So i have Daemon Controller 3.2 something and I've seen a lot of places mention undervolting. I looked around but couldn't find much information on it.. nothing extensive anyway. So my question is: what are the good things about undervolting (besides battery life) and what are the bad things?
If i undervolt and improve battery life does it decrease performance? Any info here would be awesome. Thanks!
Info here
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1611620
PatimusXPrime said:
So i have Daemon Controller 3.2 something and I've seen a lot of places mention undervolting. I looked around but couldn't find much information on it.. nothing extensive anyway. So my question is: what are the good things about undervolting (besides battery life) and what are the bad things?
If i undervolt and improve battery life does it decrease performance? Any info here would be awesome. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only thing I can think of that you might find as a benefit from U/V is improved battery life.
If you UnderVolt too far you risk freezing and/or damaging your device.
If you successfully undervolt without going too far and causing problems, you should see no negative effect on performance. Just better battery life.
I typically U/V around 50 for all clock ranges. I have never had any negative results doing this. But I haven't been able to prove I get better battery life either. I just take faith in the fact that I theoretically am. I do get wicked good battery life, but that is probably due to many things including kernel, rom, radio, clock speed settings, U/V settings, and other mods. All these together produce noticeable results, where any one by itself would not give any substantial or noticeable improvement.
TheAtheistReverend said:
The only thing I can think of that you might find as a benefit from U/V is improved battery life.
If you UnderVolt too far you risk freezing and/or damaging your device.
If you successfully undervolt without going too far and causing problems, you should see no negative effect on performance. Just better battery life.
I typically U/V around 50 for all clock ranges. I have never had any negative results doing this. But I haven't been able to prove I get better battery life either. I just take faith in the fact that I theoretically am. I do get wicked good battery life, but that is probably due to many things including kernel, rom, radio, clock speed settings, U/V settings, and other mods. All these together produce noticeable results, where any one by itself would not give any substantial or noticeable improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay cool, I get pretty good battery life too so maybe I'll just skip UV.. no awesome reward just a lot of risk
There is a balance for reward vs risk there. Undervolting by 50 isn't going to put your phone in danger. But if it gets me a couple percent/an hour of battery life, why not?
I'm a believer in doing all the little things that add up to something substantial. Undervolt, Battery MOD, wifi policies, screen on time, charging habits, Kernel, ridding of problem apps, using things like Juice Defender, etc. These all add up to give me better battery life than you can find on almost any non-Max phone. But it takes all of them together, and a constant eye oout for something else I could be doing.
Undervolting may help you.
I havent been a big fan...on my og Incredible it caused nothing but problems with signal...so I dont anymore although the Sense kernel by Dres is undervolted a tad.
Give it a shot and start with -25 increments. Will it affect battery life? Maybe, but engineering tends to dictate that lower voltages dont always affect discharge rates. Higher voltages certainly affect consumption though (and can also lead to major problems).
TheAtheistReverend said:
The only thing I can think of that you might find as a benefit from U/V is improved battery life.
If you UnderVolt too far you risk freezing and/or damaging your device.
If you successfully undervolt without going too far and causing problems, you should see no negative effect on performance. Just better battery life.
I typically U/V around 50 for all clock ranges. I have never had any negative results doing this. But I haven't been able to prove I get better battery life either. I just take faith in the fact that I theoretically am. I do get wicked good battery life, but that is probably due to many things including kernel, rom, radio, clock speed settings, U/V settings, and other mods. All these together produce noticeable results, where any one by itself would not give any substantial or noticeable improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use the app SetCPU for CPU profiles. If I use something like Incredicontrol to undervolt, will it mess up my phone?
zaza224 said:
I use the app SetCPU for CPU profiles. If I use something like Incredicontrol to undervolt, will it mess up my phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only way to mess up your phone is to U/V too far and have the "Save for Boot" box checked and no NAND backup.
Make your NAND and run the U/V settings you choose for a day or two before you check the save for boot box. If it freezes up back off your settings a notch and run it for a couple more days.
I run about 50 under without any problems.
Related
[Q] Paradox with underclock & battery savings, does it actually hurt? SetCPU, etc.
In theory, using SetCPU or other underclocking app to reduce CPU clock should reduce the power draw from the CPU, therefore reducing battery consumption.
However, underclocking does not reduce the amount of work that needs to be done. That is to say, whatever app or kernel processing that needs to be done will still be done. When UC'ed, they will be done at a slower pace, therefore taking longer time. In some cases, the UI becomes sluggish, requiring more user interaction time as well.
If, at 1Ghz, a process takes 10 seconds to complete and requires 10mA per second. This task should consume 100mA. By underclocking to 500mHz, perhaps the CPU takes only 6mA, but the task will require 20 seconds to complete. Now the task actually takes 120mA (plus the longer screen on time).
Is my theory sound?
Also, does the constant scaling itself consume power?
As far as I know, Froyo is supposed to scale the CPU anyway. So why underclock? Does it actually work or does it hurt the battery life?
Input please!
Thanks.
Edit: I know the function of CPU speed vs. efficiency vs. battery drain is never linear, and each situation has a different break-even point, but I'm curious the general application of underclocking within the Android environement and its effect on battery life, and more specifically, the Evo.
i'm a regular dude with a phone, but im educated...that being said im sure your aware of the diminishing marginal utitlity law. For example if me and you can mow a lawn in 2 hours, and we got one more guy, we can do it in in less than two...Bu you eventually reach a breakoff point where it is hurting you and those extra guy(s) are not needed and acutally slow down the process or are just a waste. Same thing here, although i am not sure of the numbers, im positive there is a sweet spot for underclock and if you go too low it actually is a waste or hurts battery life. It also could be in the middle meaning, im going to make up numbers. 1ghz uses 100 Mah in 10 seconds. 800 mhz used 50 mah. 900 uses 60 mah. Now, the difference ratio of battery usuage and spees would lean you towards using 900 because if you relate this to sales on products or even anything, for lack of better words this setting is the best abng for your buck...my 2 cents
http://www.google.com/m/url?client=...IQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFlNlZCm-gnvD1PzEsDezCIPeA8jQ
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Interesting stuff... Take a look at this thread:
[ROOT] Using SetCPU + Perflock Disabler to Save Battery, Underclock
The data seem to suggest that underclocking an Evo at idle yields real results. I would think that this can only work if there is not a lot of background/idle tasks going on?
snovvman said:
Interesting stuff... Take a look at this thread:
[ROOT] Using SetCPU + Perflock Disabler to Save Battery, Underclock
The data seem to suggest that underclocking an Evo at idle yields real results. I would think that this can only work if there is not a lot of background/idle tasks going on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
both pics depicts very different device usages. not a fair comparison imo.
quocamole said:
both pics depicts very different device usages. not a fair comparison imo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea I went through and read the whole thread. I'm now even less convinced that SetCPU provides any tangible battery benefits at all.
snovvman said:
Yea I went through and read the whole thread. I'm now even less convinced that SetCPU provides any tangible battery benefits at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think i am right on any part of which i said or am i talking out of my arse lol
A microprocessor does not live by its clock alone. lol
It can cycle through a huge math operation, which is loaded into its registers lickity split with a fast clock. It will have to wait while the memory/code of the programs it runs are loaded either into its cache memory or into execution space. So in calculating theoretical energy use, you got to figure the bus speed, as well as the type of operations the processor is doing.
Golly, ( pronounced like a resident of Mayberry) the bus is key on loading programs to be run. What's the bus clock triggered off? That's the key. You don't want the bus to slow while slowing the cpu. If you can cycle the processor while it prefetches then you've got optimal use, providing it isn't thrashing.
Google cpu wait states for bus synchronization
This is basically the reason HAVS is supposed to be better than static scaling and underclocking. With HAVS, voltage is based on workload as well as clock speed, so you should get the benefits of running fast/idling more often combined with the benefits of using as low of a voltage as possible. As long as you don't have something pegging the CPU at 100% all the time in the background, it should, in theory, work better.
