[kernel][Overclocked] Overclocked kernel

[Guest cobhc]

Just to let you know... Been trying to understand how the overclocking works the last few days and I have done some improvements...

(all Neocore scores are without sound)

600MHz (stock frequency)

Linpack : 3.665, 3.716

Neocore : 37.4, 36.9, 35.8(hwui)

Quadrant: 379, 406 (hwui)

691.2MHz (overclocked)

Linpack : 4.381, 4.272, 4.376, 4.347(hwui)

Neocore : 42.2, 42.4, 37.2(hwui)

Quadrant: 447, 474, 473(hwui), 507(hwui)

For those who have tried the some benchmarks with the "old" overclocking know the only score that improves is the linpack score. Neocore with the old method goes down to something like 28fps when overclocked to 691.2MHz. Quadrant usally got down scores around 350-370. There's still a performance penalty in Neocore when enabling hardware UI accelleration. Quadrant on the other hand increases slightly with hardware UI.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you you've been testing the old overclocking kernel and saw improvements in Neocore without HW UI enabled? I'm sure I tried this the other day with your Finnish rom and as soon as I flashed the 691mhz zip my Neocore went down to 27FPS?

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Unless I'm misunderstanding you you've been testing the old overclocking kernel and saw improvements in Neocore without HW UI enabled? I'm sure I tried this the other day with your Finnish rom and as soon as I flashed the 691mhz zip my Neocore went down to 27FPS?

What you experience is the old overclocking code but I've made several improvments too it and it no longer kills 3D performance (among other things). I'll release the new kernel with Finnish Fillyjonk RLS3.

[Guest cobhc]

What you experience is the old overclocking code but I've made several improvments too it and it no longer kills 3D performance (among other things). I'll release the new kernel with Finnish Fillyjonk RLS3.

Cool, I will definitely have to check that out, as you know I'm very interested in overclocking the Blade :) Can you/have you tried higher frequencies?

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Cool, I will definitely have to check that out, as you know I'm very interested in overclocking the Blade :) Can you/have you tried higher frequencies?

The new kernel will default to 600MHz but will support up to whatever I choose to put as the upper limit. No more need for different kernels. You will need to install SetCPU and select your overclocking. I know from previous experience that my blade can run at 691.2MHz stable but I've been able to run at 748MHz for shorter periods. Almost managed to get through Quadrant benchmark at 748.8Mhz. I did get through it at 729.6MHz. I'll propably put the upper limit at 768MHz as I do not expect anyone to run higher than that stable. Most people will propably not get past 710.4 without loosing stability.

EDIT: Neocore at 729.6MHz (hw UI turned off)

EDIT2: Quadrant at 729.6MHz (hw UI off)

EDIT3: Linpack at 729.6MHz

Edited December 14, 2010 by kallt_kaffe

[Guest Dashes]

Looks great! So enabling hwui still decreases 3d performance? Possible release date of RLS3?

Edited December 14, 2010 by Dashes

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Looks great! So enabling hwui still decreases 3d performance?

Yes it does, not sure why, but it does...

Possible release date of RLS3?

When it's done... but likely this week.

[Guest The-One]

Can you share your kernel source kallt, well at least the files that you changed?

(i saw those at the 2.3 thread but i do not know if they are the last ones with the changes you made to the oc)

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Can you share your kernel source kallt, well at least the files that you changed?

(i saw those at the 2.3 thread but i do not know if they are the last ones with the changes you made to the oc)

Yes, I will share the new acpuclock.c when it's finished.

[Guest The-One]

Ok, thank you :)

[Guest cobhc]

Yes, I will share the new acpuclock.c when it's finished.

I might sound a little stupid here with this question, but this can't be applied to a Froyo kernel can it?

Edit: Anyone else find it amusing that a Blade at 729mhz running Eclair scores the same in Quadrant as a Desire/N1 running at 1ghz on Eclair? :)

Edited December 14, 2010 by cobhc

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

I might sound a little stupid here with this question, but this can't be applied to a Froyo kernel can it?

