Ahem. To all intents and purposes, yes. I did what I was going to do as far as overclocking was concerned and have left it alone since, well, 2010. Guilty of upgrading to KP49 and not reading the fine manual until I wondered why it had lost a few speeds. The shipped configs with SR enabled defaulted to a max of 805, so this was what I presumed remained the safe limit. I'll play with SR and 900MHz. :-)

Still, my reason for doing this was not to reopen the debate about battery life, for which SR wins. Mostly I just want more responsiveness and I am starting feel less conservative about overclocking to attain it (never even actually tested 1100, I just might). There's also the point that if I'm going to buy a microSDXC and load it up with media, I'd like all the speed I can get when it comes to dealing with larger volumes of files/artists/whatever. I haven't undergone a scientific testing process of testing, but I did recently manage to get it to crash at 900MHz with SR enabled on VDD1, I think, and only tried 1000MHz without SR on a whim. If I can use 900MHz with SR that *may* provide a solution, but, I'm becoming tempted to say if I can have 1000, 1100, 1150... what by now is the compelling reason not to?

Battery life remains a concern, but I now carry a USB power brick and most people have microUSB chargers, so it's less of a worry than it was. Doesn't mean that I don't benefit from SR most of the time, but, I'd ditch it for 30 seconds for a 200-250MHz boost if I could sensibly identify circumstances in which to do so. Device life is less of a concern; I won't do anything that causes more than a couple of crashes. If I really do fry it, which I doubt, I have good backups and spare hardware. Warranty is no longer relevant. The only real concerns (to me) are stability, performance, and not wasting battery for the sake of it.

Thank you though for your input, I was not aware of this and will RTFM and do some further testing with SR at 900MHz.