I am running the siah kernel on my s3 and a few minutes ago I overclocked the GPU and I almost ''burned it''. The screen started flickering when running graphic heavy tasks, had to reboot twice, and thanks god it got back to it's normal behavior. This is what happens on the SIII, but it might happen the same on other devices, too.
Overclocking is always a risk isn't it? Keep to safe or stable clocks
maimutul said:
I am running the siah kernel on my s3 and a few minutes ago I overclocked the GPU and I almost ''burned it''. The screen started flickering when running graphic heavy tasks, had to reboot twice, and thanks god it got back to it's normal behavior. This is what happens on the SIII, but it might happen the same on other devices, too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Overclocking will generate more heat, especially when it's running at the higher clocks you should always be careful when you overclock.
Well, when you push something to work at a higher clock speed than what was intended, do you expect magical things to happen?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Use stock kernel keep problems away...
Heat = bad
All heat and no cool makes gpu a dull boy
xD
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
that was a good movie..
Theshawty said:
Heat = bad
All heat and no cool makes gpu a pool of molten sillicone inside the phone
xD
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed for you
maimutul said:
I am running the siah kernel on my s3 and a few minutes ago I overclocked the GPU and I almost ''burned it''. The screen started flickering when running graphic heavy tasks, had to reboot twice, and thanks god it got back to it's normal behavior. This is what happens on the SIII, but it might happen the same on other devices, too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you must be joking right, we know overclocking is always risky, but overclocking to 800mhz is just stupidity in its best, be specific and try moderate overclocking and not abusive one.
Envoyé depuis mon GT-I9300 avec Tapatalk
I never had problems overclocking the CPU, so I thought I would be a good idea to try the GPU, too. I was lucky this time, I tested it with modern combat 4 and worked as usual.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app
delsus said:
Fixed for you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough. :good:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
I have no problem to overclock the CPU even been in 1800, but when it comes to GPU I can not accelerate to more than 533, when I select 640 the phone becomes to lagy and I can see some artifacts.
Enviado desde mi GT-I9300 usando Tapatalk 2
maimutul said:
I am running the siah kernel on my s3 and a few minutes ago I overclocked the GPU and I almost ''burned it''. The screen started flickering when running graphic heavy tasks, had to reboot twice, and thanks god it got back to it's normal behavior. This is what happens on the SIII, but it might happen the same on other devices, too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course you will get artifacts if you going to oc gpu too much, because chip gets too hot, so you need to oc in small steps and see which frequency/voltages fits for your phone. Every phone is different.
The silicon is what defines what you can oc to. D
Different silicon quality that is
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Theshawty said:
Heat = bad
All heat and no cool makes gpu a dull boy
xD
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, ANYTHING UNDER 65c is totally normal.
@OP, my GPU is overclocked to 700mhz, with a good undervolt, stable as a rock! Phones react differently to Overclocks. I can push my phone to 700mhz and 1.7ghz and it runs stable as hell - you maybe can't.
Considering the fact that the Mali 400 was designed to operate at a 275 target clock rate, I wouldn't be surprised if it craps out at more than twice the clock speed. Heck, the stock 440 mhz already surpasses this target clock by 50%
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
As someone that's been overclocking for over a decade, it slightly depresses me that overclocking today (on all systems and devices) is so easy that people that clearly have no idea what they are doing, the consequences of what they are doing or know what the solutions to the problems they encounter are able to jump right in and do it.
Everyone in this thread is talking about heat, despite the fact that the OP's, and a number of other peoples issues posted here are clearly not heat issues at all. The flickering and artifacts people are talking about is in 90% of the cases here caused by a GPU voltage that is insufficient for the current clock frequency. Your GPU won't overheat running your UI for example, nor will it have massively overheated by running a game for a few seconds. This is a voltage issue, not heat. Lower your GPU voltage at your lower clock speeds and you'll get exactly the same graphic issues, despite the fact you've made your GPU run cooler.
