Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 1 day, 18 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 1 day, 20 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 2 days, 11 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 3 days, 9 hrs ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 4 days, 15 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-07-04
, 10:13
|
|
Posts: 105 |
Thanked: 56 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Florida
|
#2
|
Originally Posted by RobbieThe1st
Good questions, I to would like to know the answers to these... I've had mine OC'd for like 3-4 months now with no issues so far, but I know nothing of these things... Anyone?
I've read the official wiki page on OCing, and a number of posts on N900 overclocking, and I'm wondering a couple of things:
One, has anyone actually killed their device by OCing for an extended period of time? (Though, it may be too soon to tell, seeing as its only been released for 9 months or so.
Also, has anyone done any speed/lifetime calculations as to what the lifetime should be?
Two, Why is the A8 in our Nokia N900s clocked to 600mhz by default, when ARM's site says they can run from 600mhz-1ghz, and other A8-based devices on the market use ~1ghz clocks? Are these other devices using a different chip, or was the Nokia simply factory underclocked to reduce power usage(or reduce heatsink requirements)?
If the latter is the case, it would seem to be perfectly safe to OC to 900mhz-1ghz(provided voltages are appropriately adjusted,), as the chip is designed to have a good lifetime at those speeds.
Am I correct in any of this, or do I not know what I'm talking about?
Thanks,
-Rob
__________________
Jayboy5
Jayboy5
 |
|
2010-07-04
, 10:25
|
|
Posts: 2,473 |
Thanked: 12,265 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Jerusalem, PS/IL
|
#3
|
Based on what I know.
The chip in the N900 should run @ 550, with 600 being a default "overclock".
Running 550 gives the device a lifetime of 10 years.
600 5 years, that's half the lifetime for a 50MHz increase (rough estimate).
afaik these values are from TI (texas instruments) themselves.
My rough estimes:
650MHz, 2.5 years, 700MHz 1.25... you can guess the rest I suppose.
Also, according to joerg_rw, an engineer (not at Nokia mind you), damage to the CPU occurs due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration, not thermal factors.
What annoys me though, is that apps like CPUFreqUI to report "raw" speeds, using a sensor that according to SpeedEvil, TI themselves suggest not using, and it's not on the CPU, it's next to the battery.
Anyways, this is the info i've collected so far, what I said above is not from my personal findings (except my rough estimates).
The chip in the N900 should run @ 550, with 600 being a default "overclock".
Running 550 gives the device a lifetime of 10 years.
600 5 years, that's half the lifetime for a 50MHz increase (rough estimate).
afaik these values are from TI (texas instruments) themselves.
My rough estimes:
650MHz, 2.5 years, 700MHz 1.25... you can guess the rest I suppose.
Also, according to joerg_rw, an engineer (not at Nokia mind you), damage to the CPU occurs due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration, not thermal factors.
What annoys me though, is that apps like CPUFreqUI to report "raw" speeds, using a sensor that according to SpeedEvil, TI themselves suggest not using, and it's not on the CPU, it's next to the battery.
Anyways, this is the info i've collected so far, what I said above is not from my personal findings (except my rough estimates).
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:32
|
|
Posts: 726 |
Thanked: 345 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Sweden
|
#4
|
Originally Posted by MohammadAG
Isn't this the temperature sensor? That's something else than measuring the frequency, even though higher frequency will give a higher temperature.
What annoys me though, is that apps like CPUFreqUI to report "raw" speeds, using a sensor that according to SpeedEvil, TI themselves suggest not using, and it's not on the CPU, it's next to the battery.
Frequency is set as a variable in code, it's not something you measure with a hardware sensor unless you're analysing the CPU protocol.
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:34
|
|
Posts: 1,224 |
Thanked: 1,763 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
|
#5
|
Originally Posted by MohammadAG
Those numbers are completely meaningless, with absolutely no basis in fact. Why do you keep repeating them over and over again is a real mystery to me.
Based on what I know.
The chip in the N900 should run @ 550, with 600 being a default "overclock".
Running 550 gives the device a lifetime of 10 years.
600 5 years, that's half the lifetime for a 50MHz increase (rough estimate).
afaik these values are from TI (texas instruments) themselves.
My rough estimes:
650MHz, 2.5 years, 700MHz 1.25... you can guess the rest I suppose.
Also, according to joerg_rw, an engineer (not at Nokia mind you), damage to the CPU occurs due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration, not thermal factors.
__________________
My repository
"N900 community support for the MeeGo-Harmattan" Is the new "Mer is Fremantle for N810".
