Hi, since I have an extra A20 board that doesn't have a specific purpose at the moment, I thought I do some experiments with it and test performance and reliability (among other things). One of my tests involved overclocking the board at stock voltage (1.4V) to see what the board can do. So I used cpufreq-ljt-stress-test and cpuburn-a7 as mentioned on the wiki[1]. What surprised me, though, was that the stress test neither runs for a very long time nor on both cores simultaniously. So, the test results suggest that my board can do 1104MHz at 1.4V (I didn't try higher frequencies because I didn't even expect that it would run stable at 1104 MHz without raising the voltage).
But I'm wondering - how reliable are these tests actually? I would have assumed that for the results to be meaningful it would be best to put as much stress on the CPU as possible and do that over a prolonged period. And if you have multiple cores, to put them under load simultaniously. It this assumption wrong? Is such extensive testing neglible in real life? Since I didn't trust the quick test, I quickly changed the script to to 600 iterations instead of 60. But, of course, that doesn't make it run on two cores. So, while running cpufreq-ljt-stress-test, I also ran cpuburn-a7 in the background which put both cores under load. The board still passed the test. What kind of tests or setups do you use to determine reliable settings? Thanks, Timo [1] http://linux-sunxi.org/Hardware_Reliability_Tests -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
