Related
I've seen a lot of unanswered questions about the real difference, other than the price, between the 1200 mAh (original) versus the 1400 mAh (aftermarket)
If no one has any objections, i will try to evaluate the power drain time with my Socket SD WiFi card inserted. I will also include pictures of the actual Batteries and the place where I bought the 1400. I will do that tomorrow evening.
Hope this unscientific little test will help or, at most, entertain you.
I swap between a 1400 and a 1200 mAh battery in my xda2i depending on which is charged and I can quite honestly say I never know which one is inserted. Theres very little noticeable change in length of useage time from the 1400 to the 1200mAh battery.
Obviously the 1400 has 1.17 times more capacity than the 1200, but i'm saying in real world use... you don't notice it.
I guess what you would expect to find is if you got 5 hours (just as an example) with the 1200, you could realisticly expect to get almost 6 (5.85) out of the 1400
Test is starting
Test conditions:
* Fresh soft reset for each test
* Week-old hard reset (good ol' format)
* i-mate Pocket PC Phone Edition
* ROM: 1.72.00WWE
* Radio:1.18.00
* Extended ROM: 1.72.800
* Socket SD WiFi (H/W 2.1)
* Socket Driver 142 G
Today screen stuff:
* Date
* Owner Information
* Calendar
* WeatherPanel 2.3.1 (3 cities, automatically cycle cities, update interval at 30 minutes)
* Inbox
* Tasks
* Money
Parameters:
* Backlight always on
* Automatic call forwarding to my landline activated
* Almost perfect Wifi Signal and Link quality
* Very good (4/5 bars) and stable GSM connection (GPRS disconnected)
The two subjects:
* Original battery made in Japan (1200 mAh)
* Aftermarket battery made in China (1400 mAh)
Methodology:
* Unplug the previous battery
* Insert the SD WiFi card
* Plug in the test subject (fully recharged battery)
* Close the back cover (i-mate should power on at this time)
* Start the timer
* Wait for the low battery warning (10% left)
* Stop the timer
Additional notes:
The original 1200 mAh battery is in daily usage since February 2004 and the aftermarket battery since December 2004: the results may be different with brand new ones. I recharge the battery plugged in my I-mate every night. My i-mate is plugged in on work hours every weekday (sometimes in the week-end). When I'm in front of my home computer, the i-mate sits in its desktop stand, charging (and synchronizing). The batteries were never deep-discharged.[/code]
I dont know if this test is going to be very accurate if one battery is almost a year older than the other
luckily, my 1400mAh is about a week old and my 1200mAh is about 3 weeks old... i stand by my observation that theres little difference in REAL WORLD useage time
Well, actually, that's what I think. That'S why I put a complete description of my setup. But I don't have a new one handy.
Can anyone borrow me one in Quebec City? hehe.
Anyway, this test will tell me wich one of my two batteries is the best right now. My feeling is that the original 1200 mAh i-mate battery will last as much as the aftermarket 1400 mAh. If yes... well I won't buy another 1400 mAh from this shop again :wink:
if it will not last the 16.6% longer then it's kinda false advertising
I think the "stated" capacity has a caveat - depending on the method used to determine number. I'm no expert, but I suspect if you play video vs wi-fi will probably give you a different mAh number.
So a lot of the after-market products will claim, at the very least, an identical capacity compared to original, else you won't even look at them.
I have both, with a much older 1200 and new 1400, and can't feel any difference between them. Never did an outright test, but never noticed any difference.
One way to measure *possible* capacity is to weigh the battery. If they weigh the same, capacity when new is going to be very similar.
Carlos said:
I have both, with a much older 1200 and new 1400, and can't feel any difference between them. Never did an outright test, but never noticed any difference.
One way to measure *possible* capacity is to weigh the battery. If they weigh the same, capacity when new is going to be very similar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you want to run test, you can keep playing video clips with both batteries and compare.
Weighing probably is less indicative because they may use different cells.
What do you think?
A lot of problems are related to old batteries and when buying new ones you don't know how "new" they are and if the keep their promise.
Worry no longer, with just
mortscript
your device
your battery (or more)
and a spreadsheet (optional)
you can take control of the facts.
The method is descibed in this generic thread.
There you also find the files you need and some apetizers to start.
Method specific discussions go there please!
Please report here in this forum only the results of your measurements in the following format:
Battery type (Producer + Model)
Battery serial number
nominal capacity (in mAh)
your device (it should only be Tornado here!)
rundown time to 10% capacity with the standardized conditions as descibed in the generic thread
attach the file if you like, but I will not collect them
My current drain measurement for the Tornado is:
full lit display: 75 mA
dim display: 56 mA
Let me start with my data:
Code:
Type Battery Serial Battery Capacity [mAh] PBA File 10% time [s]
Samsung-ST26A 5t4x15a5004173 1150 Tornado battery-data-1264926576.csv 48573
Samsung-ST26A 5yea14ak006610 1050 Tornado battery-data-1264979784.csv 40691
Sanyo ST26C at3a359w000642 1150 Tornado battery-data-1264866099.csv 45147
Sanyo ST26C at3a359y001882 1150 Tornado battery-data-1265025510.csv 50666
Sanyo ST26C at3a35cm000832 1150 Tornado battery-data-1264764653.csv 43856
enjoy!
(I intended to post this in "general:, not q&a)
SUMMARY: I have been slowly decreasing my voltage. Wednesday, three weird things happened on my phone that never happened before (wakelocks, unintended reboot, instant drop in battery indication).
CONCLUSION: I attribute all three things (wakelocks, reboot, instant drop in battery indication) to reaching an unstable voltage.
DESIRED OUTCOMES (Why am I posting this):
1 - I think I understand what happened, but maybe you guys can point out if I'm mistaken.
2 - Maybe someone else will be interested in seeing voltage limits for my phone (-75mV appears to work, -100mV appears to be too low for me... I guess other Infuses may act differently)
3 - It seems to me that maybe excess UV should be considered when investigating causes of wakelocks (there are many other causes of course). This conclusion is based only on this one experience as reported below. I have heard obviously unintended reboot can be associated with too much UV'ing, but I never heard wakelocks could be associated with UVing. Open to comments.
DETAILS:
I’m using stock GB, rooted, Zen’s Infusion A/1600 kernel, with governor conservative 100-1200millivolts.
I have been decreasing my voltage settings by 25 millivolts every other day over the last week.
Wednesday, I got to 100 millivolts below max on all points (except 1600Mhz, which was 50 millivolts down)
Specifically, my levels on Wednesday were:
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 100mv = 850 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 100mv= 850 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 100mv = 950 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 100mv = 1100 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 100mv = 1175 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 50mv = 1350 millivolts
Before Wednesday, I had performed stability test (using “stability test” program for about 30 minutes... it sweeps the frequencies I think) at 1600Mhz Fmax while 50 millivolts down and another stability test at 1200 Fmax while 75 millivolts down, both for around 20 minutes, no problems there and no other problems with my phone in the last week since I upgraded to GB. When I decreased to 100 millivolts down I only did a 30-second “stress test” from within setcpu at 1200Mhz. No problems there.
