View Single Post
Posts: 1,680 | Thanked: 3,685 times | Joined on Jan 2011
#1131
Originally Posted by corduroysack View Post
thanks for explaining this to me but excuse me i'm on morphine so getting things straight can get a bit wild lol corduroysack has been with me since late teens lol
back to business
So it would be of more benefit to change to ideal and max at 600 rather than 750 and min @ 250 and clear out the freq inbetween?
and change the powersave bias back to 0?
Well that really depends on your use case Cord. I am saying if a person wanted MAXIMUM battery they would use the frequency that used the least voltage (obviously if you take that maxim to its logical conclusion the voltage be zero and the device would be off!). I was merely pointing out that there is quite a significant step between 250->600 and 600->750. The amount of extra power required to run the CPU from 600->750 is that voltage differance squared (times by itself) so big steps = even bigger increase in power requirements. From the graph you can see that the voltage step between 250->600 is not so big therefore it doesn't require that much more power.

The point is it is a trade off between power and frequency here and the most bang for your buck is at 600MHz.

The reason for removing unneeded frequencies is because it takes CPU time to check if a change is needed, then even more time to enact this change. From the graph we can see there is not really too much difference in voltage between 250->600 so why not just spank it all the way strait to 600?

I run my device at 805MHz as I am prepared to take a mild hit in battery life for the sake of performance.

Morphine ay? You either like to get REALLY high or...well you fight it.
__________________
N900: One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.

Last edited by vi_; 2011-07-14 at 15:18.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: