Active Topics
-
U-Boot for Nokia RX-51 with BootMenu (updated version 2012.10-rc3-1) (841)
to Alternatives by omniteal@pm.me - 7 hrs, 43 mins ago -
List of well performing apps on Leste (34)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by biketool - 18 hrs, 40 mins ago -
Maemo repository (5)
to Community by dredlok706 - 2 days, 13 hrs ago -
Re-commissioning N9 in 2018 (127)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 2 days, 16 hrs ago -
Porting apps to Leste (41)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 3 days, 9 hrs ago -
N900 is not recognizable on any of my devices (windows 10,7, xp) What can I do? (1)
to Nokia N900 by nieldk - 4 days, 22 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to artpra For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2012-04-05
, 08:25
|
|
Posts: 650 |
Thanked: 497 times |
Joined on Oct 2008
@ Ghent, Belgium
|
#212
|
I also had (have) a massive power drain shortly after installing. But I also installed latest CSSU testing around that time, so no idea which one... Unless the hildon-desktop you mention is included in CSSU-testing (2.1) - which I don't think so - it may be a problem elsewhere....
__________________
Affordable mobile internet in Belgium: Try Mobile Vikings
2 GB, 1000 SMS and 15 euro of talk time for.... 15 euro
Affordable mobile internet in Belgium: Try Mobile Vikings
2 GB, 1000 SMS and 15 euro of talk time for.... 15 euro
|
|
2012-04-05
, 08:26
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#213
|
Originally Posted by artpra
...third day at one charge. Yes, THIRD DAY. About 20% juice left...
__________________
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.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-04-05
, 08:38
|
|
Posts: 1,808 |
Thanked: 4,272 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
@ Germany
|
#214
|
Well, I also feel like I need to report something (not so impressive but..)
For a long time I've been using KP46, then KP47 w/o VDD enabled. My average long-term power consumption was around 16mA, which gave me about 3 days per full charge.
Exactly a week ago I've installed KP50, enabled the default dsp profile (but avoided some frequencies) and, although the change is not so impressive, my average is now around 14mA, which is like half-a-day more (~ 10-15% longer time-between-charging).
Other than that. everything works fine (+ obviously no reboots to report).
For a long time I've been using KP46, then KP47 w/o VDD enabled. My average long-term power consumption was around 16mA, which gave me about 3 days per full charge.
Exactly a week ago I've installed KP50, enabled the default dsp profile (but avoided some frequencies) and, although the change is not so impressive, my average is now around 14mA, which is like half-a-day more (~ 10-15% longer time-between-charging).
Other than that. everything works fine (+ obviously no reboots to report).
|
|
2012-04-05
, 08:47
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#215
|
Originally Posted by reinob
Really? I am connected to 2G, n900 locked and I am at 6mA with 250-600MHz.
Well, I also feel like I need to report something (not so impressive but..)
For a long time I've been using KP46, then KP47 w/o VDD enabled. My average long-term power consumption was around 16mA, which gave me about 3 days per full charge.
Exactly a week ago I've installed KP50, enabled the default dsp profile (but avoided some frequencies) and, although the change is not so impressive, my average is now around 14mA, which is like half-a-day more (~ 10-15% longer time-between-charging).
Other than that. everything works fine (+ obviously no reboots to report).
Code:
sleep 15; bq2700
__________________
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.
|
|
2012-04-05
, 09:04
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#217
|
Here is a plot of my SR values against frequency.
The X axis is frequency.
The Y axis is calculated power. Power is calculated from P=C*F*V^2. Where P is power in Watts, C is capacitance in Farads, V^2 is volts squared measured in Volts.
The voltage is calculated by the base voltage plus the number of voltage steps(0.0125V per step). So step 20 is (0.0125V*20) +0.6V=0.85V
Unfortunately I have no idea what the gate capacitance of the chip is. I have set it as 0.1F which is INSANELY high, however it is just a multiplication factor so it simply scales the output of the equation. So the power values are total nonsense however the shape of the graph is what is important.
As you can see the voltage steps increase linearly, the power required increases exponentially. From this I would conclude that the 'most bang for buck' is in fact at 600MHz.