No more Nokia devices for me.
My repository
"N900 community support for the MeeGo-Harmattan" Is the new "Mer is Fremantle for N810".
No more Nokia devices for me.
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:38
|
|
Posts: 105 |
Thanked: 56 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Florida
|
#6
|
Originally Posted by MohammadAG
Wow...that's some really good info. I WAS using lehtos kernels, I worked my way up from 8-900mhz with a low of 125.... and since pr 1.2, I've gone to Titans enhanced kernel using IDEAL... which is 850-500. Do you have any suggestions for what the best for me to overclock? I can't go back now, the device is just too much improved now and I can't imagine not keeping the speed and power I've become accustomed to
Based on what I know.
The chip in the N900 should run @ 550, with 600 being a default "overclock".
Running 550 gives the device a lifetime of 10 years.
600 5 years, that's half the lifetime for a 50MHz increase (rough estimate).
afaik these values are from TI (texas instruments) themselves.
My rough estimes:
650MHz, 2.5 years, 700MHz 1.25... you can guess the rest I suppose.
Also, according to joerg_rw, an engineer (not at Nokia mind you), damage to the CPU occurs due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration, not thermal factors.
What annoys me though, is that apps like CPUFreqUI to report "raw" speeds, using a sensor that according to SpeedEvil, TI themselves suggest not using, and it's not on the CPU, it's next to the battery.
Anyways, this is the info i've collected so far, what I said above is not from my personal findings (except my rough estimates).
__________________
Jayboy5
Jayboy5
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:44
|
|
Posts: 2,473 |
Thanked: 12,265 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Jerusalem, PS/IL
|
#7
|
Originally Posted by Joorin
The sensor is just close to the CPU, it's not on it, plus it sometimes report a value of -40.
Isn't this the temperature sensor? That's something else than measuring the frequency, even though higher frequency will give a higher temperature.
Frequency is set as a variable in code, it's not something you measure with a hardware sensor unless you're analysing the CPU protocol.
@ Matan, so values from TI are meaningless?
| The Following User Says Thank You to MohammadAG For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-07-04
, 10:54
|
|
Posts: 334 |
Thanked: 171 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#8
|
Originally Posted by MohammadAG
Find me a device that works at 600Mhz everyday
The sensor is just close to the CPU, it's not on it, plus it sometimes report a value of -40.
@ Matan, so values from TI are meaningless?
I use my N900 one or two hours per day. That means the clock gets higher than 250Mhz ONLY those hours. It runs mostly at 250Mhz with bursts (no more than 10-20mins) at 1150Mhz. I suppose my grandchildren will love it when I give it to them as a gift Just for the record, I have my N900 overlocked to 1.1Ghz since Lehto's kernels... Now I'm using Titan's. I've never experienced any problems, except some crashes which might not be related to OCing...
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:56
|
|
Posts: 162 |
Thanked: 24 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Essex, UK
|
#9
|
I get -40 show up sometimes, I tink it's when it's quite hot (sunshine etc.) but i'm not too sure. Erm.. Anyone that knows, what would be the best way to overclock with lower voltages? At the moment i'm using cpufrequi and I don't think it's too good for my n900 =0
__________________
"But when you’re living on the bleeding edge, you should not be surprised when you do, in fact, bleed."
"But when you’re living on the bleeding edge, you should not be surprised when you do, in fact, bleed."
|
|
2010-07-04
, 10:56
|
|
Posts: 2,802 |
Thanked: 4,491 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#10
|
Originally Posted by RobbieThe1st
Because that's what the chip is rated at.
Why is the A8 in our Nokia N900s clocked to 600mhz by default
when ARM's site says they can run from 600mhz-1ghz, and other A8-based devices on the market use ~1ghz clocks?
One, has anyone actually killed their device by OCing for an extended period of time? (Though, it may be too soon to tell, seeing as its only been released for 9 months or so.
Also, has anyone done any speed/lifetime calculations as to what the lifetime should be?
Two, Why is the A8 in our Nokia N900s clocked to 600mhz by default, when ARM's site says they can run from 600mhz-1ghz, and other A8-based devices on the market use ~1ghz clocks? Are these other devices using a different chip, or was the Nokia simply factory underclocked to reduce power usage(or reduce heatsink requirements)?
If the latter is the case, it would seem to be perfectly safe to OC to 900mhz-1ghz(provided voltages are appropriately adjusted,), as the chip is designed to have a good lifetime at those speeds.
Am I correct in any of this, or do I not know what I'm talking about?
Thanks,
-Rob