active power savings. It's a lot safer too, if you don't have a spec sheet for the CPU handy.
underclocking does nothing to idle power (or leakage power) though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Underclocking drops the performance of the phone, as the peak performance is not available when needed. Undervolting on the other hand gives you battery savings without affecting peak performance at all. If done too aggressively, it can make the phone unstable, but there is never any danger of hardware damage. The instability will at most cause errors, random reboot, or a freeze up. If this happens, you know you've pushed too far under, and you can bump voltage closer to stock after booting the phone back up. If running stably, undervolting is actually marginally better for your phone hardware than stock voltage because you are wasting less of the energy in heating up the chips and damaging them.
rajendra82 said:
Underclocking drops the performance of the phone, as the peak performance is not available when needed. Undervolting on the other hand gives you battery savings without affecting peak performance at all. If done too aggressively, it can make the phone unstable, but there is never any danger of hardware damage. The instability will at most cause errors, random reboot, or a freeze up. If this happens, you know you've pushed too far under, and you can bump voltage closer to stock after booting the phone back up. If running stably, undervolting is actually marginally better for your phone hardware than stock voltage because you are wasting less of the energy in heating up the chips and damaging them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i underclock, sometimes to 1036mhz max, with all 4 cores always on by default(no hotplugging). sure, in a benchmark itll score less, just like i expect to score more when im overclocked. but to the normal user, they would never be able to tell that my phone is only clocked to 1036mhz. meaning the user experience isnt lowered in any way. even intense gpu oriented games dont show that im running underclocked. so when you say it drops the performance, it isnt entirely accurate.
simms22 said:
i underclock, sometimes to 1036mhz max, with all 4 cores always on by default(no hotplugging). sure, in a benchmark itll score less, just like i expect to score more when im overclocked. but to the normal user, they would never be able to tell that my phone is only clocked to 1036mhz. meaning the user experience isnt lowered in any way. even intense gpu oriented games dont show that im running underclocked. so when you say it drops the performance, it isnt entirely accurate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, but CPU underclocking means always a drop in CPU performance.
When you compensate this drop in your case by always having all four cores active you produce more heat with the active cores.
(and I estimate it will produce more heat/battery depletion than the original phone settings. (max 2,26Ghz and variable core usage)
When you argue that in general a normal user is not realizing a drop in performance due to underclocking...fine.
But it will always be a drop in performance.
Undervolting in opposite to underclocking produces no drop in performance but actually a rise in efficiency. (and thats what CPU/GPU development is all about).
Less heat, less battery depletion, same performance.
Why not taking advantage of that by undervolting?
Its free lunch.
simms22 said:
i underclock, sometimes to 1036mhz max, with all 4 cores always on by default(no hotplugging). sure, in a benchmark itll score less, just like i expect to score more when im overclocked. but to the normal user, they would never be able to tell that my phone is only clocked to 1036mhz. meaning the user experience isnt lowered in any way. even intense gpu oriented games dont show that im running underclocked. so when you say it drops the performance, it isnt entirely accurate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you here. 1036 mhz is a great CPU speed for running the device and most apps. Most games UC the CPU for better battery temp like in PPSSPP. Less temperature throttle and more stable frames per second.
Benchmarks are a difference story though but who cares about those. UC is lag free, and buttery smooth so why not?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
zz_marcello said:
Sorry, but CPU underclocking means always a drop in CPU performance.
When you compensate this drop in your case by always having all four cores active you produce more heat with the active cores.
(and I estimate it will produce more heat/battery depletion than the original phone settings. (max 2,26Ghz and variable core usage)
When you argue that in general a normal user is not realizing a drop in performance due to underclocking...fine.
But it will always be a drop in performance.
Undervolting in opposite to underclocking produces no drop in performance but actually a rise in efficiency. (and thats what CPU/GPU development is all about).
Less heat, less battery depletion, same performance.
Why not taking advantage of that by undervolting?
Its free lunch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
again, sure, if youre benchmarking the performance will drop, yes. but if its something that the user doesnt see or feel, then its irrelevant.
no extra heat is produced. also, i get 5.5-7h screen on time with very heavy use. granted, i use the browser much more than i game, but thats what i use my device for mostly.
when needing the extra performance, or wanting to, i overclock. everybody uses their device differently, has differing needs. i would never say one way is better or worse than the other way.
simms22 said:
again, sure, if youre benchmarking the performance will drop, yes. but if its something that the user doesnt see or feel, then its irrelevant.
no extra heat is produced. also, i get 5.5-7h screen on time with very heavy use. granted, i use the browser much more than i game, but thats what i use my device for mostly.
when needing the extra performance, or wanting to, i overclock. everybody uses their device differently, has differing needs. i would never say one way is better or worse than the other way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can do everything you are already doing, but also undervolt, and your battery life will increase, without affecting your performance. Your performance will be different than my performance (because I don't underclock), however imperceptible as it may be. So undervolting is still better than not undervolting, even for you.
Using EX kernel 3.27, underclocked to 1.5Ghz, undervolted to "700 min" and using "stock" thermal throttling setting. Rock solid and it barely even gets warm now. Responsiveness and performance is only a touch worse than stock; the only places I really notice any performance reduction is in intensive games and app install times. Battery life is massively improved.