So I'm not sure if this 4th G2x I received is a total beast or SetCPU is just f'ing with me, but I'm cruising at -200mV on top of the already undervolted Faux CM7 kernel.
The phone has absolutely no problems and it just keeps going.
Here's my setup:
1000Mhz Max 950 mV Current 925 mV (-25 mV)
800Mhz Max 850 mV Current 750 mV (-100 mV)
500Mhz Max 800 mV Current 650 mV (-150 mV)
400Mhz Max 770 mV Current 570 mV (-200 mV)
PS: Real men type it out
Edit: Poll added!
GideonX said:
So I'm not sure if this 4th G2x I received is a total beast or SetCPU is just f'ing with me, but I'm cruising at -200mV on top of the already undervolted Faux CM7 kernel.
The phone has absolutely no problems and it just keeps going.
Here's my setup:
1000Mhz Max 950 mV Current 925 mV (-25 mV)
800Mhz Max 850 mV Current 750 mV (-100 mV)
500Mhz Max 800 mV Current 650 mV (-150 mV)
400Mhz Max 770 mV Current 570 mV (-200 mV)
PS: Real men type it out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i really wonder sometimes if its really UVing with values so high x_X 216 running at 350mV x_X
{
"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"
}
I read in another thread by one of the developers (Faux?) that 770 mV is the lowest allowed voltage due to hardware restrictions and that any settings below that do nothing.
GideonX said:
So I'm not sure if this 4th G2x I received is a total beast or SetCPU is just f'ing with me, but I'm cruising at -200mV on top of the already undervolted Faux CM7 kernel.
The phone has absolutely no problems and it just keeps going.
Here's my setup:
1000Mhz Max 950 mV Current 925 mV (-25 mV)
800Mhz Max 850 mV Current 750 mV (-100 mV)
500Mhz Max 800 mV Current 650 mV (-150 mV)
400Mhz Max 770 mV Current 570 mV (-200 mV)
PS: Real men type it out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sincest said:
i really wonder sometimes if its really UVing with values so high x_X 216 running at 350mV x_X
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys have amazing chips
The reason for 770mv @ 389/400 MHz is the limitation of ~100mv per "frequency jump" according to Tegra2 documentation. With the FakeShmoo implementation of overclock, we have a total of 8 slots (frequencies) to play with. If I start the lowest frequency let say at 500mv, then the max voltage at the eighth slot can only be ~1200mv. With 1200mv we can OC to 1.2~1.3 GHz, beyond that then it becomes unstable. So in order to get more juice @ higher clocks, we have to start a higher voltage at the low to get more juice at the high end. Of course, naturally, the next question would be why not start with 1000mv to begin with then you can get 1700mv at eighth slot? If we started with more juice at the low end, it would kill the battery 2x or 3x faster. So the current voltage table you see from my kernels is a compromise between battery life and OC Hope this clears it up a bit.
faux123 said:
You guys have amazing chips
The reason for 770mv @ 389/400 MHz is the limitation of ~100mv per "frequency jump" according to Tegra2 documentation. With the FakeShmoo implementation of overclock, we have a total of 8 slots (frequencies) to play with. If I start the lowest frequency let say at 500mv, then the max voltage at the eighth slot can only be ~1200mv. With 1200mv we can OC to 1.2~1.3 GHz, beyond that then it becomes unstable. So in order to get more juice @ higher clocks, we have to start a higher voltage at the low to get more juice at the high end. Of course, naturally, the next question would be why not start with 1000mv to begin with then you can get 1700mv at eighth slot? If we started with more juice at the low end, it would kill the battery 2x or 3x faster. So the current voltage table you see from my kernels is a compromise between battery life and OC Hope this clears it up a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So there really isn't a hardware limit in place on how low this chip can go?