In practice, I haven't seen all that much of a difference.
iitreatedii said:
i'm a regular dude with a phone, but im educated...that being said im sure your aware of the diminishing marginal utitlity law. For example if me and you can mow a lawn in 2 hours, and we got one more guy, we can do it in in less than two...Bu you eventually reach a breakoff point where it is hurting you and those extra guy(s) are not needed and acutally slow down the process or are just a waste. Same thing here, although i am not sure of the numbers, im positive there is a sweet spot for underclock and if you go too low it actually is a waste or hurts battery life. It also could be in the middle meaning, im going to make up numbers. 1ghz uses 100 Mah in 10 seconds. 800 mhz used 50 mah. 900 uses 60 mah. Now, the difference ratio of battery usuage and spees would lean you towards using 900 because if you relate this to sales on products or even anything, for lack of better words this setting is the best abng for your buck...my 2 cents
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iitreatedii said:
Do you think i am right on any part of which i said or am i talking out of my arse lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you wrote makes sense and the concept is sound. I just wish we knew what that sweet spot is, although I think it changes constantly based on load, code, and operational requirements.
With the two posts above, it would seem like phone manufactures would do everything they can to optimize efficiency. Having SetCPU loaded for 24 hours, I too, can say that I have not seen a huge difference...
Noxious Ninja said:
This is basically the reason HAVS is supposed to be better than static scaling and underclocking. With HAVS, voltage is based on workload as well as clock speed, so you should get the benefits of running fast/idling more often combined with the benefits of using as low of a voltage as possible. As long as you don't have something pegging the CPU at 100% all the time in the background, it should, in theory, work better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the stock HTC kernel, 2.6.32 "#11" have/use HAVS?
hey guys, just wondering will using a lower vsel damage my cpu and/or battery?
i have previously beein using milestone overclock on 1ghz and 60 vsel and am adding setvsel into the mix, also any ideas on starter settings? thanks
also could someone just give me a heads up on what vsel actually IS
I don't believe there are any studies that show effects of long term use of lowering the voltage, which is what you are doing with vsel in order to save battery juice...or you could increase the voltage but that defeats the purpose and also heats up the battery which leads to shorter life span. Many use it without reporting any damage to battery or cpu, I believe it's safe (however, if you are overheating you might fry the battery or cpu, so you'll need to moniter and play with settings to get the desired effect without any overheating issues).
With regards to setvsel, there are reported issues from users with different roms...from what I've read (and you can do your own research to see if this is what you are seeing...this is the conclusion that I've come to by reading a lot of threads), it is better to use milestone to overclock and setcpu to lower the vsel.
With that being said, I've used them all and like setvsel so keep going back to it...but I've been having some issues lately so I've removed setvsel to see if that is what is causing some problems (too early to tell).
Oh, and as for settings...pop on the overclocking/undervolting thread in the development section to see a lot of different settings and remember that what works for one user might not work for you...you'll have to experiment a bit to find your ideal setting.
oh okay i think i might go back to my old settings with milestone overclock and setcpu and just lower the vsel! i was under the impression for some reason that lowering the vsel would heat the battery. Thanks!
I'm no expert to be honest, I'm more of a research kinda person. From what I've researched, undervolting can help keep temps down, and may particularly help when you overclock (as overclocking is stressing the cpu to go beyond it's normal operating design hence it may heat up...supplying it with less power, or voltage, is what helps keep the temps down.
Of course, this is given you find the optimal setting for your phone, and as it seems from reading through these forums, many users have experienced completely different results using the same settings (i.e., one user will have a stable setting without any problems while another user on the same rom using the same settings will have crashes and/or issues like overheating). Doesn't seem right, but it is what it is
yeah ive read through most of that stuff too, i went down to 1ghz at 51 vsel, seeming stable, but i decided to go with 54 anyway
1.1 GHz @ Stock vsel for over a month without any issues...I hope it lasts.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Hi,
I've also read a lot regarding the underclocking 'dangers' but couldn't find anything to prove that there is such an issue. I think that it is an urban myth spread everywhere by people asking if there is a danger with low vsel [but that are never getting a positive answer on it].
The only thing I found using setvSel is that I had to first install Milestone Overclock and load its module prior to start setvsel. There is a way around it, but requires you to copy files in the system folders and change their permissions. I find that my way is much easier.
As far as over-heating goes, it's an overclocking thing; not underclocking.
My Defy is set at 900Mhz and really, I don't see the point of going much higher: everything runs smooth and lag free already.
vsel: 21/300; 32/600; 43/900 - 90% up_threshold
Been like that for about a month now and never experienced any problem at all.