Also, for the record. Just because a chip is voltage limit, increasing it's voltage by X amount isn't guaranteed to fix it. Some chips will simply just not be capable of hitting a certain speed. Being voltage limited isn't an excuse to whack the voltage slider up, because that's definitely a quick way to a dead phone! If a given clock speed quickly gives you artifacts, try giving an extra 25-50mv. If there is no improvement I'd give up, as the gains start becoming impractical for the voltage levels required.
ballsofsteel said:
Considering the fact that the Mali 400 was designed to operate at a 275 target clock rate, I wouldn't be surprised if it craps out at more than twice the clock speed. Heck, the stock 440 mhz already surpasses this target clock by 50%
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it isn't. Arm's official website quotes upto 395MHz @ 65nm, and given that clockspeed headroom increases as process nodes decrease, getting 440+MHz at 40nm sounds exactly like what you'd expect. Given that many many many things can effect this, quoting theoretical design figures is largely useless anyway. It all comes down to what performance metrics the SoC designer is looking for, as you can easily exchange power consumption for performance and gain more clock speed.
darkbahamut said:
As someone that's been overclocking for over a decade, it slightly depresses me that overclocking today (on all systems and devices) is so easy that people that clearly have no idea what they are doing, the consequences of what they are doing or know what the solutions to the problems they encounter are able to jump right in and do it.
Everyone in this thread is talking about heat, despite the fact that the OP's, and a number of other peoples issues posted here are clearly not heat issues at all. The flickering and artifacts people are talking about is in 90% of the cases here caused by a GPU voltage that is insufficient for the current clock frequency. Your GPU won't overheat running your UI for example, nor will it have massively overheated by running a game for a few seconds. This is a voltage issue, not heat. Lower your GPU voltage at your lower clock speeds and you'll get exactly the same graphic issues, despite the fact you've made your GPU run cooler.
Also, for the record. Just because a chip is voltage limit, increasing it's voltage by X amount isn't guaranteed to fix it. Some chips will simply just not be capable of hitting a certain speed. Being voltage limited isn't an excuse to whack the voltage slider up, because that's definitely a quick way to a dead phone! If a given clock speed quickly gives you artifacts, try giving an extra 25-50mv. If there is no improvement I'd give up, as the gains start becoming impractical for the voltage levels required.
No it isn't. Arm's official website quotes upto 395MHz @ 65nm, and given that clockspeed headroom increases as process nodes decrease, getting 440+MHz at 40nm sounds exactly like what you'd expect. Given that many many many things can effect this, quoting theoretical design figures is largely useless anyway. It all comes down to what performance metrics the SoC designer is looking for, as you can easily exchange power consumption for performance and gain more clock speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
:good::good::good::good::good: thumbs up to another person that know's what he is doing glad there are people out there that aren't N00BS I've been overclocking for 8 years so i know what i'm doing.
I clock my GPU to 640 MHz by most ,increases benchs but artifacts might appear and phone might crash,and have to reboot again by removing battery.
And by 640 MHz I mean min frequency(for a minute or two)
If max then 800 MHz works ok
sent fromXperia sT21i
Everything stock
i kill an s2 with overclocking so finish never again
Related
any reason for the 1.15ghz CPU speed and 400(ish)MHz gpu speed other than cost? or do you think they underclocked to save the battery? hoping we can over clock to t30l speeds
foxorroxors said:
any reason for the 1.15ghz CPU speed and 400(ish)MHz gpu speed other than cost? or do you think they underclocked to save the battery? hoping we can over clock to t30l speeds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Deffently clocked to increase battery and reduce heat
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
No need to worry. developers will get this tablet to at least 1.5ghz or more. overclck tweaks for transformer prime should work on this also. all it'll need is root
Do we really need to overclock this? I mean I probably will anyways but a 1.3 Quad is pretty zippy by itself!
As the tegra 3's gpu compared to say the galaxy s3 (international) is fairly weak, I only hope we can OC the GPU by enough to make a difference. I am not that bothered to about OCing the cpu but I do care about the GPU
miketoasty said:
Do we really need to overclock this? I mean I probably will anyways but a 1.3 Quad is pretty zippy by itself!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, even at 1.0 ghz it'll do fine with most games..
