Related
Hey people,
following on from artisticcheese's thread about battery consumption Ive performed a few tests on some different radio versions to see what the actual difference in battery consumption is.
Right now (as of 16-01-2008) I recommend the following radios:
1.47.30.10 with an overall score of 1.22 (the highest in the test)
or
1.54.30.10 with an overall score of 1.21 (2nd place).
Remember people, if you are planning on changing your radio version, flash hardspl, and make sure nothing is running which will interrupt the flash process. The radio flash is still the most risky of all flash processes and it is possible to kill the device so be sure before you flash. In doing these tests I performed over 10 radio flashes in a day and i made usre nothing CPU intensive was running on the PC and that i wasnt going to unplug the USB by accident etc...
-------------------------------------
Test Run 16-10-08:
Before running these tests the phone was soft reset, ALL today plugins shut off (apart from x button), internet explorer for downloding and acbPowerMeter for power monitoring.
All tests again running on WM6 "V3 cabb'd III".
This set of tests is the following:
Test 1: GSM mode, backlight off, downloading for 5 minutes.
Test 2: UMTS mode, backlight off, downloading for 5 minutes.
The results vary and a pattern ive noticed is radio versions 1.47.30.10 and 1.54.30.10 seem to have the same behaviour in GSM modes, perhaps the extra ".30" in the version number denotes a particular tweak or feature??
Radio_Power_Tests_16012008.zip
Enjoy.
-------------------------------------
Inital test run:
Using a freshly flashed version of my "V3 cabb'd" ROM which is a tweaked version of pandora naked 6 3.60 ROM with nothing installed so a lean install and using acbPowerMeter I ran the following tests on each radio rom:
Test 1: Backlight off, automatic standby disabled, all processes stopped using start>settings>system>memory. GSM only and phone left on idle.
10 minutes and average current consumption recorded.
Test 2: Same as test 2 , UMTS only.
Ive taken a screenshot of the data with magicss and normalised the results so the earliest radio version tested is the baseline score.
The results of the first test are in the attached spreadsheet and screenshots.
Conclusions:
The results show that overall the differences are neglegable for these tests, however I still believe there is a major difference in practice. So the next load of tests I propose will test the power consumption with data connection attached. Somehow I want to test during a call or download since the HSDPA power consumption is likely to be a BIG number.
how comes you didnt test the latest radio versions? *waits for more results*
nice idea though
each test involves flashing a new radio (20 mins-ish) and two ten minute test runs...I need to use my Tytn today so can probably try the other radios later on, it takes a fair ammount of time for each one so i only went from the ground (1.43.00.00) to the one currently on my device (1.47.30.10) last night. I abandoned doing the later ones until ive figured out a worthwhile test to run for ALL versions. Ive presented my findings so far to show that essentially the 4 versions i tried are identical under idle conditions...not really a true to life test.
..big thanks to u bro! ..awesome work as usual..
mrvanx said:
each test involves flashing a new radio (20 mins-ish) and two ten minute test runs...I need to use my Tytn today so can probably try the other radios later on, it takes a fair ammount of time for each one so i only went from the ground (1.43.00.00) to the one currently on my device (1.47.30.10) last night. I abandoned doing the later ones until ive figured out a worthwhile test to run for ALL versions. Ive presented my findings so far to show that essentially the 4 versions i tried are identical under idle conditions...not really a true to life test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I think it will be the 3G call and HSDPA tests where the benefit of testing will be found.
My own tests show little difference in the idle power consumption.
I made very good experience with 1.41.00.10.
Good signal and low power consumption!
I've changed from 1.54 to 1.48 and I can honestly say my phone goes another day or two without charging!!!!!!!
Im gonna do some more tests tonight on the new format probably with some sort of download running (web n walk is usefull hehe).
So i'll post some more results later on if i can.
The best radio rom I've ever used
I tried many different radio roms for my Jasjam, believe me the best radio rom I've used regarding to power usage and signal is 1.46.00.11.
Even when using UMTS and 3G, in other radio roms; when connecting to internet with my laptop, I mean using Jasjam as access point to internet , the battery drains fast even if the Jasjam is connected to charger. but in this radio rom, when the charger is on, the battery stays stable and the Imate can also get charged. I know that this radio rom is designed for Trinity which is GPS enabled, but I am telling my experience. THANKS
For your testing goodness, here are pretty much all the radio roms I have ever come across.
http://www.crc.id.au/files/xda/Radio_Roms/
They are in .nb format - so you'll need to use Duttys tool to get them into .nbh files.
The power consumption is definately related to voice call usage.
My normal usage in a day means I use about 50 - 80% of my battery.
Whilst away in Tenerife I used my phone exactly the same but without making voice calls and I only used 50% after 3 -4 days.
This is certainly true. I was away in a place with no mobile coverage (no GSM or UTMS) and using the device for GPS navigation only I was able to get 2-3 full days out of the standard battery.
What is necessary to detect the correct battery consumption?
Something like this: http://www.vandenmuyzenberg.nl/PowerGuard/ ???
Should I use this tool?
matar said:
What is necessary to detect the correct battery consumption?
Something like this: http://www.vandenmuyzenberg.nl/PowerGuard/ ???
Should I use this tool?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both threads you have posted in have shown you the program that is to be used. Why do you keep asking?
Starfury said:
The power consumption is definately related to voice call usage.
My normal usage in a day means I use about 50 - 80% of my battery.
Whilst away in Tenerife I used my phone exactly the same but without making voice calls and I only used 50% after 3 -4 days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Experienced exactly the same thing when I was in Majorca. Even though I did use the phone a lot for sending as MMS (as that was free for me) I still got more usage out of the phone in Majorca if I had done pretty much the same usage pattern over here (UK) and that is because I suspect there transmitters put out a stronger signal, which means the phone has to 'work' less to get a stronger signal.
Starfury said:
Both threads you have posted in have shown you the program that is to be used. Why do you keep asking?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for double posting, but I read that those tools doesn't show the correct consumption because they needs power themselves and therefore distort the result... Maybe somebody can confirm this? Thank You.
A very good point. I've known the radio kicks up the power when you have a low signal, and if it's lost - I turn off the radio until I get back to a good area or it really kills the battery fast.
Just thinking here, but to add another level of complexity to the testing - while statically measuring power drain without moving the device will give repeatable results, could a radio power draw "react" differently to signal strength variations, and not be as "efficient" compared to others while on the move (typical usage)?
For example, if the signal goes above 50db (no idea if I'm even using the correct scale here ) it incrementally increases power by 20% for 10 seconds each until an "acceptable" signal level is reached. Once this is achieved, will it reduce back down - say you came around a building an now have a better signal? How long will that take? Will some radios respond more rapidly than others - optimizing power usage vs signal strength?
Dammit Matt! Now you've really got me thinking
In a bit of the background on this, the GSM/UTMS protocol allows the base station to tell the mobile to increase or decrease the transmit power of the phone. This allows it to tune the performance of the phones radio to get the optimum signal level at the cell site. It also helps a heap in deciding what cell towers to jump between and all the critical handoff levels and names.
Much more info can be found:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5357513-description.html
There's a lovely paper about it all here - but I don't want to pay for it
http://www.actapress.com/PaperInfo.aspx?PaperID=18185&reason=500
power useage is down to lots of different factors, one of the main culprits is use of HSDPA/3G and it bounsing up and down between it and GSM when the local Cell doesnt support it or has a weak signal.
I can't believe the statement made above about the battery being used quicker when you talk, of course its going to drain quicker, its permanently transmitting for gods sake
It also depends on how strong the signal to the nearest cell/Base Station is, if its a week signal then the radio/phone will bounce around to find a stronger one, I believe typically a phone will register with up to 3 base stations to enable you to auto switch between cells when you move.
if you're really bored and want to dig into how GSM works heres a starter for 10
http://www.fci-cu.edu.eg/INFOS2005/presentation/GSM_Concepts.pdf
If you want to test weak signals stick your phone in a tin box, assuming this doesnt kill the signal totally then the phone should start ramping up its power output and sucking the battery dry quicker.
My point was made in reference to the testing of the phone to see what uses the most battery and indicating that we should direct our testing at the phone application over any others.
OK, searched first, heres the gist of a thread from the N1 section:
Originally Posted by SBS_
I remember reading something about undervolting a while back in this forum and I found it quite interesting. Some are saying that undervolting the cpu doesn't actually save battery on the device, as the cpu will just up the ampere to get the amount of power it needs.
Don't take my word for it though.
Well that's what my first impression was. I mean, a CPU needs more energy to run faster. So if you lower the voltage I would assume it would lower the power which would either lower the speed or make it increase energy usage to run faster. Anyone else have definite info?
--------------------------------------------------
Which made me think, duh.... um ok, so if a CPU requires X wattage, then wouldn't their theory be correct? Or do CPUs have logic built in to compensate and allow for out of spec voltages??? OR is it like undervolting a PC fan, where it just works... but I guess running off a power supply I never would have noticed if the fans drew more amperage... Mr. Tesla???
