[HTC EVO 3D] mikeyxda:
Makes sense to me. That's what I was hoping people would do anyway! I've done it and have my own opinion. But one doesn't make a "sample". If you like, I could take all the init.d tweaks that are in DE 2.0 including the init.post-boot.sh and put them into a DE-20-backtostock.zip flash. And another one called clearalltweaks.zip or something like that which gets rid of all the init.d tweaks. Then if you want to test with no other tweaks, flash clearalltweaks and then flash the one you want to test. If you wanna go back to the as-installed DE 2.0, flash DE-20-backtostock. Would that help? That'd keep you from having to recompile entire ROM's just to handle a few small files.

:) I enjoy the tit-for-tat. I'm just glad we can both discuss this civilly without trying to say which are tits and which are tats. :D

I'm a fan of testing mods out on the track and not by committee, so I hope we can have others tests both tweaks. The performance is neck and neck on GabersDemand vs awakenings for me, but I get many times better battery life with awakenings. And I only use benchmarks as a sanity check. I'm talking real performance. I test things like how smoothly the launcher scrolls, how fast apps open and close, how smoothly you can pinch/zoom in different apps, how smooth certain games run, and one of my favorites: how much lag those types of things have when something else is happening in the background like a large email coming in. When I test, I actually kick off a CPU intensive command and then switch out and do something else while that is running in the background to see how the system handles multitasking. I don't see any user-noticeable difference between the two tweaks WRT real performance. Both perform exceptionally well when it comes to snappiness and lack of lag: having that second core online really helps especially when something else is running in the background. It's the battery life that makes awakenings pull (way) ahead in my tests. But I'd sure appreciate more testers. We all have different setups and run different apps.

One question for you CG. This question relates to your "race to idle" principle where you think it's a good idea to go full throttle for a fraction of a second in order to get back to idle state faster. Again, based on pure physics, that makes little sense. If you look at your CPU graph versus mine or you go look at the stats file outside of System Tuner, it won't matter, awakenings will spend a LOT more time at 384Mhz. If we're talking about idle time where the phone doesn't have much to do and you look at any time window (1 min, 1 hour, etc.), awakenings will have gotten the same tasks done in that time but will have stayed at 384Mhz doing it.

Now, I'm not convinced that the many frequency hops caused by GabersDemand are even responding to actual load! But let's say they are just for argument's sake. All that means is that when a momentary short-burst task appears (could be as simple as the system updating battery percentage), GabersDemand will go full throttle and get the task done in 50ms whereas awakenings will stay at 384Mhz and get the task done in 200ms. With the system idling most of the time, it's not like it'll get behind at the slower speed. All tasks within a given time window are still going to get done. With awakenings, they'll all get done at 384Mhz while GabersDemand will spend half it's time at full throttle to accomplish the same tasks over time!

The physics is simple: V=IR. At 384, the CPU(s) are going to run at a much lower voltage. About 1.4 times lower than when they run at 1.5Ghz! Voltage/power doesn't change depending on what the CPU is doing so as long as it is running at 384Mhz, it is drawing the same current versus drawing 1.4 times that amount of current when it hops up to 1.5Ghz. Yes, if it takes the CPU longer to complete a series of operations that access memory, sdcard, the radio, etc. those other devices (other than the CPU) might draw more current momentarily because the operations take longer at 384Mhz but I doubt that can counteract the fact that the entire system is run at 1.4x the voltage while at the higher clock rate.

And the reason I say I don't believe GabersDemand is necessarily responding to real load... it samples CPU load 100 times/sec. That means any micro-task that takes more than about 8 milliseconds (your up_threshold is set to 75) will cause a frequency spike. I don't think you want to respond to a few short instructions like that because in reality, many of them may be 90% complete (or have already completed) by the time you ramp up the frequency! Then it comes right back down 10ms later, not having done any good at all except raise system voltage.

But the proof is really in the pudding. I get the same performance with either tweak but much better battery life with awakenings. And I think a few others here have indicated the same but we really need people to test both and/or speak up to be sure.

Mike