I underclock my S2 to 1.0 ghz and i experienced no hiccups whatsoever.. and I'm still on dual core
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Questions go in the Q&A section
foxorroxors said:
any reason for the 1.15ghz CPU speed and 400(ish)MHz gpu speed other than cost? or do you think they underclocked to save the battery? hoping we can over clock to t30l speeds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Tegra 3 used in the Nexus 7 is a version of the Tegra 3 chip that didn't work within guidelines at the regular speeds, but were within guidelines for a lower speed. This is done regularly in Intel/AMD CPUs as well. That's why there are different speed CPUs in the same model family. This way they can sell the high speed CPUs at a higher cost and still make money off the CPUs that can't run as fast. Eventually the process to make the chips will be so efficient that they will artificially lower the speeds to sell as the cheaper version and that's when you can overclock like crazy and not have instability (if the CPU product cycle lasts that long).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning
Outrager said:
The Tegra 3 used in the Nexus 7 is a version of the Tegra 3 chip that didn't work within guidelines at the regular speeds, but were within guidelines for a lower speed. This is done regularly in Intel/AMD CPUs as well. That's why there are different speed CPUs in the same model family. This way they can sell the high speed CPUs at a higher cost and still make money off the CPUs that can't run as fast. Eventually the process to make the chips will be so efficient that they will artificially lower the speeds to sell as the cheaper version and that's when you can overclock like crazy and not have instability (if the CPU product cycle lasts that long).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This suggests Nexus 7 probably won't OC so well. Which wouldn't surprise or disappoint me. It appears Asus dropped a lot of little features to keep cost down(which I think is a good move), and using CPU s that didn't bin well is one good way to keep cost low.
i777 w/ Siyah 3.4.3 dual booting AOKP and Shostock... yet sent from my iPad using Forum Runner
I wonder if we really "need" to overclock this beastly CPU of ours? Hell, even if i underclock to 1Ghz, most task if not all are done fast, really fast. Talking about games? Modern FPS games are driven by both CPU and GPU and thus doesnt require much of horsepower of the CPU. Im confuse why numbers of people here are crying "why they are not stable @ 1.8Ghz"? ... Even if you set it @ 1.8Ghz max, our phone will barely reach this clockspeed because other cores will kick-in in less than maximum speed of the primary core (if im right?) ... Is it just for Benchmark figures? Good figures doesnt equates to good performance and we all know that... Can you really sacrifice "Stability" for the sake of some "Ego-driven faaassssstttt BM"?
I swear, some people are just so dense. Why don't we all drive Honda civics? Do we really need a car with over 200hp and can top out at 150mph when most speed limits are 65mph? Why do we bother eating at expensive restaurants when we could save a ton and eat at mcdonalds? People have preferences...it's what makes the world go 'round. If people want to overclock, let them have it.
lude219 said:
I swear, some people are just so dense. Why don't we all drive Honda civics? Do we really need a car with over 200hp and can top out at 150mph when most speed limits are 65mph? Why do we bother eating at expensive restaurants when we could save a ton and eat at mcdonalds? People have preferences...it's what makes the world go 'round. If people want to overclock, let them have it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha good one.
I drive a v8 6.0L lumina SS, my pc is o/c'd from 2.6Ghz to 3.8Ghz Quad core, ram is overclocked to 1700mhz, have crossfired 2 5870s and tested them at 900mhz, my SIII is overclocked to 1800mhz, my LG O3D is oc @ 1350mhz (1ghz original) I guess i like fast things Maybe the OP is just a laid back happy go lucky fella and if everyone is like him we would be all driving steam powered cars and flying in propeller planes
Ok, you got me Guys .. But what pissed me is that this people all points their finger to the Kernel or Dev when they have reboots and heat-ups which is obviously the effect of their Overclocking... i can remmber a post; "damn, why i cant reach 1.8Ghz without random reboot, please fix"...
I actually agree with the op personally and I have been developing on android for four years since the g1, I don't see the need to over clock this phone as it runs really well all of the time,I too had the optimus 3d and that definitely needed overclocking as that was so painstakingly sluggish without it. the only reason I would overclock is for benchmark results other than that its just another drain on the battery for no real world performance gain
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
jaytana said:
Ok, you got me Guys .. But what pissed me is that this people all points their finger to the Kernel or Dev when they have reboots and heat-ups which is obviously the effect of their Overclocking... i can remmber a post; "damn, why i cant reach 1.8Ghz without random reboot, please fix"...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you just can't fix ignorance. if someone doesn't understand the concept and risks of overclocking, let them figure it out. sometimes it irks me to encounter posts like that as well.
androidfanboi said:
I actually agree with the op personally and I have been developing on android for four years since the g1, I don't see the need to over clock this phone as it runs really well all of the time,I too had the optimus 3d and that definitely needed overclocking as that was so painstakingly sluggish without it. the only reason I would overclock is for benchmark results other than that its just another drain on the battery for no real world performance gain
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Off topic: Optimus3D ROM is one of the most poorly optimize in modern Android flagships... I too had one, running it with AOSP is buttery smooth but also have some compromises...
I am sure you are missing the main idea of overclocking. First of all people normally do it to achieve better results in benchmark. But more and more are starting to do it for better performance and so. Overclocking a phone is useful for the first mainly, I doubt that anyone would overclock their phone in order to play games with better fps for instance. The whole idea is bad, there is a large difference between a phone with minimal cooling and a big ass desktop with 50 fans. If we want our devices to last longer we needn't touch them to make them "faster".
When I can overclock to 1.6gh AND under volt to 50mv below the stock voltage for 1.4GHZ it's pretty much a no-brainer
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Do you?
Do you keep it overckocked for a longer period, permanently, or just when/while you need it? How much (exact frequencies would be cool) I'm thinking of OCing mine (both CPU and GPU) since some games like NOVA 3 lag on occasions but not sure how safe/advisable it is.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
I don't think it's needed. I've heard that OC won't help much with gaming, but you can definitely try
I don't yet - I might later. My N7 is still less than a month old.
The device manufacturers (e.g. Asus in this case) have motivations to "not leave anything on the table" when it comes to performance. So, you have to ask yourself - why would they purposely configure things to go slowly?
After all, they need to compete with other handset/tablet manufacturers, who are each in turn free to go out and buy the exact same Tegra SoC (processor) from Nvidia.
At the same time, they know that they will manufacture millions of units, and they want to hold down their product outgoing defect levels and in-the-field product reliability problems to an acceptable level. If they don't keep malfunctions and product infant mortality down to a fraction of a percent, they will suffer huge brand name erosion problems. And that will affect not only sales of the current product, but future products too.
That means that they have to choose a conservative set of operating points which will work for 99+ % of all customer units manufactured across all temperature, voltage, and clock speed ranges. (BTW, Note that Asus didn't write the kernel EDP & thermal protection code - Nvidia did; that suggests that all the device manufacturers take their operating envelope from Nvidia; they really don't even want to know where Nvidia got their numbers)
Some folks take this to mean that the vast majority of units sold can operate safely at higher speeds, higher temperatures, or lower voltages, given that the "as shipped" configuration will allow "weak" or "slow" units to operate correctly.
But look, it's not as if amateurs - hacking kernels in their spare time - have better informed opinions or data about what will work or won't work well across all units. Simply put, they don't know what the statistical test properties of processors coming from the foundry are - and certainly can't tell you what the results will be for an individual unit. They are usually smart folks - but operating completely in the dark in regards to those matters.
About the only thing which can be said in a general way is that as you progressively increase the clock speed, or progressively weaken the thermal regulation, or progressively decrease the cpu core voltage stepping, your chances of having a problem with any given unit (yours) increase. A "problem" might be (1) logic errors which lead to immediate system crashes or hangs, (2) logic errors (in data paths) that lead to data corruption without a crash or (3) permanent hardware failure (usually because of thermal excursions).
Is that "safe"?
Depends on your definition of "safe". If you only use the device for entertainment purposes, "safe" might mean "the hardware won't burn up in the next 2-3 years". Look over in any of the kernel threads - you'll see folks who are not too alarmed about their device freezing or spontaneously rebooting. (They don't like it, but it doesn't stop them from flashing dev kernels).
If you are using the device for work or professional purposes - for instance generating or editing work product - then "safe" might mean "my files on the device or files transiting to and from the cloud won't get corrupted", or "I don't want a spontaneous kernel crash of the device to cascade into a bricked device and unrecoverable files". For this person, the risks are quite a bit higher.
No doubt some tool will come in here and say "I've been overclocking to X Ghz for months now without a problem!" - as if that were somehow a proof of how somebody else's device will behave. It may well be completely true - but a demonstration on a single device says absolutely nothing about how someone else's device will behave. Even Nvidia can't do that.
There's a lot of pretty wild stuff going on in some of the dev kernels. The data that exists as a form of positive validation for these kernels is a handful of people saying "my device didn't crash". That's pretty far removed from the rigorous testing performed by Nvidia (98+% fault path coverage on statistically significant samples of devices over temperature, voltage, and frequency on multi-million dollar test equipment.)
good luck!
PS My phone has it's Fmax OC'ed by 40% from the factory value for more than 2 years. That's not a proof of anything really - just to point out that I'm not anti-OC'ing. Just trying to say - nobody can provide you any assurances that things will go swimmingly on your device at a given operating point. It's up to you to decide whether you should regard it as "risky".
Wow thanks for your educational response, I learned something. Great post! I will see if I will over clock it or not since I can play with no problems at all, it is just that it hics up when there is too much stuff around. Thanks again!
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
With the proper kernel its really not needed. Havent really seen any difference,aside from benchmark scores(which can be achieved without oc'ing)
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA Premium HD app
Yes, I run mine at 1.6 peak.
I've come to the Android world from the iOS world - the world of the iPhone, the iPad, etc.
One thing they're all brilliant at is responsive UI. The UI, when you tap it, responds. Android, prior to 4.1, didn't.
Android, with 4.1 and 4.2, does. Mostly.
You can still do better. I'm running an undervolted, overclocked M-Kernel, with TouchDemand governor, pushing to 2 G-cores on touch events.
It's nice and buttery, and renders complex PDF files far faster than stock when the cores peak at 1.6.
I can't run sustained at 1.6 under full load - it thermal throttles with 4 cores at 100% load. But I can get the peak performance for burst demands like page rendering, and I'm still quite efficient on battery.
There's no downside to running at higher frequencies as long as you're below stock voltages. Less heat, more performance.
If you start pushing the voltages past spec, yeah, you're likely into "shortening the lifespan." But if you can clock it up, and keep the voltages less than the stock kernel, there's really not much downside. And the upside is improved page rendering, improved PDF rendering, etc.
Gaming performance isn't boosted that much as most games aren't CPU bound. That said, I don't game. So... *shrug*.
Bitweasil said:
I can't run sustained at 1.6 under full load - it thermal throttles with 4 cores at 100% load.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@Bitweasil
Kinda curious about something (OP, allow me a slight thread-jack!).
in an adb shell, run this loop:
# cd /sys/kernel/debug/tegra_thermal
# while [ 1 ] ; do
> sleep 1
> cat temp_tj
> done
and then run your "full load".
What temperature rise and peak temperature do you see? Are you really hitting the 95C throttle, or are you using a kernel where that is altered?
I can generate (w/ a mutli-threaded native proggy, 6 threads running tight integer loops) only about a 25C rise, and since the "TJ" in mine idles around 40C, I get nowhere near the default throttle temp. But I am using a stock kernel, so it immediately backs off to 1.2 Ghz when multicore comes on line.
Same sort of thing with Antutu or OpenGL benchmark suites (the latter of which runs for 12 minutes) - I barely crack 60C with the stock kernel.
?
bftb0
The kernel I'm using throttles around 70C.
I can't hit that at 1200 or 1300 - just above that I can exceed the temps.
I certainly haven't seen 95C.
M-Kernel throttles down to 1400 above 70C, which will occasionally get above 70C at 1400, but not by much.
Bitweasil said:
The kernel I'm using throttles around 70C.
I can't hit that at 1200 or 1300 - just above that I can exceed the temps.
I certainly haven't seen 95C.
M-Kernel throttles down to 1400 above 70C, which will occasionally get above 70C at 1400, but not by much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Any particular workload that does this, or is the throttle pretty easy to hit with arbitrary long-running loads?
Odp: Do you overclock your N7?
I'll never OC a quadcore phone/tablet, I'm not stupid. This is enough for me.
Sent from my BMW E32 using XDA App
I've over clocked my phone, but not my N7. I've got a Galaxy Ace with a single core 800MHz processor OC'd to 900+. The N7 with its quad core 1.3GHz is more than enough for doing what I need it to do. Using franco.Kernel and everything is smooth and lag-free. No need for me to overclock
Sent From My Awesome AOSPA3.+/franco.Kernel Powered Nexus 7 With XDA Premium
Impossible to do so can't even get root but did manage to unlock the bootloader
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
CuttyCZ said:
I don't think it's needed. I've heard that OC won't help much with gaming, but you can definitely try
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not a big OC'er, but I do see a difference in some games when I OC the GPU. It really depends on the game and what is the performance bottleneck. If the app is not Kernel bound than an OC won't make much difference. Must games are I/O and GPU bound.
Sent from my N7 using XDA Premium
Dirty AOKP 3.5 <&> m-kernel+ a34(t.10)
I've overclocked all of my devices since my first HTC hero. I really don't see a big deal with hardware life.
I know that this n7 runs games better at 1.6ghz than at 1.3ghz.
First thing I do when I get a new device is swap recovery and install aokp with the latest and greatest development kernel. Isn't that why all this great development exists? For us to make our devices better and faster? I think so. I'd recommend aokp and m-kernel to every nexus 7 owner. I wish more people would try non-stock.
scottx . said:
I've overclocked all of my devices since my first HTC hero. I really don't see a big deal with hardware life.
I know that this n7 runs games better at 1.6ghz than at 1.3ghz.
First thing I do when I get a new device is swap recovery and install aokp with the latest and greatest development kernel. Isn't that why all this great development exists? For us to make our devices better and faster? I think so. I'd recommend aokp and m-kernel to every nexus 7 owner. I wish more people would try non-stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you mean the pub builds of AOKP? Or Dirty AOKP
Ty
bftb0 said:
Thanks. Any particular workload that does this, or is the throttle pretty easy to hit with arbitrary long-running loads?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stability Test will do it reliably. Other workloads don't tend to run long enough to trigger it that I've seen.
And why is a quadcore magically "not to be overclocked"? Single threaded performance is still a major bottleneck.
Bitweasil said:
Stability Test will do it reliably. Other workloads don't tend to run long enough to trigger it that I've seen.
And why is a quadcore magically "not to be overclocked"? Single threaded performance is still a major bottleneck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Bitweasil,
I fooled around a little more with my horrid little threaded cpu-blaster code. Combined simultaneously with something gpu-intensive such as the OpenGL ES benchmark (which runs for 10-12 minutes), I observed peak temps (Tj) of about 83C with the stock kernel. That's a ridiculous load, though. I can go back and repeat the test, but from 40C it probably takes several minutes to get there. No complaints about anything in the kernel logs other than the EDP down-clocking, but that happens just as soon as the second cpu comes on line, irrespective of temperature. With either of the CPU-only or GPU-only stressors, the highest I saw was a little over 70C. (But, I don't live in the tropics!)
To your question - I don't think there is much risk of immediate hardware damage, so long as bugs don't creep into throttling code, or kernel bugs don't cause a flaw that prevents the throttling or down-clocking code from being serviced while the device is running in a "performance" condition. And long-term reliability problems will be no worse if the cumulative temperature excursions of the device are not higher than what than what they would be using stock configurations.
The reason that core voltages are stepped up at higher clock rates (& more cores online) is to preserve both logic and timing closure margins across *all possible paths* in the processor. More cores running means that the power rails inside the SoC package are noisier - so logic levels are a bit more uncertain, and faster clocking means there is less time available per clock for logic levels to stabilize before data gets latched.
Well, Nvidia has reasons for setting their envelope the way they do - not because of device damage considerations, but because they expect to have a pretty small fraction of devices that will experience timing faults *anywhere along millions of logic paths* under all reasonable operating conditions. Reducing the margin, whether by undervolting at high frequencies, or increasing max frequencies, or allowing more cores to run at peak frequencies will certainly increase the fraction of devices that experience logic failures along at least one path (out of millions!). Whether or not OC'ing will work correctly on an individual device can not be predicted in advance; the only thing that Nvidia can estimate is a statistical quantity - about what percent of devices will experience logic faults under a given operating conditon.
Different users will have different tolerance for faults. A gamer might have very high tolerance for random reboots, lockups, file system corruption, et cetera. Different story if you are composing a long email to your boss under deadline and your unit suddenly turns upside down.
No doubt there (theoretically) exists an overclocking implementation where 50% of all devices would have a logic failure within (say) 1 day of operation. That kind of situation would be readily detected in a small number of forum reports. But what about if it were a 95%/5% situation? One out of twenty dudes report a problem, and it is dismissed with some crazy recommendation such as "have you tried re-flashing your ROM?". And fault probability accumulates with time, especially when the testing loads have very poor path coverage. 5% failure over one day will be higher over a 30 day period - potentially much higher.
That's the crux of the matter. Processor companies spend as much as 50% of their per-device engineering budgets on test development. In some cases they actually design & build a second companion processor (that rivals the complexity of the first!) whose only function is to act as a test engine for the processor that will be shipped. Achieving decent test coverage is a non-trivial problem, and it is generally attacked with extremely disciplined testing over temperature/voltage/frequency with statistically significant numbers of devices - using test-vector sets (& internal test generators) that are known to provide a high level of path coverage. The data that comes from random ad-hoc reports on forums from dudes running random applications in an undisciplined way on their OC'ed units is simply not comparable. (Even "stressor" apps have very poor path coverage).
But, as I said, different folks have different tolerance for risk. Random data corruption is acceptable if the unit in question has nothing on it of value.
I poked my head in the M-kernel thread the other day; I thought I saw a reference to "two units fried" (possibly even one belonging to the dev?). I assume you are following that thread ... did I misinterpret that?
cheers
I don't disagree.
But, I'd argue that the stock speeds/voltages/etc are designed for the 120% case - they're supposed to work for about 120% of shipped chips. In other words, regardless of conditions, the stock clocks/voltages need to be reliable, with a nice margin on top.
Statistically, most of the chips will be much better than this, and that's the headroom overclocking plays in.
I totally agree that you eventually will get some logic errors, somewhere, at some point. But there's a lot of headroom in most devices/chips before you get to that point.
My use cases are heavily bursty. I'll do complex PDF rendering on the CPU for a second or two, then it goes back to sleep while I read the page. For this type of use, I'm quite comfortable with having pushed clocks hard. For sustained gaming, I'd run it lower, though I don't really game.
hi guys i just want to know what is the max overclock of the cpu and the gpu for the nexus 7 ( please has to be has safe as possible, i dont want to damage the tablet too much, and yes i know that overcloking will reduce the life of the tablet) I want to get the best performance out of this tablet!!!!!
Note: battery drain is not a problem!!! I will use the nexus 7 for gaming most of the time and also browsing!!!
Please I really want to know i created an account on this site for this!!!
Most people can go to 1600 on the CPU. Any real world performance increase from the stock 1300 is negligible.
I wouldn't overclock the GPU past 446 (+30) because anything higher creates a lot of heat and people have reported benchmarks actually being lower once you go much higher than that.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
Thanks
Thanks for the help
If someone wants say something else go head
More Help the better
Hi, tbh you'll probably not notice much if you overclock the cpu to 1.6ghz as percentage wise it isn't a large jump. Things may feel a little zippy at times though, in my house I have acces to two n7's, one stock and one overclockable to 1.6ghz. Ran tests between them and the 1.6ghz was fractionally faster, the difference was very small. Overclocking the gpu to 600mhz vs 416mhz at stock made a huge difference, as it it made some games actually playable. Despite the crap Nivida spit out about the tega 3 soc, it's GPU is comparatively weak. Over-clocking the GPU will give immediate performance increase in a lot of games. After doing heat and clock speed tests myself, I've found anything in-between 416-600mhz to give near enough liner performance increase and heat to be long term sustainable depending on the voltages your device can handle. Overall, I doubt CPU overclocking will give you much benifit, but if you play games the gpu overclock will. If your worried about heat from overclocking the gpu a lot, you can always use this kernel http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1937146, which gives you full GPU clock and voltage control so you can undervolt your gpu to reduce heat. I wouldn't run at 600mhz unless I could undervolt the gpu as much as I have and I use that kernel because of it. I have my gpu overclocked to 600mhz running at 1225mV, which is only +25mV above stock voltage for 416mhz. Although most heat is generated from the transition period of the transistor charging/ discharging, undervoting does give a large positive effect on heat output if it's large enough. But 600mhz is a high GPU clock and the highest I'd recommend, tbh I would say 520mhz is a really good compromise between heat, performance and battery, especially if you under-volt the GPU at that frequency for most people if your not as annal with FPS as I am :silly:
Thanks Too
Thanks Too
I'm glad I have registered in this forum because people are so cool in here and they help alot compared to other foruns!!!