All day Wednesday I was running the conservative governor, with Fmin=100 and Fmax = 1200, cfq io scheduler, UV settings as above (all 100 down except 1600Mhz). I have one setcpu profile that puts the phone to 1600Mhz Fmax when I manually launch "Memento Database" program, but I did not launch that program at all on Wednesday, so I never got above 1200Mhz on Wednesday.
My battery profile for the day Wednesday is shown in attached graphic.
The label “phone awake with screen off” points to a time period approx 2-4pm when my phone was awake with the screen off. I have never seen this happen on my phone before, and I look at this screen pretty regularly.
I used the phone heavily during my hour-long ride home from work from 5pm to 6pm (no problems). I was surfing the internet, reading the news about the Hurricane in New Orleans (not tweaking my phone). Phone worked absolutely perfectly throughout this hour long heavy usage.
First thing on getting home, I connected to wifi and surfed for about 5 minutes. At about 6:10pm, while surfing with my battery level happened to be 47% (as I deduced later), suddenly appeared the black screen with Samsung logo ... phone booted up to normal home screen. I think that’s what you guys call the “screen of death”?
I assume the phone reboot may be my first indication that I’ve reached my limit for UV’ing?
But here’s what concerned me more than the SOD:
Immediately after rebooting, my battery now showed 8% !
How does it go from 47% to 8% that fast? I have several screens from “battery monitor widget” and from the Android battery screen, and they all confirm the battery dropped from 47% to 8% over this very short time period (less than 5 minutes). I also have audible low-battery warnings on my phone (generated by Tasker, a lass with a pretty British lady voice) at levels of 40%, then 30%, then 20%, then 10%. I didn’t get any of those audible warnings prior to this spurious reboot – seems to confirm either this was a real drop in battery, or else my battery signal feeding all my applications (battery monitor widget, Tasker, GB battery profile) somehow went bezerk.
I have a hard time imagining this could be a real drop in battery ....where would the energy go? The phone did not get hot.
Is it possible somehow the phone’s battery calibration got confused?
Attached is a screenshot of battery drop.
The rapid drop from 70% to 50% was when I was using the phone heavily for an hour... I consider that normal.
The vertical drop from 47% to 8% is what is completely unexplainable to me. Although I have seen in the forum reports of battery gage reading unreliably in certain circumstances.
By the way, I put my UV setting back to -75 Wed night, and phone working fine ever since. No wakelocks or other anomolies.
Questions:
1 – Is this what is known as “screen of death”
2 – Has anyone seen that type of rapid battery level decrease?
3 – What do you think caused it.... calibration problem or actual loss of battery? If calibration problem, it’s kind of weird that the voltage increased smoothly during recharge afterwards?
4 – Do you think the phone-awake-with-screen off occurences earlier in the day are related to my UV'ing? I didn't see them before and I haven't seen them since went back to -75mV, suggesting they are caused by UV'ing. But also note the phone worked fine during my hour long drive home after the wakelocks and before the SOD
5 – Do you agree I have probably reached stability limit and should stick with 75 millivolts down instead of 100 (I have been back on 75 again for awhile...no problems)
Attached below is my battery voltage over the course of the day, annotated with the items discussed above.
If you undervolted, your going to run into problems man. Simple as that. If you do anything to your phone not stock these things can and will happen.
Just take is as a fluke and move on. Everyone's phone uv's differently.
Imo what happened is the processor was making lots of errors and corrupted some part about your batteries actual percentage and was a lot lower than was presented to you.
Phone awake while screen on is a wakelock and quite common. Usually an app holds the phone turned on.
Edit: if uv of 75 fixes the problem. Then that definitely us what you should do. Note, benchmarks don't give stability reports. You would need run them for hours before you get accurate assessment.
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
1 – SOD is when the screen is black and phone won't unlock. Sometimes the volume buttons work. A long press of the power button will usually reboot the phone.
2 – The rapid power drains I've seen have typically been due to the rild process running amok and maxing the cpu. Typically the phone gets hot when this happens. In a SOD situation, you can typically still connect to the phone via ADB. If you can do this, run "adb shell" and then the following command: "top -m 5 -n 1" (spacing emphasized as all spaces are required).
3 – Dunno, but I'm with Elliot: the thing you changed was UV. Back that out and see if the problem goes way.
4 – Awake when screen off is usually related to an app that sets a wakelock and syncs in the background. Use Better Battery Stats to troubleshoot this. If it was UV causing this, I'm not sure why that would be - see #3
5 – FWIW, I never UV below -75... and truth be told I haven't seen a significant savings in battery life with UV, but that's likely because my phone is asleep most of the time...
Thanks for your response Elliot.
I think you interpretted it roughly the same as me except you lean more towards other possible causes of wakelocks unrelated to UV. That is certainly possible and I will keep a close eye on tha (moreso as a reuslt of your comments)
I am moving on with my phone at –75mv and don’t plan any drastic changes as a result of this unless I see more problems, but I also want to treat this as a learning experience. I spent awhile collecting the data and drawing my own conclusions, but wanted to bounce it off the others here for my own long-term learning.
Thanks again.
Thanks Zen, good info as always.
if you UV, i had better luck with higher UV on the top end:
ex: -125 or 150 @ 1600
-100 or 125 @ 1200
-75 or 100 @ etc
Basically, you are limiting power consumption and increasing battery life.
Once you hit the lower limit, your phone will let you know.
If you care to try, and you will have a slower phone:
set cpu max to 800 and then uv -75, -50, -25 stepping down. you will see the difference. it will make calls or mms fine. But you will notice slowdown with web/games/etc
every cpu is different. i've had 2 infuses because my screen broke, i replaced it and the replacement was defective, found another phone for about the price of a replacement screen.
one get's me about -100mv the other was completely stable at -225(maybe more) with stock clocks and -200 overclocked.
one thing that can cause instability is a big voltage differential from low to high especially with on demand governor, it's not only a matter of necessary volts to drive the chip per clock, the rapid fluctuations can cause issues. if you want performance you might want to uv from the top down leaving the lower freqs stock and seeing how much uv it will tolerate at 1600 before you mess with lower clocks, you might get more uv on the upper clocks that way which will reduce heat. if you want battery life then try less or no overclock still going from the top down.
for people that can't reach 1600, or think they can't try to set 1400 and 1600 at the same voltage so the voltage table has a plateau at the top. setting 1200 and 1400 high might smooth the transition to 1600, also try the voltages across the board, there may be a narrow range where the heat and required voltage balance out. i did this with my captivate and got it from 1200 to 1300mhz but 1300 would only work in a narrow 50mv range and 1200 needed to be enabled as well as set to the same voltage. the chip in that phone didn't like overclock at all compared to most infuses but sometimes thats how it goes.
still have wakelocks
if you UV, i had better luck with higher UV on the top end:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
one thing that can cause instability is a big voltage differential from low to high especially with on demand governor, it's not only a matter of necessary volts to drive the chip per clock, the rapid fluctuations can cause issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting. Both comments end up suggesting the same strategy to my way of thinking (more UV'ing at top frequencies will create a flatter voltage curve across the range of frequencies). I'll give it some thought when I get back to polishing my uv strategy. Maybe instead of putting all back to -75 I should do something like:
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 75mv = 875 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 50= 900 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 75mv = 975 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 100 mv = 1100 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 75mv = 1200 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 100mv = 1300 millivolts
...and stick with conservative governor to avoid the big jumps. That way I'd never jump more than 100millivolts (except between 400 and 800 which jumps by 125... but was apparently already a 150mv jump in the stock?). But I'd want to do some testing on the at 1600 to see how it likes the 100mv down, first. Sound reasonable?