The source needs to be released first, then we can overclock it.

[Guest cobhc]

The source needs to be released first, then we can overclock it.

I was almost 100% sure that was the case, but thought it was worth asking anyway :)

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Just for fun... more benchmarks at 729.6MHz when I turned off whatever I could think of like background data sync, automatic brightness, killed all unneeded apps etc...

To make it a fair comparison, here's the result with the stock kernel under the same setup:

.

Edited December 15, 2010 by kallt_kaffe

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Hmm... I just realized I've accidently overclocked the AHB bus from 200Mhz to 364.8MHz in the example above. Seems like AHB overclocking has very noticable effect on Quadrant benchmarks but I'm not sure it's safe to go that high. I'm going to try a little bit more conservative AHB overclock...

EDIT:

A more conservative AHB overclocking didn't allow me to go above 729.6 without freezing rather quickly.

Linpack and Neocore isn't affected that much but Quadrant scores goes down. It's propably the file read/write parts in Quadrant that benefits from AHB overclocking. I'll propably make two kernels. One with safer AHB speeds and one that boosts the AHB speed from the 400MHz level and upwards.

Edited December 15, 2010 by kallt_kaffe

[Guest cobhc]

Hmm... I just realized I've accidently overclocked the AHB bus from 200Mhz to 364.8MHz in the example above. Seems like AHB overclocking has very noticable effect on Quadrant benchmarks but I'm not sure it's safe to go that high. I'm going to try a little bit more conservative AHB overclock...

EDIT:

A more conservative AHB overclocking didn't allow me to go above 729.6 without freezing rather quickly.

Linpack and Neocore isn't affected that much but Quadrant scores goes down. It's propably the file read/write parts in Quadrant that benefits from AHB overclocking. I'll propably make two kernels. One with safer AHB speeds and one that boosts the AHB speed from the 400MHz level and upwards.

Forgive my ignorance, what is AHB?

[Guest rickywyatt]

is it this ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micr...performance_Bus

[Guest cobhc]

is it this ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Micr...performance_Bus

Could very well be, I'm guessing it's like a PCI bus speed on a computer?

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

I guess it would be good with more people testing this before FFJ RLS3... So here's two boot-images that can be used with FFJ RLS2.

Download: http://www.mediafire.com/?e22dvs9s7x9b7d3

Use fastboot to flash them and make sure you are running FFJ RLS2 first.

In both cases they will boot at 600MHz and you will need SetCPU to overclock. Get it here (or buy it in Market): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=505419

boot_overclocked.img

Up to 600MHz uses standard timings. Over 600MHz overclocks AHB bus but as much as the other version does.

Timings:

			cpu-speed				 ahb-speed

		{ 0, 400000, ACPU_PLL_2, 2, 2, 133333, 2, 5, 122880 },

		{ 1, 480000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 1, 160000, 2, 6, 122880 },

		{ 1, 600000, ACPU_PLL_2, 2, 1, 200000, 2, 7, 122880 },

		{ 1, 672000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 224000, 2, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 691200, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 230400, 2, 7, 128880 },

		{ 1, 710400, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 236800, 2, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 729600, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 243200, 2, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 748800, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 249600, 2, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 768000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 256000, 2, 7, 200000 },[/code]




[b]boot_ahb_overclocked.img[/b]

All frequencys over from 400MHz and upwards overclocks the AHB bus.



Timings:

[code]			cpu-speed				 ahb-speed

		{ 0, 400000, ACPU_PLL_2, 2, 2, 200000, 1, 5, 122880 },

		{ 1, 480000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 1, 240000, 1, 6, 122880 },

		{ 1, 600000, ACPU_PLL_2, 2, 1, 300000, 1, 7, 122880 },

		{ 1, 672000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 336000, 1, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 691200, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 345600, 1, 7, 128880 },

		{ 1, 710400, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 355200, 1, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 729600, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 364800, 1, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 748800, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 374400, 1, 7, 200000 },

		{ 1, 768000, ACPU_PLL_0, 4, 0, 384000, 1, 7, 200000 },

EDIT: Don't worry about the 128800 axi speed on 691200, I forgot to change that but it doesn't matter as it will be changed to 200000 automaticly anyway. Not sure what the axi bus is so don't ask. :)

EDIT2: Oh well...

AXI, the third generation of AMBA interface defined in the AMBA 3 specification, is targeted at high performance, high clock frequency system designs and includes features which make it very suitable for high speed sub-micrometer interconnect:

EDIT3: Attached all the changed files needed to compile a kernel with the latest ZTE source. acpuclock.c and freq_table.c is the ones that has been changed for the overclocking. freq_table.c was changed to make it always default to 600MHz max frequency the rest of the magic is in acpuclock.c

changedfiles.zip

Edited December 15, 2010 by kallt_kaffe

[Guest Dashes]

Looks great and stable(at 710mhz).

With ahb overclocked

at 710mhz:

Quadrant 525 cpu 466/memory 1160/ io 522/ 2d 120 / 3d 355

Neocore 41.4 FPS

Linpack 4.407

at 729mhz:

Quadrant 556 cpu 485 / memory 1238 / io 577 / 2d 123 / 3d 359

Neocore 41.9 FPS

Linpack 4.675

Freezes at 729mhz, gonna try with hwui on later.

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

Looks great and stable(at 710mhz).

With ahb overclocked

at 710mhz:

Quadrant 525 cpu 466/memory 1160/ io 522/ 2d 120 / 3d 355

Neocore 41.4 FPS

Linpack 4.407

at 729mhz:

Quadrant 556 cpu 485 / memory 1238 / io 577 / 2d 123 / 3d 359

Neocore 41.9 FPS

Linpack 4.675

Freezes at 729mhz, gonna try with hwui on later.

Could you reproduce the same benchmarks with the more conservative AHB clockings? I'd like to see which parts are affected by the AHB overclocking.

[Guest cobhc]

Ow damnit, why do you have to release this when I'm at work and can't test since I can't use fastboot here lol.

[Guest Dashes]

Could you reproduce the same benchmarks with the more conservative AHB clockings? I'd like to see which parts are affected by the AHB overclocking.

With conservative AHB clockings

at 710mhz:

Quadrant 417 cpu 472/memory 575/ io 573/ 2d 118 / 3d 349

Neocore 40.9 FPS

Linpack 4.533

Looks like the only difference is in memory speed.

[Guest kallt_kaffe]

With conservative AHB clockings

at 710mhz:

Quadrant 417 cpu 472/memory 575/ io 573/ 2d 118 / 3d 349

Neocore 40.9 FPS

Linpack 4.533

Looks like the only difference is in memory speed.

Sure looks like that. I suppose the memory access goes over the AHB then...

cpu 710.4MHz/AHB 236.8MHz/ cpu 472/memory 575 / io 573/ 2d 118 / 3d 349

cpu 710.4MHz/AHB 355.2MHz/ cpu 466/memory 1160/ io 522/ 2d 120 / 3d 355[/code]


The higher AHB clock seems to run just as stable as the lower one for me. 729.6MHz is almost stable so I've settled for 710.4MHz.

[Guest Dashes]

The higher AHB clock seems to run just as stable as the lower one for me. 729.6MHz is almost stable so I've settled for 710.4MHz.

Yep, same here. With hwui on it freezes even at 710MHz.

[Guest cobhc]

Ok, flashed the AHB oc kernel, and I hit 548 on quadrant at 710 mhz, slowly cranked it up, and now i'm at 768mhz hitting 584 on quadrant, so I'm benchmarking faster than a 1ghz nexus one/desire running eclair. Just amazing! Seems stable for the moment as well. And this is with HWUI turned on.

Edit, getting some lockups now, gonna drop it down a little.

Edited December 15, 2010 by cobhc