Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 304
  1. #201  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    That is interesting, because the palm battery is 3.7v while the Seidio is 3.6v.

    Another possibility could be you noticed a speed increase because changing the battery would have resulted in a soft reset.
    eeeehhh...miss that one. Totally makes sense.
    at&t iPhone3G
  2. #202  
    The speed increase I noticed was with the Palm Standard Battery. I think, as someone previously mentioned, that the contacts with the extended don't line up perfectly.
  3. dcpmark's Avatar
    Posts
    560 Posts
    Global Posts
    562 Global Posts
    #203  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    Another possibility could be you noticed a speed increase because changing the battery would have resulted in a soft reset.
    Hmmm.....I have never noticed an increase in pBench scores following a soft reset, Ink. Only a hard reset. Can you confirm that soft resets result in faster pBench times? If not, then maybe the speed issue is not related to data access times if speed can be increased without an increase in pBench times......
  4.    #204  
    I'm using a Seidio 2200mAh extended battery. I wonder if the slightly larger 2400mAh battery is the one that doesn't line up correctly?
  5. #205  
    I have the 2400mAh battery and it fits fine in the 700P
  6. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #206  
    Quote Originally Posted by dcpmark
    Hmmm.....I have never noticed an increase in pBench scores following a soft reset, Ink. Only a hard reset. Can you confirm that soft resets result in faster pBench times? If not, then maybe the speed issue is not related to data access times if speed can be increased without an increase in pBench times......
    I don't have any numbers at the moment, as i have been doing testing with hardresets. I would need to run the treo a couple of days without a reset so the DBcache fills to test for slowdown. Perhaps someone else who has not had any resets in the past couple of days could run pbench, softreset, then run pbench again.
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre
  7. dcpmark's Avatar
    Posts
    560 Posts
    Global Posts
    562 Global Posts
    #207  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    Perhaps someone else who has not had any resets in the past couple of days could run pbench, softreset, then run pbench again.
    Sorry....I've been slowly testing 1054 roms for PalmMame, resulting in numerous soft resets as I go.
  8. #208  
    Quote Originally Posted by 2000 Man
    I guess that 20% slower than the 650 = "lightning fast" for the 700p.
    The fact that the issue is with data access is why it is not having an "across the board" effect on the 700p's performance and why, depending on device use, some people are having more issues than others.

    Again, for how I use my 700p this isn't causing me huge problems. I guess the reason I'm sort of laid back about the whole thing right now is that there isn't a whole lot we can do aside from making sure Palm knows about it. Hopefully it is just a case of someone not tweaking the OS enough and it can be fixed with a ROM update. The alternative is that it is a hardware / design limitation or an inherent OS limitation in which case then we're all pretty much SOL.
  9.    #209  
    Quote Originally Posted by ajabbari
    The fact that the issue is with data access is why it is not having an "across the board" effect on the 700p's performance and why, depending on device use, some people are having more issues than others.

    Again, for how I use my 700p this isn't causing me huge problems. I guess the reason I'm sort of laid back about the whole thing right now is that there isn't a whole lot we can do aside from making sure Palm knows about it. Hopefully it is just a case of someone not tweaking the OS enough and it can be fixed with a ROM update. The alternative is that it is a hardware / design limitation or an inherent OS limitation in which case then we're all pretty much SOL.
    Luckily, Jeff Gibson disagrees with you. If you read his quote, he found that the data access problem affects nearly everything on the 700p but was confident that Palm would be able to fix the problem in short order. Hopefully he's correct about it being a software issue.
  10.    #210  
    Quote Originally Posted by irabren
    I have the 2400mAh battery and it fits fine in the 700P
    Good to know.
  11. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #211  
    Quote Originally Posted by dcpmark
    Can you confirm that soft resets result in faster pBench times?
    OK after a couple days of use I benchmarked with pbench before and after a soft reset here are the results

    Before soft reset 438
    After soft reset 465

    Not much of a difference but there is some. Of course, there was much more of a difference after a hard reset.
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre
  12. dcpmark's Avatar
    Posts
    560 Posts
    Global Posts
    562 Global Posts
    #212  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    OK after a couple days of use I benchmarked with pbench before and after a soft reset here are the results

    Before soft reset 438
    After soft reset 465

    Not much of a difference but there is some. Of course, there was much more of a difference after a hard reset.
    Probably not enough to be noticed as a speed difference......are we back to square one on the standard battery vs. extended battery issue?
  13.    #213  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    OK after a couple days of use I benchmarked with pbench before and after a soft reset here are the results

    Before soft reset 438
    After soft reset 465

    Not much of a difference but there is some. Of course, there was much more of a difference after a hard reset.
    Those numbers are pretty awful. Have you tried a different battery? It certainly sounds unlikely that it would make any difference.
  14. #214  
    Why not eliminate that variable? plug into AC power.