========
New subject
An "update" on my phone:
My battery display still shows today that there is quite a lot of time with cpu on and screen off (wakelock) even though now my phone is not undervolted at all today (I removed undervolting to do some testing and haven't put back the uv'ing yet).
I'm heading over to the market to download Better Battery Stats per Zen's suggestion.
Thanks
electricpete1 said:
Interesting. Both comments end up suggesting the same strategy to my way of thinking (more UV'ing at top frequencies will create a flatter voltage curve across the range of frequencies). I'll give it some thought when I get back to polishing my uv strategy. Maybe instead of putting all back to -75 I should do something like:
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 75mv = 875 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 50= 900 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 75mv = 975 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 100 mv = 1100 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 75mv = 1200 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 100mv = 1300 millivolts
...and stick with conservative governor to avoid the big jumps. That way I'd never jump more than 100millivolts (except between 400 and 800 which jumps by 125... but was apparently already a 150mv jump in the stock?). But I'd want to do some testing on the at 1600 to see how it likes the 100mv down, first. Sound reasonable?
========
New subject
An "update" on my phone:
My battery display still shows today that there is quite a lot of time with cpu on and screen off (wakelock) even though now my phone is not undervolted at all today (I removed undervolting to do some testing and haven't put back the uv'ing yet).
I'm heading over to the market to download Better Battery Stats per Zen's suggestion.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
in my experience that will probably work well. but if the phone is at it's limits with the 1600mhz clock then you might have a specific voltage that it prefers so it's possible it doesn't work into what i was describing. try it, i can't say uv is safe but i haven't broken a phone yet by driving the voltage too low. it just tends to crash and will be fine on the next boot after you clear the settings in my experience so far.
Thanks. I went ahead and made the above changes in voltage. Then I manually rebooted (to allow voltage changes to take effect), went into setcpu to set my max frequency to 1600.
Successful stress test from within setcpu ~ 50 seconds.
Then went to the application named "Stability Test", selected "scaling" (which is supposed to vary the frequency) and has been successfully running the test for 14 minutes (11 successful cpu runs and 75 successful RAM runs). It has been on 1600Mhz the whole time according to the Stability Test display. The battery temperature increased from 37 to 42 pretty quickly then slowed, looks to be stable at 43C now.
Elliot warned above that it takes stability tests hours to find problems and Stability Test documentation mentions something about 5 hours on one frequency to find a problem. But if it's only running at one frequency as it appears from the display (stuck on 1600), I think even after running it for 5 hours I might not be confident that it will ferret out all the problems that might arise while switching frequencies (and I'm not sure I want to leave it running for 5 hours if it's stuck on 1600). I'm not sure exactly what is the purpose of "scaling" mode is, if it doesn't change frequency.
At any rate, I''m going to terminate the test and give it the real-life test now.
I will leave my governor at 100-1600 conservative governor for a few days to help shake out any glitches hiding inside there.
Will let you know if anything goes wonky.
Later on when I'm confident in results, I plan on setting up profiles for 100-400, 100-800, 100-1200, 100-1600 depending on the situation, but will stick with conservative in all cases.
Thanks again.
I wanted to provide an update of testing I have done with UV on my phone. Nothing conclusive for me yet, just a lot of data.
I’ll discuss 5 different UV settings labeled below as 0, A, B, C, D (going from most UV to least UV).
About notation - I think it is helpful to list UV settings in the full format I use (rather than just how many volts down) for two reasons:
1 – The reference voltages vary depending on kernel. So it could be misleading to report what the reduction in voltage is without reporting the reference. At 1200Mhz, Zen’s Infusion A/B uses 1275millivolts while Entropy’s DD uses 1300millivolts (voltages match at other frequencies). I’m not sure what the voltages are in stock kernel.
2 – Listing the final voltages allows you to see how much jump in voltage there is from one frequency to the next (large jump could possibly increase instability)... this aspect is not as obvious if we just list how many volts below the reference.
Setting set 0
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 100mv = 850 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 100mv= 850 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 100mv = 950 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 100mv = 1100 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 100mv = 1175 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 50mv = 1350 millivolts
Duration: Tested less than one day.
Results: Reported in original thread: caused unwanted reboot while surfing. After that the battery indicator jumped.
Setting set A.
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 75mv = 875 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 50= 900 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 75mv = 975 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 100 mv = 1100 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 75mv = 1200 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 100mv = 1300 millivolts
Duration: Tested 3 days heavy use
Results:
* “Rainbow Screen After Trap Game” – I tried the game “Trap” which was recommended in a thread somewhere as being a good test to find stability problems using UV. Sure enough upon exiting the game once, my screen turned to rainbow colors. I rebooted to restore screen to normal (same UV). I played the game for 15 minutes exiting a few more times, no more problems.
* “Widgets Lost” - Once after reboot I lost all my widgets (Tasker, Color Notes, Elixir). They did not come back even when I went to stock voltages and rebooted. Had to manually restore each of my widgets.
* “Discolor Upon Screen On” - Once in awhile when turning on screen, some colors are initially wrong (mostly I notice the white labels of my icons are yellow or pink). It goes away very quickly - either after I touch the screen or after scroll around a little. After that everything is normal.
* “Flash Upon Screen On” - Once in awhile when turning on the screen, I see a white flash for a fraction of a second (sort of like with an old TV tube when you turn it on or off). After that everything is normal.
These last two symptoms (“Discolor Upon Screen On” and “Flash Upon Screen On”) occurred probably once per day over the course of the three days relatively heavy usage.
Setting set B
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 25mv = 925 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 25= 925 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 25mv = 1025 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 75 mv = 1125 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 50mv = 1225 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 75mv = 1325 millivolts
Duration tested: 3 days heavy use
Results:
* “Discolor Upon Screen On” – Same as above. 2 or 3 times over three days heavy use
* “Flash Upon Screen On” – Same as above. Once over three days.
setting set C
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 15mv = 935 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 15= 935 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 15mv = 1035 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 50 mv = 1150 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 25mv = 1250 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 50mv = 1350 millivolts
Duration Tested: 3 days heavy use
Results:
* “Discolor Upon Screen On” – Same as above. 2 or 3 times
(Did not have the Flash upon screen on)
setting set D = 0 undervolt – use Zen’s default settings.
Duration: about 2 weeks experience with GB in this configuration
“Discolor Upon Screen On” – Never saw it
* “Flash upon screen on” – Never saw it, but did see a similar flash just once in my phone application when I removed phone from ear to look at keypad.
** EDITED TO ADD - Today after posting this, I noticed the flash upon screen on" while using no UV, 100-1200Mhz. Maybe I just wasn't looking for it before.