Also, my more to the point question, does undervolting affect the radios, as has been postulated?? I can understand on a PC if you undervolt the CPU, you are probably isolating that mod to the CPU itself, but in our cases, if the radio theory is correct, the undervolting would be systemwide... or is it??? I think a Dev should probably know this.. just asking, I need all the 3g I can get at home, Sprint is the best coverage in this area EXCEPT at my house... and Id rather not get forced onto VZ, not until Sprint jacks their prices so much its not worth it anymore... and the Premier ripoff is a start... anyways, undervolting!.... FIGHT!
Just bought a rooted dInc that was running evervolv ICS / incredikernel, and the sound quality was ranging from not great (cell calls) to terrible (grooveIP, skype, etc.) Voices sounded muffled with cell/skype and tinny/compressed with grooveIP. Note that this is on my end - receivers have told me that quality on their end was also bad, but I've never heard it & so can't describe.
After running through various combinations of settings, different wifi networks, etc. I eventually flashed back to a near-stock config (Stock+ GB), which seems to have improved the cell quality to the point where it's usable, though VOIP still sounds lousy. However, I really did like some of the features of the custom ROM (back key kills apps, battery use per-app, etc.) and ICS in general. Plus, I bought this phone primarily to use with VOIP. Which is all a long lead-up to my actual question...
Q: Is there a particular ROM/kernel that's known for high call quality - particularly with VOIP apps?
I've searched through the forums and the lists of ROMs, but not found a thread specifically focusing on this issue. As this is my first android phone, I'm not entirely sure whether call quality is a ROM thing, kernel thing, or maybe just a problem with this particular phone. So I'm hoping some knowledgeable dInc owner can enlighten me.
meeotch1 said:
Just bought a rooted dInc that was running evervolv ICS / incredikernel, and the sound quality was ranging from not great (cell calls) to terrible (grooveIP, skype, etc.) Voices sounded muffled with cell/skype and tinny/compressed with grooveIP. Note that this is on my end - receivers have told me that quality on their end was also bad, but I've never heard it & so can't describe.
After running through various combinations of settings, different wifi networks, etc. I eventually flashed back to a near-stock config (Stock+ GB), which seems to have improved the cell quality to the point where it's usable, though VOIP still sounds lousy. However, I really did like some of the features of the custom ROM (back key kills apps, battery use per-app, etc.) and ICS in general. Plus, I bought this phone primarily to use with VOIP. Which is all a long lead-up to my actual question...
Q: Is there a particular ROM/kernel that's known for high call quality - particularly with VOIP apps?
I've searched through the forums and the lists of ROMs, but not found a thread specifically focusing on this issue. As this is my first android phone, I'm not entirely sure whether call quality is a ROM thing, kernel thing, or maybe just a problem with this particular phone. So I'm hoping some knowledgeable dInc owner can enlighten me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try cm7+incredikernel.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
After many different ROMs/kernels/radios, including CM7, I'm stumped. Cell call quality improved a bit after moving off my original evervolv ICS ROM and back to GB, but my 3G strength is still notably worse than my dumb phone, at about -85dBm in my apt. Anyway, it's usable for cell calls.
VOIP over wifi, on the other hand, still sounds pretty awful, with none of the combos I've tried having a significant difference. (Though I did find that direct grooveIP->grooveIP calls sound better than ones to non-VOIP phones.)
So it feels like a case of bad wifi performance, except I've tried several different nets, including my home, which shows 40-50 ping and 5-10Mbps consistently (from the phone).
I guess there's either something wrong with this particular phone, or maybe the dInc generally doesn't have the wifi or cpu oomph to run VOIP apps well. I wish there was some way of testing, short of buying another couple of phones to test against.
meeotch1 said:
After many different ROMs/kernels/radios, including CM7, I'm stumped. Cell call quality improved a bit after moving off my original evervolv ICS ROM and back to GB, but my 3G strength is still notably worse than my dumb phone, at about -85dBm in my apt. Anyway, it's usable for cell calls.
VOIP over wifi, on the other hand, still sounds pretty awful, with none of the combos I've tried having a significant difference. (Though I did find that direct grooveIP->grooveIP calls sound better than ones to non-VOIP phones.)
So it feels like a case of bad wifi performance, except I've tried several different nets, including my home, which shows 40-50 ping and 5-10Mbps consistently (from the phone).
I guess there's either something wrong with this particular phone, or maybe the dInc generally doesn't have the wifi or cpu oomph to run VOIP apps well. I wish there was some way of testing, short of buying another couple of phones to test against.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It might be the voip app not putting out high quality audio?