//EDIT: Real Conclusions
You can see from the graph that the difference in power use between 125-250MHz is negligible. When you consider the performance hit you take by activating 125MHz it makes sense to avoid it. Here doubling the frequency takes a tiny amount of power.
after 250MHz the increase in power use is almost linear up to 600MHz. Above 600 the power use line changes to a much higher gradient. This means increases in speed come at a much higher power cost.
meh, TBC.
Last edited by vi_; 2012-04-05 at 09:21.
The X axis is frequency.
The Y axis is calculated power. Power is calculated from P=C*F*V^2. Where P is power in Watts, C is capacitance in Farads, V^2 is volts squared measured in Volts.
The voltage is calculated by the base voltage plus the number of voltage steps(0.0125V per step). So step 20 is (0.0125V*20) +0.6V=0.85V
Unfortunately I have no idea what the gate capacitance of the chip is. I have set it as 0.1F which is INSANELY high, however it is just a multiplication factor so it simply scales the output of the equation. So the power values are total nonsense however the shape of the graph is what is important.
Code:
Frequency Step Voltage Power 0 0 0.6125 0.0375 125 20 0.85 9.03125 250 23 0.8875 19.69140625 500 36 1.05 55.125 550 38 1.075 63.559375 600 40 1.1 72.6 720 46 1.175 99.405 805 50 1.225 120.8003125 850 52 1.25 132.8125 900 54 1.275 146.30625
As you can see the voltage steps increase linearly, the power required increases exponentially. From this I would conclude that the 'most bang for buck' is in fact at 600MHz.
//EDIT: Real Conclusions
You can see from the graph that the difference in power use between 125-250MHz is negligible. When you consider the performance hit you take by activating 125MHz it makes sense to avoid it. Here doubling the frequency takes a tiny amount of power.
after 250MHz the increase in power use is almost linear up to 600MHz. Above 600 the power use line changes to a much higher gradient. This means increases in speed come at a much higher power cost.
meh, TBC.
__________________
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_; 2012-04-05 at 09:21.
| The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-04-05
, 09:05
|
|
Posts: 1,808 |
Thanked: 4,272 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
@ Germany
|
#218
|
Originally Posted by vi_
I'm talking *average*. Idle is obviously much less, but I actually use my N900
Really? I am connected to 2G, n900 locked and I am at 6mA with 250-600MHz.
Code:sleep 15; bq2700
Clearly I'm not a "heavy" user (I rarely use 3G, 2G is plenty for me) and do mostly modest, xterm and a bit of browsing.
|
|
2012-04-05
, 09:08
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#219
|
Originally Posted by freemangordon
@all - guys, please, some of you to update the kernel-power wiki with the modificatons/achievments since KP46.
__________________
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.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
| Tags |
| battery test, i <3 fmg, i <3 pali, igottaboner, kernel, kernel-power, viva fmg, viva pali |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:56.
- after initial install, at not so fresh but well maintained N900 i had a massive battery drain. Or better if I wrote MASSIVE - six hours from 100% load to powered off phone without any activity and in offline mode (overnight). Uninstalled kp50.
- I`ve wanted to give it another try so flashed my device and installed it again on pure&clean CSSU testing (updated from PR1.3.1). From there I`ve started to install my applications one by one, watching how system performs battery wise. Right now I installed all of them (the same like when that huge battery drain appeared) except one - hildon desktop lockable in portrait (http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...sktop+supports).
- SUCCESS! Running with "dsp" (VDD1&2=1) profile as default, with whole bunch of my apps installed, third day at one charge. Yes, THIRD DAY. About 20% juice left.
I`m guessing that there are some compatibility issues between kp50 and that specific h-d version. So if any of You were struck by battery drain after kp50 install AND are using that h-d, try to remove it and return to CSSU h-d version. It will prove my guess right or wrong.
I`m completely, totally and absolutely blown away with this battery efficiency: it`s almost three times more than before (1 day to charge vs 2,5~3 days to charge). Massive improvements are especially shown when device is on standby (idle) - battery graph is close to flat. Writing "thank You pali" is not enough for this, but nevertheless: thank You pali!
PS - closing thought: please include proper version of h-d with portrait lock in next CSSU.