4 ms·
> Could we have it run in 010ms vs 250ms? if it runs once per hour, then it may be inconsequential; if it runs every 30s, then it might be an extra 1hr of batt
by leeoniya 4y ago
> Could we have it run in 010ms vs 250ms?
if it runs once per hour, then it may be inconsequential; if it runs every 30s, then it might be an extra 1hr of battery life for your phone, but people will still keep using it and not complain. is there a problem? maybe.
- thesz 4y ago30s is a 120 times per hour. Or, 30 sec of difference per hour between 250ms and 0 ms (instanteneous). To get a hour of difference my phone needs to have battery life of 120 hours. For more reasonable 10 hours of battery life I will get about 5 minutes saved. I see why no one will complain about that difference.
- leeoniya 4y agoyou might be right, but there's more to power consumption than CPU time. something that takes 250ms vs 10ms might wake more cores and/or prevent them from sleeping, might use high-perf cores instead of efficient cores, it might read from storage instead of from cache, etc. i've certainly seen a 10x improvement in one bottleneck turn into a 20x-30x improvement holistically, due to reduction in contention, back-pressure, etc; there is almost always a cascading/multiplier effect, in my experience.