Other Testing Using Specific Applications:
I did a lot of testing with these programs on settings A, B, C and saw no anomalies. For settings A, B, and C, did the following:
SetCPU “Stress Test” for approximately one minute
“Stability Test” Applicaiton– “Scaling Stability Test” subtest for approx 20 minutes (battery gets up to about 115F).
“Stability Test” Applicaiton – “CPU+GPU Stability Test” subtest for approx 10 minutes (actually did this only in B, C, didn't try it in A)
I played the game "Trap" (that caused the problem in setting A) for 15-20 minutes in B, C, exiting and reentering a few times. Didn't see any problems.
Interestingly, when I run Quadrant it sometimes flakes out (returns to Quadrant start screen without any result) and somtimes run to conclusion. But this happens even on stock voltages, and I think I remember it's a problem with Quadrant that others have seen, so I’m inclined to think it is not an indicaion of instability I should worry about.
Analysis:
It looks like B is the most UV I can apply without significant problems appearing during 3-day test. But I still had some minor anomalies I notice occasionally when turning screen on (brief flash and brief discoloration),.but they occur to certain extent even at less UV (C) and at zero UV (D)
All of the above real-life testing in A, B, C was done with max frequency of 1200 (because I wanted to rule out 1600 as a problem).
I used 1600 only during the specific stability test appliations.. that ran fine and also in the D configuration that ran fine. So the problems (if they are problems) come from UV, not from using 1600Mhz.
Questions:
Do you think discoloration upon turning on the screen or flash upon turning on is cause for concern? The symptom itself is not an inconvenience but I’m wondering if it’s warning me about something else going on...(***)
I don’t really have a feel for what change in battery life occurs with these different settings. Seems very difficult to quantify. Any thoughts?
By the way, I'm using ULCB3 stock rooted GB. Using Zen's Infusion-A kernel. cpu control using setcpu: Mostly 100-1200Mhz cpu frequency, conservative cpu governor with the Up/Down threshholds tweaked to 95/45, noop io scheduler.
I installed this configuration about a month ago using qkster's Heimdall one-click.Never had any problems other than those mentioned above which may or may not be problems.
*** I have to confess, I wiped Davlick cache and wiped the other cache at that time, but never did the "factory data wipe" because I had data on my phone that wasn't backed up. I'm not sure if those particular instructions required factory data wipe or not but I remember it was mentioned as good practice. It occurs to me maybe these subtle brief strange symptoms upon turning on the screen are remnants from incomplete wipe?
I went back to stock and still had the occasional occurence of discolored screen upon waking from deep sleep.
It seems harmless, goes away if cycle the screen.
So I re-established UV. I have had my phone at the following settings since 9/17/12. No problems for me other than that occasional discoloration or flashing upon waking for sleep and one other problem where the phone would occasionally ring and I could see the call but not hear the caller (they could hear me). I eventually traced that to tweaking my governor settings... will post that in another thread.
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 50mv = 900 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 25= 925 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 50mv = 1000 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 75 mv = 1125 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 50mv = 1225 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 75mv = 1325 millivolts
electricpete1 said:
I went back to stock and still had the occasional occurence of discolored screen upon waking from deep sleep.
It seems harmless, goes away if cycle the screen.
So I re-established UV. I have had my phone at the following settings since 9/17/12. No problems for me:
100 Mhz: 950mv max – 50mv = 900 millivolts
200 Mhz: 950mv max – 25= 925 millivolts
400 Mhz: 1050mv max – 50mv = 1000 millivolts
800 Mhz: 1200mv max – 75 mv = 1125 millivolts
1200 Mhz: 1275mv max – 50mv = 1225 millivolts
1600 Mhz: 1400mv max – 75mv = 1325 millivolts
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. discolored screen: zen told me about these. I've not seen it..no known harm effects though.
2. I've pushed the 1600 to -125mV; 1200 to -100mV without issues.
Howdy,
You might remember me from the Xperia Z2 or the Xperia Z. I've started playing around with Android on my old Sony Xperia X10i and i've always liked fiddling around with too much data and thoroughly testing what i own in order to fully understand it.
Lately i've been active in the HTC 10 Subforums but since the Battery started going bad i've become afraid of the phone dying on me and i got this really good deal on the XZ2. So here i am back at Sonys.
So... this thread is mainly for me to keep my findings sorted but you might also find some interesting things here.
If you take a look at my older threads you'll know what to expect
What's new with the Xperia XZ2?
Well.... Android 8.0 with SD845 and 4.9 Kernel... no more Interactive governor. We got EAS built in an use SchedUtil. While it is possible to modify the behaviour of SchedUtil via SchedTune it's nowhere nearly as complex as Interactive or different governors.
Trepn Profiler doesn't report Battery Power anymore... while Trepn Profiler has been partially broken since Android 6.0 it did work kinda fine on the SD820 devices even with Android 8.1 and custom Kernels. (except Load%) Even though it was limited one poll per 30sec. While on the XZ2 only estimated Power is available. Which does not work due to missing CPU load.
Benchmarking:
Powerdrain: Find out how much the Phone is using under specific circumstances.
Charging: How fast does the Device charge from 1% to 100%
Throttling: Analyzing Thermal and Powerlimit Throttling
Benchmarking Apps:
Repetitouch: To create custom Benchmarks that simulate normal everyday usage.
BatteryLog: For Charging Benchmark, Voltage and Battery% per Minute
GameBench: For FPS in games. (Make sure you deactivate Screenshot function for HTC10)
Benchmarking Hardware:
YZX Powermonitor: USB 3.0 QC3.0 4-13V 0-3A USB A Male-> USB A Female Powermonitor that measures Voltage and Current passing trough.
I'll update this Post when new infos are available...
Index:
Charging Stock ROM with Stock Charger Post NR3
Thermal Throttling and Taks Migration / Load Balancing Post NR6
Powerdrain & Thermal Throttling on GPU & CPU Post NR7
Thermal Throttling on Android P | 5% Battery Limit Post NR9
Charging Android P no Qnovo.... Post NR10
Charging Android 10 Post NR15
Aftermarket Batteries Tested Post NR16
OFFICIAL Battery Tested.... not better -.- Post NR19
Charging Sony Xperia XZ Stock ROM with Stock Charger
Qnovo in Action!
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
First thing we see is the max Voltage.... this phone is fully charged at 4,331V Okay? Guess that's the new kind of Battery. I'm used to see 4,4V
After 40 Minutes when the battery reached 40°C and 60% there is Thermal Throttling. If you take a look at the HTC10 Charging you can see the CCCV breaking point this does not happen here, it's simply reduced from 11W to 8W which does indicate throttling. It's only after 117 Minutes when the Battery reaches 4,33V that you can see the expected curve...
This has to do with the new Qnovo Charging Technology. Nice read on Qnovo Charging Technology...
In the far future when my phone found out when i charge it over night i'm also gonna measure the Battery Care in action i wonder how slow it charges if it has the time.
Oh, and i'll have to Try with Another QC3.0 Charger. While the UCH12 is QC3.0 and PD2.0 compatible even the Old Sony Chargers said 1.5A but only charged the phone with 1A....
just some ramblings to not forget....
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq $ cat scaling_available_governors
conservative ondemand userspace powersave performance schedutil
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq $ cat scaling_available_frequencies
300000 403200 480000 576000 652800 748800 825600 902400 979200 1056000 1132800 1228800 1324800 1420800 1516800 1612800 1689600 1766400
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat hispeed_freq
1209600
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat hispeed_load
90
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat pl
1
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat rate_limit_us
0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq $ cat scaling_available_governors
conservative ondemand userspace powersave performance schedutil
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq $ cat scaling_available_frequencies
825600 902400 979200 1056000 1209600 1286400 1363200 1459200 1536000 1612800 1689600 1766400 1843200 1920000 1996800 2092800 2169600 2246400 2323200 2400000 2476800 2553600 2649600
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq $ cat scaling_boost_frequencies
2803200
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat hispeed_freq
1574400
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat hispeed_load
90
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat pl
1
H8216:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/schedutil $ cat rate_limit_us
0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
/dev/stune doesn't really show much.... schedtune.boost always seems to be 0.
Some Sensor paths... might need them later on.
H8216:/ $ for file in sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone*/type; do echo "$file"; cat "$file"; done
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone0/type
aoss0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone1/type
cpu0-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone2/type
cpu1-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone3/type
cpu2-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone4/type
cpu3-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone5/type
kryo-l3-0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone6/type
kryo-l3-1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone7/type
cpu0-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone8/type
cpu1-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone9/type
cpu2-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone10/type
cpu3-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone11/type
gpu0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone12/type
gpu1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone13/type
aoss1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone14/type
mdm-dsp-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone15/type
ddr-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone16/type
wlan-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone17/type
compute-hvx-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone18/type
camera-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone19/type
mmss-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone20/type
mdm-core-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone21/type
gpu-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone22/type
silv-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone23/type
gold-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone24/type
pop-mem-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone25/type
cpu0-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone26/type
cpu1-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone27/type
cpu2-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone28/type
cpu3-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone29/type
cpu0-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone30/type
cpu1-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone31/type
cpu2-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone32/type
cpu3-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone33/type
lmh-dcvs-01 Stuck at 75000 no matter what...
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone34/type
lmh-dcvs-00 Stuck at 75000 no matter what...
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone35/type
pm8998_tz 20° Colder than cores at load, idle is same
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone36/type
aoss0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone37/type
cpu0-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone38/type
cpu1-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone39/type
cpu2-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone40/type
cpu3-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone41/type
kryo-l3-0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone42/type
kryo-l3-1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone43/type
cpu0-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone44/type
cpu1-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone45/type
cpu2-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone46/type
cpu3-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone47/type
gpu0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone48/type
gpu1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone49/type
aoss1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone50/type
mdm-dsp-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone51/type
ddr-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone52/type
wlan-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone53/type
compute-hvx-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone54/type
camera-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone55/type
mmss-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone56/type
mdm-core-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone57/type
ibat-high from 500 idle to 2200 load, dropping with throttling to 1120
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone58/type
ibat-vhigh same as above
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone59/type
vbat 3744 at idle 3666 at load.... wtf is this voltage?
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone60/type
vbat_low same as above
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone61/type
vbat_too_low same as above
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone62/type
soc idles at 44, drops to 42 and 42 at load...
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone63/type
pmi8998_tz Broken "No Data available"
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone64/type
xo-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone65/type
msm-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone66/type
pa-therm1-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone67/type
quiet-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone68/type
ufs_therm idles at 37656 drops to 33672 at load
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone69/type
pa_therm2
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone70/type
flash_therm
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone71/type
battery you guessed it... battery!
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone72/type
wireless broken "no such device"
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone73/type
bms same as battery at idle, 6°C colder at load. Shis should be interesting while charging
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone74/type
sony_camera_0 broken "no such device"
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone75/type
sony_camera_1 broken "no such device"
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone76/type
wsatz.14 either around 34 to 55
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone77/type
wsatz.13 idles at 38, goes to 53 at load
Edit: i did a test while Loaded and saw how the temperatures changed... Oh... and i also wrote a little script, to run on your phone, which writes all temperatures down as .csv
Yeah..... there is a lot of sensors... so let's try to cut some...
the normal difference between usr step and lowf is almost nonexistent... so one should be enough.
H8216:/ $ for file in sys/class/thermal/cooling_device*/type; do echo "$file"; cat "$file"; done
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device0/type
panel0-backlight
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device1/type
thermal-devfreq-0
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device2/type
thermal-cpufreq-0
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device3/type
thermal-cpufreq-1
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/type
thermal-cpufreq-2
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device5/type
thermal-cpufreq-3
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device6/type
thermal-cpufreq-4 #Throttling is happening here: shows value 10
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device7/type
thermal-cpufreq-5
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device8/type
thermal-cpufreq-6
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device9/type
thermal-cpufreq-7 #Throttling is happening here: shows value 24
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device10/type
ebi
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device11/type
cx
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device12/type
mx-cdev-lvl
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device13/type
cdsp_vdd
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device14/type
adsp_vdd
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device15/type
slpi_vdd
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device16/type
modem_pa
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device17/type
modem_proc
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device18/type
modem_vdd
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device19/type
modem_current
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device20/type
modem_skin
EDIT: P Dev Preview 2
oooh Fûck this shít they changed quite a bit in P dev Preview 2 -.-
C:\ADB>adb shell for file in sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone*/type; do echo "$file"; cat "$file"; done
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone0/type
aoss0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone1/type
cpu0-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone10/type
cpu3-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone11/type
gpu0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone12/type
gpu1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone13/type
aoss1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone14/type
mdm-dsp-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone15/type
ddr-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone16/type
wlan-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone17/type
compute-hvx-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone18/type
camera-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone19/type
mmss-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone2/type
cpu1-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone20/type
mdm-core-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone21/type
gpu-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone22/type
silv-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone23/type
gold-virt-max-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone24/type
pop-mem-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone25/type
cpu0-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone26/type
cpu1-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone27/type
cpu2-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone28/type
cpu3-silver-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone29/type
cpu0-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone3/type
cpu2-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone30/type
cpu1-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone31/type
cpu2-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone32/type
cpu3-gold-step
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone33/type
lmh-dcvs-01
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone34/type
lmh-dcvs-00
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone35/type
pm8998_tz
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone36/type
pm8005_tz
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone37/type
aoss0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone38/type
cpu0-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone39/type
cpu1-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone4/type
cpu3-silver-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone40/type
cpu2-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone41/type
cpu3-silver-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone42/type
kryo-l3-0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone43/type
kryo-l3-1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone44/type
cpu0-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone45/type
cpu1-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone46/type
cpu2-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone47/type
cpu3-gold-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone48/type
gpu0-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone49/type
gpu1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone5/type
kryo-l3-0-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone50/type
aoss1-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone51/type
mdm-dsp-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone52/type
ddr-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone53/type
wlan-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone54/type
compute-hvx-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone55/type
camera-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone56/type
mmss-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone57/type
mdm-core-lowf
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone58/type
ibat-high
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone59/type
ibat-vhigh
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone6/type
kryo-l3-1-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone60/type
vbat
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone61/type
vbat_low
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone62/type
vbat_too_low
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone63/type
soc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone64/type
pmi8998_tz
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone65/type
xo-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone66/type
msm-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone67/type
pa-therm1-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone68/type
quiet-therm-adc
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone69/type
ufs_therm
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone7/type
cpu0-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone70/type
pa_therm2
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone71/type
flash_therm
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone72/type
battery
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone73/type
wireless
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone74/type
bms
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone75/type
sony_camera_0
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone76/type
sony_camera_1
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone77/type
wsatz.14
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone78/type
wsatz.13
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone8/type
cpu1-gold-usr
sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone9/type
cpu2-gold-usr
Thermal/cooling_device is still the same...
akari:/ $ for file in sys/class/thermal/cooling_device*/type; do echo "$file"; cat "$file"; done |MAX|MIN|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device0/type
panel0-backlight |4095|error|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device1/type
thermal-devfreq-0 |6|6|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device10/type
ebi |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device11/type
cx |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device12/type
mx-cdev-lvl |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device13/type
cdsp_vdd |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device14/type
slpi_vdd |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device15/type
adsp_vdd |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device16/type
modem_pa |3|0|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device17/type
modem_proc |3|0|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device18/type
modem_vdd |1|1|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device19/type
modem_current |3|0|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device2/type
thermal-cpufreq-0 |18|18|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device20/type
modem_skin |3|0|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device3/type
thermal-cpufreq-1 |18|18|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device4/type
thermal-cpufreq-2 |18|18|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device5/type
thermal-cpufreq-3 |18|18|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device6/type
thermal-cpufreq-4 |24|24|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device7/type
thermal-cpufreq-5 |24|24|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device8/type
thermal-cpufreq-6 |24|24|
sys/class/thermal/cooling_device9/type
thermal-cpufreq-7 |24|24|
To Properly show these Values i've modified the adb reading scripts i've found somewhere else on XDA...
You simply start the .bat file when connected via ADB... either trough USB, or connect phone via USB type "ADB tcpip 5555" unplug, when in WiFi use adb connect 192.168.1.XX:5555
Welcome back! ^^
Thermal Throttling & Task Migration / Load Balancing
When i first used this phone i tought i'd have Endless power in my hands, so i couldn't resist using it ALL. Started CPU Load Generator app and saw that even with 8 Threads fully loaded the phone does not throttle down CPU....
Sound awesome huh? Even the Temperature wasn't getting that hot. Coooool... (pun intended)
But i was a tiny wee bit Skeptical. Could it really be? So i've decided to use my USB Powermeter and charge my phone to 100%. After a while the phone kept using the same current. 0.255W to be accurate. (With Screen Off and WiFi connected)
using a Full Load i could see all CPU cores staying at the max Frequency.
But.... the wallcharger did say something different!
Not even a Full Minute! While it does peak at 8W it falls down to a sustaineable 4W rapidly. (Even drops to 3.5W Later on...)
So What's going on here?
Using Snapdragon Profiler with ADB over WiFi i've tried different Load Scenarios, 1-9 threads and 16 threads.
1 Thread:
You can see the Thread jumping between core 5, 6 and 7
2 Threads:
With 2 Threads core 4 is also used this time
3 Threads:
with 3 Threads Core 7 is not being used anymore... throttling? The phone is trying to reach a sustaineable temperature of 60°C by limiting Big cores to 2.4ghz
4 Threads:
While core 7 stays offline we see the small cores being used, and a throttling to 2.4ghz on big cores.
5 Threads:
While it did cool down enough to go back to the big cores previously, now it stays on small cores. Also 2.17ghz on big cores.
6 Threads:
7 Threads:
Dropping to 1.84ghz on big cores
8 Threads:
Aaaannndd... here is the magic! 2.8ghz on big cores! Somehow the phone switched to another throttling method than frequency.
9 Threads:
While we did see some slight CPU frequency drops with 8 threads, they're all gone with 9.
16 Threads:
Exactly the same as with 9 threads.
Sadly Snapdragon Profiler does not show BatteryPower on the XZ2 So it seems plugging to the WallCharger is the only way to figure this out.
I'll have to redo tests when my phone is fully charged and see if i can get a consistent powerdrain.
Edit: Update: Android P Beta.... Dev Preview 2
Starting with 4 Threads...
Core 7 does NOT get turned off anymore.... But you do see a small task migration as soon as 68°C are hit. Small cores get more load.
Looking at the Performance you see a gradual degradation, and not big spikes like before.
With 7 Threads:
We can see Thermal Limit has been increased to 72°C
The Performance drops really fast to 85%-90% but manages to stay there for a long long time. i'm really impressed.
Edit:
Absolutly nothing new with Android 10 (Again 8 Threads)
Powerdrain & Thermal Throttling
Okay... here we go... Wallcharger + Snapdragon Profiler...
First i've charged my phone fully to check Idle drain. Around 0.3W check.
About GPU testing:
You see the Idle 1.2W Powerdrain at the beginning? That's because Snapdragon Profiler is connected via ADB over WiFi. Quite a lot compared to the 0.3W Idle...
The first few Peaks until 12 Minutes are a failure because i've accidently started the sublevel Benchmarks^^
The first real Peak to 5.4W is a CarChase OnScreen.
The 1.7G on Clocks/Second is a reading error, normal Max is 710Mhz.
You can see the Temperature reaching 66°C and throttling starts, GPU going to 600Mhz, also Big Cores limiting to 2.17ghz.
The 2nd Peak is CarChase OffScreen.
You can see the big cores dropping in Frequency pretty early. GPU maxed out at 710mhz, until the phone reaches 68°C. GPU throttles heavily, and Big cores are going Offline putting the Load on small cores.
Which caused a drop in Powerusage from 5W to 3.7W
The last Peak is Manhatten OffScreen.
When Throttling starts at 68°C GPU drops from 710mhz to 600mhz and task migration from big to small cores.
The Powerdrain is reduced from 4.4W to 3.9W
About CPU testing:
Well.... that didn't work as well as expected... In the Powermonitor graph you can see i've used CPU Load Generator started with 1 Thread, and added 1 more after 1 Minute, until i had 4 threads.
Admittely the phone was already 45°C when i started this test... therefore i've already had throttling before i even started.... But well.... i've expected more...
The same peaks that are visible in the Powermonitor graph are also clearly visible in the temperature graph on Snapdragon Profiler.
So even if the phone is throttling, it allows Burstpower/increased thermal limit for new tasks, to reduce lag. Pretty neat.
Edit: Here we go... on a cold device:
As always, until Minute 1.2 is pure IDLE, from 2-2.7 is whit ADB over WiFi and Snapdragon Profiler connected.
At Minute 3 you see the start of the first Task. Using around 3.3W
At 4.2 you see the 2nd Task starting, generating 4.4W load
At 5.2 the 3rd Task starts, using up to 6.3W but shortly after (timestamp 225s in the graph below) the phone reaches 68°C and starts throttling. Load drops to 5W. because the continous Load of 5W is not sustaineable the phone throttles down to 4.1W (timestamp 245s)
Tt 6.2 Minutes the 4th Task is started, which generates 5.2W, this causes the phone to get almost 68°C again (timestamp 275s) and drops powerdrain to 3.3W, the phone cools down to about 60°C (timestamp 295s) and stop throttling, therefore peaking to 6.1W and rising to 68°C again in 10 seconds. Trying to limit powerdrain to 5.2W for the next 5 seconds fails, and task migration kicks in turning core7 offline and pushing load onto little cores. Limiting Big cores to 2.4ghz and using 3.9W
(timestamp 0s equals 2 Minutes on the other graph)
Edit2:
So what does that mean for Performance?