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
Unfortunately, it seems to be most/all VOIP apps, at least when using them over wifi... grooveIP, talkatone, and skype all sound lousy. (And oddly, skype and google voice sound fine on the same wifi networks via my laptop.)
meeotch1 said:
Unfortunately, it seems to be most/all VOIP apps, at least when using them over wifi... grooveIP, talkatone, and skype all sound lousy. (And oddly, skype and google voice sound fine on the same wifi networks via my laptop.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a problem with the apps then, not the phone
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
I'm sort of drawing the opposite conclusion... The "bad sound" constants being: 1) the phone and 2) wifi on that phone, with sound quality being reasonable in all other cases.
The only test I've got left at this point is to find someone with an android-based phone, and have them make calls with the same apps, same location as me. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone who's got a dInc, so can't compare apples to apples.
meeotch1 said:
I'm sort of drawing the opposite conclusion... The "bad sound" constants being: 1) the phone and 2) wifi on that phone, with sound quality being reasonable in all other cases.
The only test I've got left at this point is to find someone with an android-based phone, and have them make calls with the same apps, same location as me. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone who's got a dInc, so can't compare apples to apples.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See I think this phone sounds great having used a droidx and various T-Mobile phones. And the wifi seems slightly weaker then the dx, but only slightly
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
meeotch1 said:
After many different ROMs/kernels/radios, including CM7, I'm stumped. Cell call quality improved a bit after moving off my original evervolv ICS ROM and back to GB, but my 3G strength is still notably worse than my dumb phone, at about -85dBm in my apt. Anyway, it's usable for cell calls.
VOIP over wifi, on the other hand, still sounds pretty awful, with none of the combos I've tried having a significant difference. (Though I did find that direct grooveIP->grooveIP calls sound better than ones to non-VOIP phones.)
So it feels like a case of bad wifi performance, except I've tried several different nets, including my home, which shows 40-50 ping and 5-10Mbps consistently (from the phone).
I guess there's either something wrong with this particular phone, or maybe the dInc generally doesn't have the wifi or cpu oomph to run VOIP apps well. I wish there was some way of testing, short of buying another couple of phones to test against.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just started playing around with GrooveIP recently as my parents live on a mountain and cell phone service is non-existent no matter the carrier. One of the things that I found was I had to go deep into the android wifi settings and check the "best wifi performance" option in the advanced menu. If I didn't do that, when the screen was off, voice quality became unusable. With that option checked I can talk with the screen off with no problems over wifi. Not sure about 3g/4g calls as I only use on wifi. I also used the adaptive echo canceler with post processing, and lowered the mic gain a bit. Good luck!
Try the gingerbread sense test kernel I built that should have better vopi over wifi. I also made one for aosp rooms on the smaller incredikernel thread (tiny+Chad).
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Is there any reason/benefit to updating my radio from 2.15.00.07.28?
I haven't noticed anything out of the ordinary with it wrt 3G or WiFi. I do get some "echo effect" in voice calls sometimes to my wife's phone, but I think I've always had that.
I'm on a CM9 nightly build and all seems to be going well, but I noticed my radio is pretty out of date. I figured if there was a compelling reason to do it, now would be a good time to update the radio.
Thanks.
You could update the radio to see if you notice greater signal reception, call quality, and data speeds. This is dependent on your relative environment as one radio may be good for you but the next may not be.
Im still on the radio that came with gingerbread. I've held off on changing it because people say it depends on location which one works better, and the current one works for me. I feel like if I update it, any change would be a placebo. Now, if anyone knows of a stats app that could measure reception, 3g, wifi etc then I might experiment
Hey guys and gals--
So most of us know that the radio in the GNex is not the greatest (for me at least with the gsm variant)
Anyways, I am wondering of there is some sort of software mod I could do to improve this, even at the expense of it taxing the battery a little. If so, maybe even some sort of toggle for it.
Thanks for any pointers.
The best you can do is try different radio versions and see which works best for you in the area where you have service. There are no software apps/mods to increase cell reception, since it's solely based on the radio hardware/firmware.
I don't know much on how the kernel controls the radio, but my idea was since the kernel controls battery use, maybe some extra juice could be put to the radio. Or something like that.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
dschreiber69 said:
I don't know much on how the kernel controls the radio, but my idea was since the kernel controls battery use, maybe some extra juice could be put to the radio. Or something like that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't work like that. The radio firmware controls the radio hardware. The kernel does not. The only instance where the radio hardware gets a bump in juice (aside from the standard increases when the phone is struggling to maintain a connection) is when making an emergency call. This, too, is hard-coded.
Cilraaz said:
It doesn't work like that. The radio firmware controls the radio hardware. The kernel does not. The only instance where the radio hardware gets a bump in juice (aside from the standard increases when the phone is struggling to maintain a connection) is when making an emergency call. This, too, is hard-coded.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh... OK.
Thanks for the info.
Would be pretty cool though right?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium