Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 48 of 48
  1. #41  
    My battery was great on 1.4 with the 800patch, so i decided to install it in 1.4.1.1 and the battery drains really fast to a point where it is not usable. I think ima uninstall it since it is not really made for 1.4.1.1 anyways, just wanted to push my luck a little.
  2. #42  
    I'm trying the 800/500 suggestion; it seems to make the most sense.

    Viewing a random YouTube video shows no noticeable artifacting. Very pleased!
  3. #43  
    The next day: I see noticeable artifacting before starting and when pausing videos but nothing during playback. I find that acceptable.

    However, twice today I've tried to wake the phone only to find it completely powered off and the only way to bring it back up is to pull the battery. I don't know that enabling 800/500 scaling is the cause but I've disabled it for now and will keep an eye out for the same symptoms.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by idontwan2know View Post
    It's not credible that increasing the clock speed of your CPU has vastly improved your battery life.

    More likely is that the battery monitor is not calibrated properly and will correct out over several days, or that your usage patterns have changed.
    it is very much credible getting longer battery life with increased clock speed. hence web sites load faster text messaging is quicker and everything else.. so the day to day tasks you do with your phone probably take half the amount of time as they did before hence the phone being idle with screen off. where is before took longer with longer screen time. the hit the faster clockspeed takes on the battery is definitely greater then the old 500mhz but the longer screen time being on takes a larger hit on the battery then the faster clock speed..

    not by any means is anything i just said tested and is just my personal theory.
    MatterOfFactJack
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by WalterH View Post
    I don't get it, so i have to tell you to get some insight...

    My Pre (non +) used to drain the battery rather fast. About 7%/hour when idle and much more when in use. From the forum posts i learned that it should be 4-5%/hour when idle (right?)

    But after i installed the 800 MHz patch i noticed a much better battery performance. Yesterday i showed a friend the tethering capabilities (MyTether) of my Pre. He's an iphone user and was quite impressed, needless to say.

    After that i put the Pre away and forgot about it. About 3 hours later the Pre noticed me that battery was empty - only then i remembered that i didn't turn off tethering.

    The Pre was at about 80% when i enabled it and lasted another 3 hours. I was used to about 2 hours with fresh batteries.

    So today i started battery monitor and put the Pre away to idle around. I only used it occasionally for 2 short calls, a few contact searches and a preware search.

    Now look at attached screenshot: 77% when i started battery monitor, 67% 7 hours later, about 1.5% drain/hour. These are actual data from today, nothing photoshopped.

    It was on 3G for the first about 2 hours, then WLAN.

    What gives? That's an unbelievable improvement and i just don't get it. From way too much power consumption to 1.5%.

    Any ideas?

    -Walter (currently very happy with his Pre)
    You didn't get an improvement in battery life from the patch. You got it from draining the battery down to nothing. At which point the circuitry in the battery and phone communicate and tell the WebOS what is going on. The WebOS keeps the new settings and your good to go. No more massive battery drain.

    Problem is that over time, the WebOS seems to 'lose' calibration on the battery. And more often than not, a WebOS patch totally fubars the calibration.
  6. #46  
    Steve----excellent information. Thanks a lot.

    Where can we all go and read more about these parcitular parameters (up threshold, sampling_rate, bias)? You mention documentation. From where?

    I have been given different settings for those (11 for threshold, and bias as 1), so I want to read on what those truly mean, and then I will play and decide on my own.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by NABRIL15 View Post
    Steve----excellent information. Thanks a lot.

    Where can we all go and read more about these parcitular parameters (up threshold, sampling_rate, bias)? You mention documentation. From where?

    I have been given different settings for those (11 for threshold, and bias as 1), so I want to read on what those truly mean, and then I will play and decide on my own.
    The documentation is provided as part of the Linux kernel. There are various sites generously hosting viewable archives of the kernel; for example LXR / The Linux Cross Reference . The ultimate reference is of course the source code itself, and ondemand.c is fairly well commented, as seen at LXR / The Linux Cross Reference . Intel's site at LessWatts.org - Saving Power on Intel systems with Linux has a lot of useful background information, as well.

    Cheers, Steve
  8. #48  
    if i do this how can i undo it?
    thanks
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions