3 ms·
You are comparing a very purpose-built chip in the original watch to a general purpose microprocessor in this design. The original won't have a single extra tr
by MegaDeKay 3y ago
You are comparing a very purpose-built chip in the original watch to a general purpose microprocessor in this design. The original won't have a single extra transistor than it needs, and it won't be operating one Hz faster than it needs to. Not a surprise to me.
And in reality, the real-life battery life of the Sensor Watch will drop further if you actually attach actual sensors to it or (I'd expect) start running your own code on it.
- josecastillo 3y agoThe Movement framework for developing watch faces tries to steer folks toward low power consumption by default; the watch spends most of its time in standby, and a custom watch face only runs code once per loop (which is once a second by default, although you can request more frequent updates from 1 to 128 Hz). This means most watch faces can actually stay under 10 µA as long as they don't need to update too frequently; up to about 16 Hz, power consumption remains decent. Anecdotally, my daily driver is coming up on 550 days on the same CR2016 coin cell from February 2022, and I think it's on track to make it to 2024. A far cry from the original's 7+ year battery life, but still pretty good considering all it's capable of!
- MegaDeKay 3y agoThat is really impressive!!! Are you able to do some kind of power management on any attachable sensors as well besides whatever their standby current is?