Sent from my HTC Vision (G2x in disguise)
I'm really starting to wonder if setcpu is busting our chops or not I'm
-100mV on all frequencies starting at 594mhz down to 216mhz on morfics jrcu 6/21 kernel, that can't be right can it is there a way to find out for sure???
for frequency 500mhz or 400mhz I can as low as I want ... 10mVs.. even 0mV. so i dont tihnk its accurate
c19932 said:
for frequency 500mhz or 400mhz I can as low as I want ... 10mVs.. even 0mV. so i dont tihnk its accurate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do you have any more than 100mV between frequencies?
Black6spdZ said:
do you have any more than 100mV between frequencies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes I do. should I not exceed 100mV between each frequency level then? would you happen to know the exact biggest voltage difference allowed between each level?
on another note, if I just leave them at 10mV, will that mean the processor will automatically take the voltage down to the lowest possible, or will it just do nothing but run at stock voltage?
c19932 said:
for frequency 500mhz or 400mhz I can as low as I want ... 10mVs.. even 0mV. so i dont tihnk its accurate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems possible to make settings that are not logically possible.
It would be nice if either SetCPU (which I am currently using) or Pimp My CPU would display in either real time or histogram what voltages are actually being used in the same way as they show frequency. Although I suspect this may be impossible due to hardware or this would be already implemented.
Added a poll up top.
I made it so you can vote either above or below -50mV. I'm basing this off the OC/UV kernel from Faux123.
I also skipped everything between 1.0 to 1.5Ghz. I'm going to assume at that speed, UV'ing will be very low.
double post
i actually use 1216max and uv it minus 150 all together so fauxs -50 plus i uv it -100, and my phone still flys and battery life is niceeee, oh and for the min i use 389, -200 on top of fauxs -50 so -250 all together
I am OC/UV up to 1200MHz -75mV on all frequencies below the undervolting built into Trinity JRCU kernel. This is stable and further UV gives me trouble. Your assumption about UV at higher frequencies is appears to be incorrect.
The poll actually confuses me, undervolting > -50 could mean I am not undervolting at all since 0 is greater than -50.
Interesting, I can UV more on the lower Mhz than higher. For example, at 1.0Ghz -50mV is already pushing it. Anything higher and I'll notice FC and random closes on certain apps.
First time polling, I guess there's no edit feature to change up the wording. Sigh.
SetCPU doesn't error check so everyone reporting -150mV and greater probably is incorrect. Remember there is only 800mV allowable from the highest frequency and only 100mV allowable between frequencies. So.. take my phone for instance.. I started at the highest 1.5Ghz frequency and tested -25mV at a time until phone rebooted and then went back up 25mV. This just happens to be 1300mV stable for me. This means the lowest 389Mhz can have at the lowest 500mV "1300mV - 800mV". I set everything -50mV across the board and then focused on 503Mhz since no matter what 389Mhz can only be -100mV lower. I was able to get -75Mv "725mV" stable. Then I was able to run 389Mhz stable at -150mV or 620mV. In actuality it is running 625mV since that is 100mV less than the frequency above it... setting it any lower in SetCPU would STILL only be 625mV regardless.
Also, this poll will be useless for everything but the 1500Mhz frequency as we wouldn't know if the user started with the SV or UV kernel. We need multiple polls with the final voltage eg 1100Mhz @ 1000mV,975mV,950mV
Test with a charger plugged in, I've had reboots with a battery at <50% because it cannot supply the high current draw of 100% cpu usage.
My specific settings are as follows as -?? means nothing because different kernels have a different starting point.
1075 mV @ 1200 MHz
975 mV @ 1100 MHz
875 mV @ 1000 MHz
775 mV @ 594 MHz
675 mV @ 432 MHz
575 mV @ 216 MHz
This is solidly stable having run it for several days without any bad behavior although any further reduction of voltage at 1200 MHz causes significant problems.