    Edit: seems I didn't grasp the whole context of the battery discussion.

    Having 3.6V as opposed to 3.7V IMO could make a small difference however not much. I of course don't have a extended battery so I can't figure out for myself.

    However as for contacts not lining up perfectly... I don't see this as being a problem unless some do not touch. Whether or not the contact hits the center of the battery terminal or the far edge shouldn't make a difference as I imagine the resistance is pretty much nothing. I don't know the engineering of the battery however as far as why there's *six* pins.

    So if one pin isn't touching that may knock out a cell and significantly decrease the power to the device... I'm guessing (without any real idea whatsoever) that there's two cells in the battery, thus two sets of positive and negetive, and that there's two pins for some type of status check. If anyone actually knows what the pinout is or has a better idea... let's get it.
    Last edited by ryan42; 07/10/2006 at 05:44 AM.
  15. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #215  
    I played around with different amounts of free memory and test if how it effects data access speed with pbench. All I did was either fill my internal memory with apps that I would normally leave on the SD card or move everything to the SD (all with PowerRun).

    Here are my results

    Available memory ------------ Data access speed
    16.7 mb-------------------------------428
    37.1 mb-------------------------------461
    39.0 mb ------------------------------560
    48.9 mb------------------------------ 604
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre
  16. #216  
    I got that battery last week and I would qualify it to say it barely fits. The battery cover is a much much tighter fit than with the standard battery. It seems like it will be OK, but if I had known it would be this tight I would not have bought it.

    Quote Originally Posted by irabren
    I have the 2400mAh battery and it fits fine in the 700P
    Main Phone: Treo 270/600/650/700w/700p/750v/Motorola Q/iPhone
    Tried but sold: Motorola Q/Nokia E61/700wx/HTC TyTN/Treo 680
  17. #217  
    Quote Originally Posted by bcaslis
    I got that battery last week and I would qualify it to say it barely fits. The battery cover is a much much tighter fit than with the standard battery. It seems like it will be OK, but if I had known it would be this tight I would not have bought it.
    I just got the 2400 and the battery cover fits the same as with the stock battery. The 2400 actually fits looser in my Seidio USB charger than the Stock Battery does go figure.
  18. #218  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    I played around with different amounts of free memory and test if how it effects data access speed with pbench. All I did was either fill my internal memory with apps that I would normally leave on the SD card or move everything to the SD (all with PowerRun).

    Here are my results

    Available memory ------------ Data access speed
    16.7 mb-------------------------------428
    37.1 mb-------------------------------461
    39.0 mb ------------------------------560
    48.9 mb------------------------------ 604
    Those results concur with mine -- that as my main memory fills up, the pBench data access score goes down. However, the lower score yielded no discernable impact on performance in my case. Did your system slow down?
  19.    #219  
    Quote Originally Posted by ink883
    I played around with different amounts of free memory and test if how it effects data access speed with pbench. All I did was either fill my internal memory with apps that I would normally leave on the SD card or move everything to the SD (all with PowerRun).

    Here are my results

    Available memory ------------ Data access speed
    16.7 mb-------------------------------428
    37.1 mb-------------------------------461
    39.0 mb ------------------------------560
    48.9 mb------------------------------ 604
    Yikes! Those are some horrendous numbers! They do back up my theory about filling up the RAM causing even greater delays in the database access speeds. I'm sure that some slowdown may be unavoidable and a price that we must pay for the extra RAM, but 428 is just pathetic.

    I'm spoken with Palm about it but they couldn't give me any ideas as to when a fix would be available. The good news is that they weren't surprised to hear about the results so they must have already known about the problem.
  20. ink883's Avatar
    Posts
    872 Posts
    Global Posts
    883 Global Posts
    #220  
    Quote Originally Posted by SonnyS
    the lower score yielded no discernable impact on performance in my case. Did your system slow down?
    I did notice a slow down between the 428 and the 604. But not as much as after a hard reset.
    Visor --> Visor Platinum --> Treo 300 --> Treo 600 --> Treo 650 --> Treo 700p --> Treo 755p --> Treo 800w --> Palm Pre

Posting Permissions