The underclocking is great for saving battery; no exact numbers to give here but it feels like my battery now last 2 times longer. I can easily get 4 days between charges with low/moderate usage and would get to 6+ days "IF" I could stay away from games and having the screen ON for long sessions of browsing/video watching.
I tried SetCpu before but I didn't like the interface; the simplicity of SetvSel is really nice.
i use setcpu for scaling and profiles, and run 18/300, 36/600, 50/1000 stable and smooth as
Undervolting is not a bad thing at all. It means less Watts consumed for running (Watts = Voltage x Amperage), less of your battery consumed.
Ussually companies test a large batch of components and how they react on different voltages and freqvencies, and then they decide for a voltage that works with all components and that is safe for all cases. Eg. when they have different CPU speeds and thus different options for CPU's this is one way to decide which one work at 3GHz and which one at 2.7 GHz (the other one is demand for components).
Phisically you will not have any problems and you can't damage your phone by undervolting, so no problem here, only possible software problems if you go too low.
Advantages :
+ Lower processor temperature
+ Lower phone temperature
+ Longer battery time
+ Longer components life
Disadvantages
- Stability issues (freeze, artefacts, slowness)
maxi2mc said:
Disadvantages
- Stability issues (freeze, artefacts, slowness)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know, I was recording a video and when playing back noticed that there were squiggly lines that went through the video a couple of times (in a two minute clip). This was the first time I saw this...and have recently lowered vsel by 2 on vsel3...could that be the artifacts that you are mentioning?
I just figured it perhaps I was too bouncy with the phone while recording making it glitch...but now that I see this post I'm thinking maybe I undervolted too much...what do you think?
My settings: 54/1000 44/700 28/300
I know what people mean by same settings don't work for every phone even if it's the exact same model. My Defy won't underclock as much as others. I'm using SetVesel, and I've been able to drop 5 points from each, and that's about it before it reboots itself. I only tested undervolting, but I mainly overclock to get as much speed as I can, and give it enough juice to run super fast. I'm current running [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Threshold at 75%. The highest the temp ever got was 112F, and that was after playing a game for about an hour. Usually it stays below 90F for normal use. I get around 17-20 hours out of it with screen on time at about 3 hours @ 50% brightness. I've been running these settings about a month, and have not had any issues.
If you put something like 100vsel will the phone accept and then burn? Is there any protection? Does anyone know what's the highest acceptable vsel?
Just for curiosity...
im pretty sure 80 is the highest you should EVER use and that'll significantly increase the chances of your phone burning out. @bobbyphoenix you should be able to lower your vsels a fair bit or your really unlucky! i run a lower vsel for 1ghz than u do for 700mhz smooth and stable
stewi21 said:
im pretty sure 80 is the highest you should EVER use and that'll significantly increase the chances of your phone burning out. @bobbyphoenix you should be able to lower your vsels a fair bit or your really unlucky! i run a lower vsel for 1ghz than u do for 700mhz smooth and stable
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CM7, rather non-technical person here. I seem to have a very happy phone at setvsel settings of [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], 86%. Been running this for the month or so since I rooted and the phone feels like it was made for this config. I've never seen the temp above ~32c. My 2¢.
I thought an Undervolting thread would be good for me and I'm sure it will help others. Messed with it a little bit on my Inc but haven't on this phone yet.
How much do you undervolt by?
How much better is the battery life?
Any kernels that work better with undervolting in your opinion?
TeeRom said:
I thought an Undervolting thread would be good for me and I'm sure it will help others. Messed with it a little bit on my Inc but haven't on this phone yet.
How much do you undervolt by?
How much better is the battery life?
Any kernels that work better with undervolting in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's not really needed.
I think most kernels already undervolt themselves to the possible max.
I know Franco has something called Smartflex, which takes in a bunch of calculations and undervolts it at the most optimal level (I think) and undervolting manually doesn't give any more real world battery savings compared to it.
But either way, I'd recommend Franco kernel for some of the best battery life.
