Most preferred overclocking app

Which OC'ing app do you prefer?


  • Total voters
    0

pharmnatr

Active member
Jul 19, 2010
38
1
0
Visit site
JRummys has Super LV, LV, Moderate, High, and Stock Settings tab. There are twelve presets for frequently ranging from 700 mhz to 1.45 ghz. Three slots each.

I have three profiles set and a 110 second delay to apply OC on boot. Adjusted wifi scan time, the STAGEFRIGHT settings off, and Governed is on demand. I have the setcpu widget updating every 30 sec and it stays at 400mhz most times, occasionally it will be at 1250mhz.

I also removed the boot animation for a faster boot, activated the add blocker, cleaned my cache and moved chaches and apps to SD all from that Jrummys app.

And I didn't touch several other extras because I didn't know what they do and my stock setting is higher than the presets. Don't know if higher is better with the DalvikVM Heap and Max events?

Whats the advantage of moving caches to sd card?
 

.46caliber

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2010
740
44
0
Visit site
Ok how about this... which of these OC apps have undervoltage capabilities? That's something I'd like to experiment with as well.

JRummy has a number of undervolting options that work well. Unstable Apps caused my phone to be, well...unstable. Installing and consequently running that app on my device caused it to run slow, force closes and many battery pulls.

JRummy's has been smooth sailing other than my device. I can use his 1.15 GHz profiles, but as soon as I go 1.2GHz or higher, my phone does not cooperate. I guess I have a slightly different build that does not respond as well to higher overclock figures.
 

Stang68

Well-known member
Mar 15, 2010
2,270
99
0
Visit site
So I just installed Jrummy's app and created two profiles. Can you guys tell me if this is smart?:

Profile one: 50 - Screen Off - 400mhz Max/400mhz Min
Profile two: 50 - Screen On - 1200mhz Max/1000mhz Min

Is this right? Is it safe? lol Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, guys.
 

JungleLarry

Well-known member
Dec 2, 2010
663
15
0
Visit site
There's no reason to have your minimum frequency on your 'screen on' profile set that high. You should also give the 'screen off' profile a higher priority. I have 'screen on' as my lowest priority in my list of profiles.

If you keep those profiles, monitor your CPU temperature closely. Running at 1+ GHz constantly while your screen is on may take its toll. Keep your max where it is, but roll your min back to 400 MHz.
 

Stang68

Well-known member
Mar 15, 2010
2,270
99
0
Visit site
Ok, I made some of those changes. But what exactly does priority do? Don't they all run when they're supposed to?
 

JungleLarry

Well-known member
Dec 2, 2010
663
15
0
Visit site
Ok, I made some of those changes. But what exactly does priority do? Don't they all run when they're supposed to?
Yeah, but I do it to avoid "confusion," if you will.

I have profiles for screen off, three battery levels, and screen on. I make sure my 'screen on' profile is lower priority than the battery level profiles so they don't conflict. I also make sure the 'screen off' profile is higher priority than all battery level profiles for the same reason. By virtue of the transitive property the 'screen on' profile ends up on bottom!

My profiles are set for maximum battery performance while maintaining good speed. You may have different preferences.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
943,011
Messages
6,916,883
Members
3,158,773
Latest member
Chelsea rae