I've used the App CPU Throttling Test to create a workload and also Display it's performance. Here you can see 3 threads at work. Full Performance 125.9GIPS
The 2 Minute run does not throttle, Snapdragon Profiler proofs that
Using the app with 7 Threads causes throttling twice. But again, all cores are shown at full frequency.
Using Snapdragon Profiler we can see the phone throttling at 64°C (timestamp 447s) and later on at 60°C (timestamp 490s)
The performance drops from 125.9Gips to 104.9Gips. Nothing in Snapdragon profiler would indicate that.... CPU frequency stays the same and Load is also equal.
These graphs are such a pain
I have no clue where the Thermal Limit is on the P Beta.... but it seems to be quite high!
(click on Image to get redirected to interactive Chart from Google Sheets)
(The Drops are when i stopped testing and changed from 8 to 7 to 6 threads)
panel0-backlight thermal-devfreq-0 thermal-cpufreq-0 thermal-cpufreq-1 thermal-cpufreq-2 thermal-cpufreq-3 thermal-cpufreq-4 thermal-cpufreq-5 thermal-cpufreq-6 thermal-cpufreq-7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
There is NO throttling due to Task Migration, thats what Snapdragon profiler said, and the value in sys/class/thermal/cooling_device0/cur_state proofs this. As you can see in the example above, they stayed at 0 during the whole test.
Which is nice to know, since now we're certain Performance throttling does not happen due to a value in thermal/cooling_device*
Edit:
Oh.... not sure if this is a P feature or happens on Oreo too... gotta test...
But when you reach 5% Battery big cores shovel all Tasks to small cores, therefore frequency drops to 800mhz and performance takes a HUGE hit.
This time we see all 4 big cores reach a value of 24 on sys/class/thermal/cooling_device* for thermal-cpufreq-4, 5, 6 and 7.
Edit 2: Thermal Throttling on Android P (dev preview 2)
Yeah... i need way more patience.... Did another test, this time while charging, so we have power Measurement!
We already knew Thermal limit was WAY higher on P.....
(interactive Chart...)
Because this was using External Power from Wallcharger the battery did not heat up as fast because it was not used. Took 10 minutes for the battery to reach 43°C while the starting point was about 32°C
What we did not know... the PowerLimit is different too!
on Oreo it peaks at 8W and then rapidly drops to 6W and even lower to 4W when the Limit kicks in.
Thanks to the bigger Thermal Headroom we have in P it only peaks to 6.5W and drops to 5.8W in 1 minute but after that it continuously falls from 5.8W to 5W in 10 Minutes! Seems like it manages to stay at 5W. Oreo couldn't handle that.
You Remember Qnovo Charging on the XZ2 ?
Haldi4803 said:
Qnovo in Action!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well... it's not present in Android P Dev Preview 2.
We still have the typical CCCV point
But instead QuickCharge 3.0 is doing a good job in scaling Voltage.
Charging is fast, 105 minutes to 130 Minutes... but with Qnovo you have 93% at 105 Minutes, who cares about 7% If you have way better battery live.
Sadly Bluetooth Broke down after 70 Minutes.... oh well you can probably imagine what happens from minutes 70 to 130 right? ^^
Haldi4803 said:
You Remember Qnovo Charging on the XZ2 ?
Well... it's not present in Android P Dev Preview 2.
We still have the typical CCCV point
But instead QuickCharge 3.0 is doing a good job in scaling Voltage.
Charging is fast, 105 minutes to 130 Minutes... but with Qnovo you have 93% at 105 Minutes, who cares about 7% If you have way better battery live.
Sadly Bluetooth Broke down after 70 Minutes.... oh well you can probably imagine what happens from minutes 70 to 130 right? ^^
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Coming from OnePlus, I'm not impressed at all. My 5T could do 0-93% in only 60 mins. Almost twice as fast... Old OnePlus phones didn't seem to suffer from battery degradation after more than a year either.
davidletterboyz said:
Coming from OnePlus, I'm not impressed at all. My 5T could do 0-93% in only 60 mins. Almost twice as fast... Old OnePlus phones didn't seem to suffer from battery degradation after more than a year either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly Sony is limiting itself to QC 3.0. Secondly seeing as higher end phones all pack high quality batteries, they all suffer little degradation in the first place. Sony's method might make them last even longer. Come back in 2 to 3 years time and compare the battery health before saying you are not impressed. Not everyone is rich like you people to change phones every year or less. There are people who think about really long term usage and this should benefit them considering how batteries are non user replaceable nowadays.
hotcakes_shinku said:
Firstly Sony is limiting itself to QC 3.0. Secondly seeing as higher end phones all pack high quality batteries, they all suffer little degradation in the first place. Sony's method might make them last even longer. Come back in 2 to 3 years time and compare the battery health before saying you are not impressed. Not everyone is rich like you people to change phones every year or less. There are people who think about really long term usage and this should benefit them considering how batteries are non user replaceable nowadays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I said that because my friend is still using his OP3 and it's been two years. His SOT is still largely similar and he use Dash charge all the time.
And no I am not rich. Rich people buy iPhone.
hotcakes_shinku said:
Firstly Sony is limiting itself to QC 3.0. Secondly seeing as higher end phones all pack high quality batteries, they all suffer little degradation in the first place. Sony's method might make them last even longer. Come back in 2 to 3 years time and compare the battery health before saying you are not impressed. Not everyone is rich like you people to change phones every year or less. There are people who think about really long term usage and this should benefit them considering how batteries are non user replaceable nowadays.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
one thing worth noting when it comes to battery life
What killed my battery on my Z1 (I replaced it twice) was doing nandroid backups with TWRP, I believe part of the problem is that all the OS battery control and protection is not running when you boot into recovery and it causes extreme overheating, it is definitely something to be aware of and IMO destroys batteries
Charging Android 10
Nothing much changed For the good or the bad ^^
Aftermarket Battery Tests
Aftermarket Battery Tests
Because i was unhappy with the Batterylife of my XZ2, it was nowhere near where it has been 2 years before, i decided to open my phone and replace the battery!
Opening your phone seems kinda easy, so no big issue. In theory... in practice you need to be aware of 2 important details.
You need new Glue to close it again. Afaik Witrigs is the only seller of that.
Be verry carefull on the bottom part. If you go too dep you will cut your Display cable and need to buy a new LCD for 35$. I'm speaking from experience....
How to test the battery?
Because the connector of the battery is proprietary and extremely compact you can't plug the battery directly, so i had to make use of the USB Power Delivery function to draw 5V out of the phone.
The Phone was in Flight mode with screen off, to make sure no other services use the battery. Then i connected a Load Generator i bought from aliexpress. Drawing 5V 1A my 2.5 year old battery lasted 1h33 min and gave out 7.6Wh
Original Battery:
Which has been in use for more than 2 years.