Phone: G2X
ROM: CyanogenMod 7.1 RC1
Kernel: Trinity 15 jrcu 06212011
Other relevant: SetCPU
I've gotten even better results with the SV kernel. After testing each speed for stability at lower and lower voltages here are my results:
1408Mhz @ 1175mV
1216Mhz @ 1075mV
1100Mhz @ 975mV
1015Mhz @ 900mV
816Mhz @ 800mV
655Mhz @ 725mV
503Mhz @ 650mV
389Mhz @ 595mV
lose 100Mhz from the UV/OC kernel but I get better UV settings with the SV kernel
Black6spdZ said:
I've gotten even better results with the SV kernel. After testing each speed for stability at lower and lower voltages here are my results:
1408Mhz @ 1175mV
1216Mhz @ 1075mV
1100Mhz @ 975mV
1015Mhz @ 900mV
816Mhz @ 800mV
655Mhz @ 725mV
503Mhz @ 650mV
389Mhz @ 595mV
lose 100Mhz from the UV/OC kernel but I get better UV settings with the SV kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
too bad the lowest my phone can go for 1015mhz and 816mhz are 940 and 840mv respectively
Black6spdZ said:
I've gotten even better results with the SV kernel. After testing each speed for stability at lower and lower voltages here are my results:
1408Mhz @ 1175mV
1216Mhz @ 1075mV
1100Mhz @ 975mV
1015Mhz @ 900mV
816Mhz @ 800mV
655Mhz @ 725mV
503Mhz @ 650mV
389Mhz @ 595mV
lose 100Mhz from the UV/OC kernel but I get better UV settings with the SV kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We seem to be hitting about the same spot, almost exactly, I can OC to 1400 or 1500 but choose not to push my phone to that extent. I live in a very hot area and don't want to tempt fate.
Hopefully someone can either confirm my beliefs or clear up any confusion I may be suffering from lol.
If these are my UV settings (just the lower end of the freqs range):
192 MHz > 800 mV
310 MHz > 800 mV
384 MHz > 800 mV
432 MHz > 800 mV
486 MHz > 825 mV
540 MHz > 837.5 mV
Is there any difference in power usage between having my minimum wake frequency set to 432 MHz as opposed to 192 MHz? I am currently under the impression that since both frequencies are set to 800 mV, the end power usage will be the same.
Current Daemon Controller settings are:
Wake Min > 432 MHz
Wake Max > 1026 MHz
Ondemand
Sleep Min > 192 MHz
Sleep Max > 384 MHz
SmartassV2
And using Bricked 1.6 AOSP kernel.
And thanks, of course!
Sent from my Sensation using XDA App
-bump-
44 views and no one knows?
Sent from my Sensation using XDA App
Hi XDA,
I recently installed Apex ROM and have tried a couple kernels (Matr1x and Trinity) but it seems that whenever I receive an incoming call AND the screen is off my device reboots.
I am able to receive calls normally when my screen is on. I'm also able to make outgoing calls without any problems.
I suspect that it has something to do with either my minimum frequency or my voltages (i.e. my phone isn't coming out of deep sleep properly), but after raising either/both of them the problem persists.
Has anyone come across this before, or have any suggestions on how to fix this? Would flashing a different radio help (although I've used my current radio on a different ROM without any issues)?
I apologize if this has been asked before. I did a brief search but did not find anything similar to this exact problem.
Some more info:
-ROM: Apex v1.1.3
-Kernel: Trinity (T132-NS-CV-56HZ-ANY-201212623)
-When a call is incoming:
1) The screen remains off, while the capacitive touch keys light up. There is no ringing either.
2) After a few seconds, the phone reboots and the splash animation appears.
What clock speeds are you running at (Min and max)? Are you using deep idle? etc.
063_XOBX said:
What clock speeds are you running at (Min and max)? Are you using deep idle? etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not have deep idle enabled.