Thanks again for the Help!!!!
AW: Nexus 7 Overcloking
You all probably have seen those 2GHz oc screenshots.Are those real?I'm not wanting to try this I'm just curious.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
They are probably real
yes i have almost sure they are real, but puting the nexus 7 in 2Ghz will, i think will damage a lot the tablet!!!
The 2 GHz kernel was a test to see how far the Nexus 7 could be pushed. This kernel wasn't released for obvious reasons so yes, those pics/ benchmarks were true.
So as you can see by these screenshots only 4 of my eight cores are working.. Is there any way to fix this??
(Here's the album i mgur. c 0 m/ a /2FWDH
Any help would be extremely appreciated..
gyropepsi said:
So as you can see by these screenshots only 4 of my eight cores are working.. Is there any way to fix this??
(Here's the album i mgur. c 0 m/ a /2FWDH
Any help would be extremely appreciated..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What makes you think that only 4 cores are working?
I don't know in the Android world, but in PCs the applications must be written expressly to use more than one core. And the SD 615 has 4 cores that runs at 1.7 MHz max and the other 4 at 1.0 MHz max, but the frequencies could be lowered by phone makers to increase battery duration.
BubuXP said:
What makes you think that only 4 cores are working?
I don't know in the Android world, but in PCs the applications must be written expressly to use more than one core. And the SD 615 has 4 cores that runs at 1.7 MHz max and the other 4 at 1.0 MHz max, but the frequencies could be lowered by phone makers to increase battery duration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but I had my phone on performance mode and it's using half of the cores, if the other 4 max at 1.0mhz then why are all games that I play (3D Wise) are slow? Is there any way I could fix it? Could overclocking via CPU managing apps (using root,) work in my situation?
gyropepsi said:
Yeah but I had my phone on performance mode and it's using half of the cores, if the other 4 max at 1.0mhz then why are all games that I play (3D Wise) are slow? Is there any way I could fix it? Could overclocking via CPU managing apps (using root,) work in my situation?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Four cores are high-performance, and four cores are low-power. The performance cores suck up a lot of battery, so not for use with background tasks. The low-power cores are useless for pretty much anything but background tasks, so they're not for use with gaming, etc. The fact that your apps are only using four cores is normal.
Also, as for your gaming performance, I've actually done some testing on this and it turns out that on the ZE551KL, the GPU is way underpowered. No amount of overclocking can fix the abysmal GPU performance on the ZE551KL. This doesn't seem to happen on other models, either, so... yeah.
@gyropepsi: yes, that's correct, the eight cores are not "equal". You have four cores for general CPU use and another four for higher CPU use. They cannot be used in the same time, they get switched to save power. It's actually called "dual quad-core".
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/snapdragon-615-processor-product-brief
Other manufacturers have one core for low processing and four for high processing. Those phones are doing great in tests but they really suck in daily usage.
@sensi277: I would't say abysmal performance, but yes, it seems to be lower than the Selfie in some tests. However it moves VERY good for a phone, 3D tests on phones are just for kids, to brag about their phones. Nobody does real gaming on a phone.
SoNic67 said:
@sensi277: I would't say abysmal performance, but yes, it seems to be lower than the Selfie in some tests. However it moves VERY good for a phone, 3D tests on phones are just for kids, to brag about their phones. Nobody does real gaming on a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
?
Except, I do real gaming on my phone. Or at least, I try to. Laser GPU holds back most games, though.
Why? You don't have a laptop, desktop? Phone gaming experience is horrid no matter what. No good controls, no immersion...
Sent from my ASUS_Z00TD using Tapatalk
Here is some info about big.LITTLE processing:
https://www.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/biglittleprocessing.php
Sent from my ASUS_Z00TD using XDA-Developers mobile app