7.6Wh - 7.8Wh Obviously i did 2-3 Tests to see if i get the same every time. And it was always around that.
Hsabat 4300mAh Battery:
Bought from Aliexpress for 13.- Looks pretty decent. Is utter crap. As one expects.
First charge gave 7.3Wh, Second charge gave 5.6Wh and third charge gave 6.5Wh Not something you want to put in your phone.
Witrigs Battery:
Since i bought the glue there anway, why not just get a battery for 9$ and test that!
It looks bland (black) but hey... who cares as long as it works.... right? it works?.... well yeah...
First charge gave 7.3Wh and the others were also around that. "New" Battery? i Don't think so...
Phonedepot
Because i was disapointed that my old 2.5years harshly used battery has better capacity than **** i bought online i went to a swiss shop which has quality batteries... well yeah... at least is supposed to: Phonedepot.ch
It's more expensive but has faster shipping (as its close by) and the quality of the battery looks way better from the ouside.
I managed to draw 7.4Wh - 7.5Wh
Conclusion
Well... it was obvious before i even started.... i just didn't want to believe it.
Aftermarket batteries sucks. All of them!
Simply replacing your battery to get better batterylife is a dream. If youre battery broke down completly a replacement can help out, yes. But not if the battery is ageing normally.
This is extremely useful info, thank you for the tests.
Yeah, so this is a problem. As I mentioned earlier, I didn't bought any of those "new" batteries or aftermarket ones. All of them are a low quality piece of garbage so unless your battery is dead, literally, I wouldn't really buy these. This isn't any help from me and I am aware of that. The problem is, you can't really buy any genuine battery from anywhere. LG has a lot of genuine replacement parts and you even can buy from them directly, or from samsung. I tried looking on aliexpress but there are "replacement" batteries that are obviously fake or "original" that have the same serial numbers printed on them.
Official Battery Test!Because i really couldn't let it be i wen't and bought an official Sony Battery.
Where do you get a Official Battery you ask? There is an Official Sony Homepage that lists Repair Centers. Here in Switzerland Sertronics is the official Repair center. Mailed them with the Part number and Foto of my Battery and got a quick answer.
28.- is an extremely fair price. the 16.- shipping are somewhat annoying.
So i got an Official Battery which Looks WAY better than the other ones.
Looks pretty much the same as my Original one right?
So let's get into Testing...
As Before I've used my Discharging Tool via USB Type-C with 1A draw the 5V dropped to something like 4.85V so 4.85W draw was used. Phone in Flightmode with Screen off to have almost no internal power usage.
Sadly i had issues with some kinda power Saver which killed the USB Power drawing at 10% Battery sometimes....
Run:Time to 10%Wh at 10%Time to 0%Wh at 0%Stock Run 11h 28min7.1Wh--Stock Run 21h 29min-1h37min7.8WhStock Run 31h 29min7.2Wh--New Battery Run 11h 22min (16%)6.6Wh (16%)--New Battery Run 21h 27min-1h 38min7.9WhNew Battery Run 31h 29min-1h 38min7.9Wh
Works pretty much the same. You can see the Voltage Drop at the end is not THAT bad as with the Original Battery. (Yes, both of them we're used until the phone did an Emergency Shutdown due to low battery, shows 0% in the Log)
Because these Results aren't really that good (And Yes, i've plugged the new battery and used my phone for one week to let it acclimate, i also did two Full resets with the new battery, one with newflasher) i've checked the Battery test in the Service Menu.
It truly is no good. I've bought a "Typical 3180mAh" battery that has a minimum of 3060mAh and then it offers 2654. My old battery was showing something around 2700mAh the last time i checked.
So yeah... it is a fully working as intended Battery without any flaws... BUT the capacity is WAY to low.
I will contact the repair center from Sony and ask what the think of this.
Judging by the marked numbers on the replacement Sony battery, it was manufactured between April 4th and 10th 2020 (20W18 - year 2020, week 18). So you received a one year old battery. I also have some experiences with batteries manufactured around that date (20W32). Very poor results: 2200 mAh at first charge, then goes down to a consistent 2000 mAh for all other ones. XZ1 Compact here.
Haldi4803 said:
I will contact the repair center from Sony and ask what the think of this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What did they say? Did they at least accept it back?
Hey guys recently my battery suferring problems .
I found a battery in Ebay. I need to know about it .
Is betterer than original. I hope to put some coments here.
Expect it to be fake, in that in reality it probably won't be more mAh than original Quark 3900 mAh. A lot of Chinese companies do that, put more mAh in the battery properties than actual scientific measurements would validate. They do it to sell batteries against competition, and there's no one to punish them.
It WILL be a newer battery, so hope that solves your problems.
Let's hope it's at least 3900 mAh.
ChazzMatt said:
Expect it to be fake, in that in reality it probably won't be more mAh than original Quark 3900 mAh. A lot of Chinese companies do that, put more mAh in the battery properties than actual scientific measurements would validate. They do it to sell batteries against competition, and there's no one to punish them.
It WILL be a newer battery, so hope that solves your problems.
Let's hope it's at least 3900 mAh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You recomend to buy original battery 3900mAh. I was thinking to buy an extra duration buy could cause problems to hot devices in long time.
I'll buy original battery
I guess
yehison said:
Hey guys recently my battery suferring problems .
I found a battery in Ebay. I need to know about it .
Is betterer than original. I hope to put some coments here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This battery that you mentioned does not change much. In fact, the Quark will continue to indicate 3900mAh with it. I bought a battery for about $ 15 on the internet 1 year ago, I even changed it. I'm not sure if it was original but it was identical to the original. Anyway, it still works great with android Oreo.
vinydasilveira said:
This battery that you mentioned does not change much. In fact, the Quark will continue to indicate 3900mAh with it. I bought a battery for about $ 15 on the internet 1 year ago, I even changed it. I'm not sure if it was original but it was identical to the original. Anyway, it still works great with android Oreo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amazing performance . 9 hours of screen
Thanks for your opinion. I really apreciate.
Whit the last ROM RR 02 only 4 hours of screen reach.
You have at least any configuration to reach 9 hours
yehison said:
Amazing performance . 9 hours of screen
Thanks for your opinion. I really apreciate.
Whit the last ROM RR 02 only 4 hours of screen reach.
You have at least any configuration to reach 9 hours
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the 02 I got 8 hours screen
vinydasilveira said:
With the 02 I got 8 hours screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OMG good performance.
Tell me your configuration in the kernel..
I doubt about the battery .
yehison said:
OMG good performance.
Tell me your configuration in the kernel..
I doubt about the battery .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try this
CPU:
-Max 1574mhz/Min 268mhz (yankactive)
-CFS Scheduler Policy: powersave
-imput boost frequency Core 0: 1267mhz /Core 1,2 & 3 desable
CPU Voltage:
-Global set -30
GPU
-Maxx 400mhz/min 100mhz (msm-adreno-tz)
I/O Scheduler
-noop
Misc Controls
-Android Logging desable
Power & Battery
-BCL ON
-BCL Max Frequency 1267mhz
-BCL Hotplugging (Core 2 & 3)