Frequency:
400/1000 MHz, ondemand
(15000 sampling rate, 98% up threshold, 1 sampling down factor, 0 powersave bias)
Voltages:
Max Arm Volt - 1500 mV (1250 mV INT)
1320 mhz - 1425 mV (1150 mV INT)
1000 mhz - 1425 mV (1150 mV INT)
800 mhz -1200 mV (1150 mV INT)
400 mhz - 1100 mV (1150 mV INT)
200 mhz - 1000 mV (1150 mV INT)
100 mhz - 1000 mV (1050 mV INT)
developersdevelopers said:
I do not have deep idle enabled.
Frequency:
400/1000 MHz, ondemand
(15000 sampling rate, 98% up threshold, 1 sampling down factor, 0 powersave bias)
Voltages:
Max Arm Volt - 1500 mV (1250 mV INT)
1320 mhz - 1425 mV (1150 mV INT)
1000 mhz - 1425 mV (1150 mV INT)
800 mhz -1200 mV (1150 mV INT)
400 mhz - 1100 mV (1150 mV INT)
200 mhz - 1000 mV (1150 mV INT)
100 mhz - 1000 mV (1050 mV INT)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your ARM voltages are all wrong. This can cause crashes, if they're too high.
Stock from 100 to 1000.
950
950
1050
1200
1250
polobunny said:
Your ARM voltages are all wrong. This can cause crashes, if they're too high.
Stock from 100 to 1000.
950
950
1050
1200
1250
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for responding.
The default voltages for Trinity are slightly higher than default because of the bus OC I believe. It was only after I realized I had this problem that I raised the voltages for 100 MHz to 400 MHz a bit.
Anyways, I tried your above voltages but the problem remains.
I'm going to try flashing a couple more kernels (AirKernel, SimpleKernel) and finally my ROM again to see if that helps.
developersdevelopers said:
Thanks for responding.
The default voltages for Trinity are slightly higher than default because of the bus OC I believe. It was only after I realized I had this problem that I raised the voltages for 100 MHz to 400 MHz a bit.
Anyways, I tried your above voltages but the problem remains.
I'm going to try flashing a couple more kernels (AirKernel, SimpleKernel) and finally my ROM again to see if that helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which kernel are you using presently? It is quite possible if it's a Trinity kernel that your phone simply doesn't support any type of overclock whatsoever. I'd recommend something a bit more "stock-ish" like the CM9 kernel, thalamus or simple kernel. Air kernel is very good too, very solid on my phone and not overclocked in any way by default. Has the stock voltages too.
Ok so apparently it's an issue specific to the Apex v1.1.3 ROM (which I would have realized if I read that thread more thoroughly, doh).
I'm on Euroskank CM9 now and everything seems to be working just fine.
Oh damn, those kind of things happen I guess. Good to know you got skankwich on this ;D
I have recently installed PimpMyROM for my tablet and have found this nice voltage setting feature.
Anyone have any good voltage values for longer lasting battery life without any cases of random reboots?
Best guaranteed to work is really not dialed into your specific tab and user habits.
Setcpu is an excellent app that can help you out with testing. It has a stress test future to make it easy to see if your Undervolt settings are stable.
Google Play claimed it isn't compatible for my tab so I grabbed it off Xda. It works fine. I gotta donate still... (and so should you if you get it here)
Btw: Setcpu has Undervolt settings built in too. You may want to freeze PMR while testing to be sure their settings are not conflicting.
Sent from my SGH-I997 using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2
But as for a starting place...
I have both my daughter's p6210 running smooth with these settings:
1200 MHz 1175 mV
1000 MHz 1050 mV
800 MHz 950 mV
500 MHz 925 mV
200 MHz 900 mV
The most intensive thing they do is play Survival Craft (for hours). Tabs were getting excessively hot before I Undervolted them. No crashes in days...
They're both on CM10.1
Sent from my SGH-I997 using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2
My voltages:
1400 MHz 1325mV
1200 MHz 1225mV
1000MHz 1175mV
800MHz 1150mV
500MHz 1050mV
200MHz 975mV
Its not much battery saver but rom is stable