Straight 175 seems to be safe for most people. I can undervolt lower. I can UV much lower but then I get a reboot at least once a week. The nexus is so efficient at many things uv'ing helps but doesn't impact usage that much. Honestly I don't think you get but about 30 minutes tops extra screen time and I'm being very generous. Uv'does help keep temps down and helps longevity of phone life.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Undervolting shouldn't be relied on for better battery life. It is such a minuscule amount of electricity change. The only thing undervolting should be used for is stability in OC.
Sent from my SGH-I897 using xda premium
i have some questions on overclocking
1 . How to overclock
2 . Which app to use
3 . The long term effects and the device life expectancy
1. Some ROMs have it built in. You choose a higher speed than your phone default.
2. I have used No-Frills or the ROM's built in one.
3. I have OCed my DHD to 1.5 safely, but every phone is different. If it acts oddly lower the speed. And overclocking too much can reduce the life of the hardware.
I'm considering overclocking as well. Sometimes my phone slows down noticeable during scrolling through settings, I'm wondering if overclocking will solve that problem and if it has a big impact on battery life.
trollebol said:
I'm considering overclocking as well. Sometimes my phone slows down noticeable during scrolling through settings, I'm wondering if overclocking will solve that problem and if it has a big impact on battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It probably will help, and it does impact battery life somewhat.
Android 4.2.1
CyanogenMod 10.1 Snapshot M1 (21/1/13)
Franco Kernel R364
I'm trying to maximize my battery time.
(Power mode BeastlyBattery 192MHz~1036MHz, Governor: Lazy, IO Scheduler: deadline, Screen of Max Frew: 384MHz)
I want to UV my CPU (and maybe IVA and GPU also, does it helps too?) to save some battery.
Should I just decrease the voltage a bit, use stability test app and keep going till there will be errors,
or I can just decrease like someone else on the web and then keep going..?
Can it do something to the device? (because Its just undervoltage..)
For how long I need to run the stability test?
I saw this topic:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1599025
and he says:
"1. It has been tested that the 700Mhz frequency is prefereable over the 300Mhz one, due to the drops on frequency signal of the phone."
Anyone tested this?
Does UV degrades preformance?
What is SmartFlex?
Anything else I need to know about that?
Im gonna make this one quick, so my apologies if I don't address your questions directly.
Prior to my Galaxy Nexus, I had a T-Mobile SGSII. I too had the belief that undervolting/clocking would improve my battery life substantially. It seemed to work but then I was only getting the results that I wanted to get, and thats because I went to extremes to lowering my screen brightness to minimum and using my phone a fraction of what I used to.
With the help of others and trial and error, my major conclusion is that undervolting/clocking, though normal headset use will not improve your battery life by a landslide. Android is so well optimized to save you as much battery as it can. Sure there are things here in there that interrupt that optimization such as bugs or kernel issues but that something even undervolting/clocking will not be able to solve.
If you do go into undervolting/clocking your device, please keep in mind that the most you will probably get out of it is maybe 45 minutes to 1hr extension, but thats not display time.
What you can do to improve your battery life is turn off whatever sync services you don't use, lower your screen brightness ( the display is the major battery hog in the GN and SAMOLED devices), use dark wallpapers and dark themes if apps support it, use wifi, disable 3G when not in use. The radio you use can also potentially affect your battery life and signal quality.
Those are just a few suggestions, the rest is up to you.
Good luck!
P.S. Kernels also add variation to the longevity of your battery life. It's been a very long time since I touched CM10 so I'm not gonna go and defame that ROM but do try something else that possibly offers better battery life. If MODs are a MUST for you, then you will be faced with a lower battery life compared to stock based ROM's. It won't be an extreme difference but the difference will be there. If I may suggest a ROM, try this one. I can honestly say I can get up to 3-4 hours of display time on it with about a 12 hour standby.
I read a lot on the web that it does help to battery time.. :S
anyone?
You're not going to see much difference. Running the cpu at a lower clock speed just means it will take longer to complete the same operation so you'll use just as much battery.
063_XOBX said:
You're not going to see much difference. Running the cpu at a lower clock speed just means it will take longer to complete the same operation so you'll use just as much battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And undervoltage?
Different overnor?
Undervolting will have minimal effect during actual use and a governor is based on specific user needs. One might save me battery while another works better for your usage. You need to actually mess with setting instead of just asking others what they use.