![]() |
2010-03-20
, 15:06
|
|
Posts: 2,355 |
Thanked: 5,249 times |
Joined on Jan 2009
@ Barcelona
|
#141
|
![]() |
2010-03-20
, 21:57
|
Posts: 202 |
Thanked: 30 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ CZE
|
#142
|
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 00:06
|
Posts: 1,427 |
Thanked: 2,077 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
@ Sydney
|
#143
|
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 00:45
|
Posts: 207 |
Thanked: 154 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#144
|
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 01:00
|
Posts: 486 |
Thanked: 154 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ New York City
|
#145
|
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 01:50
|
Posts: 1,427 |
Thanked: 2,077 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
@ Sydney
|
#146
|
I'm not sure why would one want to overclock it?
The overclocking margin is anyway so small it hardly makes a noticeable difference in everyday use. You could get a little more throughput, but that would have meaning mostly if you use it as a rendering server or something..
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 10:09
|
Posts: 202 |
Thanked: 30 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ CZE
|
#147
|
Big margin. 600Mhz > 800Mhz = 33% increase.
What would run hotter at such utilization?
66% @ 800Mhz or 100% @ 600Mhz
If it can handle 800Mhz, it might even run cooler.
All depends on the sample quality in your N900.
Overclocking does not mean we will constantly use that faster frequency at 100%.
It's the "instant" cpu power that it lacks sometimes.
When it shoots to 100% @ 600Mhz which it does frequently during certain operations, it's hitting a bottleneck.
Instead, if the cpu was capable of 800Mhz for its ceiling.
Then maybe it might only neded 80% at 800Mhz for that "instant".
Why do we have quad cores in our desktop pc's when 90% of the users will never really get it to use 100% on all 4 cores?
The more speed headroom you have, the smoother it can run even for little non-cpu intensive tasks.
Well, I love my N900. So it's natural to want it a bit faster.
- less video playback frame drops
- less pauses during music playback while multi-tasking
- less frame drops in game emulators
- smoother multi-tasking in general
I wish you can increase the RAM it has to 512MB. That would actually make it a lot smoother during multi-tasking. But we know that's really impossible. So we are clutching on straws here to at least bump the cpu a bit faster.
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 11:36
|
Posts: 207 |
Thanked: 154 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#148
|
When it shoots to 100% @ 600Mhz which it does frequently during certain operations, it's hitting a bottleneck.
Instead, if the cpu was capable of 800Mhz for its ceiling.
Then maybe it might only neded 80% at 800Mhz for that "instant".
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 15:26
|
Posts: 20 |
Thanked: 9 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#149
|
My fear is that CPU throttling itself at this "instant" is the problem; when more CPU is suddenly needed, it has already stalled, and it's too late to "send the cavalry". Sure, you may now get through the stall a bit faster, but the illusion of smoothness was already lost.
At least that's what I gather from the desktop PC overclock/cpu throttling experiments I've made. But who knows, N900 is a bit different beast, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see until someone actually tries it.
![]() |
2010-03-21
, 15:29
|
Posts: 207 |
Thanked: 154 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
|
#150
|
![]() |
|