Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

hj.diva-portal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#41

Post by actionfromafar »

toxik wrote: post #38

The institution credited, Jönköping University, is notable in Sweden for /not/ being a university and skirting the name issue by being named “Jönköping University” in Swedish as well. Make of that what you will but to me it seems like a con. diva-portal.org is not a journal, it is simply a repository of all academic texts from Swedish institutions.

Right, it's marketing to attract foreign students I believe and bad taste IMHO.

But the difference in practice between a college and a university in the US is not clear cut even there.

In Sweden the distinction between "högskola" (college, basically) and university is not super clear either.

One needs to look at the specific faculty in question to know if it's any good. This goes for all schools.

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#42

Post by arcanemachined »

calvinmorrison wrote: post #19
PaulHoule wrote: post #17

What's going to matter for audio streaming in an automotive (the case they are concerned about) is the energy consumption in the receiver, not the transmitter. They are measuring the second.

This is killing my in my newest stereo, the bluetooth will sleep if the phone is silent for more than 1 second, like a breathy pause during a audiobook. Then it takes a half second to kick back in. I haven't found anyone with a solution yet.

For iPhones, there is a background noise generator built into the phone (in Accessibility settings, controllable from the Control Center). On Android, a similar solution likely exists (one that continues to play even if other apps are playing audio).

You would just need to set one of those up, quiet enough not to be too annoying, but loud enough so that the stereo doesn't think its silent.

Also, there are audiobook players (for Android, at least) that skip over silent sections of the audio track.

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#43

Post by larkost »

actionfromafar wrote: post #41
toxik wrote: post #38

The institution credited, Jönköping University, is notable in Sweden for /not/ being a university and skirting the name issue by being named “Jönköping University” in Swedish as well. Make of that what you will but to me it seems like a con. diva-portal.org is not a journal, it is simply a repository of all academic texts from Swedish institutions.

Right, it's marketing to attract foreign students I believe and bad taste IMHO. But the difference in practice between a college and a university in the US is not clear cut even there. In Sweden the distinction between "högskola" (college, basically) and university is not super clear either. One needs to look at the specific faculty in question to know if it's any good. This goes for all schools.

I think the difference between university and college in the US is very clear, it is just not widely known. A college can get you a bachelors degree, a university can confer a doctorate (I always assume masters degrees come along with university, but that is an assumption).

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#44

Post by calvinmorrison »

fellerts wrote: post #37
aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is an aux cable.

My LG OLED TV is connected via an AUX cable to a speaker, but still mutes its audio output after long-ish periods of silence. Cabled audio doesn’t help if the software sucks.

my TV now flashes "mute" every like 10 seconds in an animation... and also asks me to setup the TV every time with its cloud services...

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#45

Post by fuckstick »

larkost wrote: post #43
actionfromafar wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, it's marketing to attract foreign students I believe and bad taste IMHO. But the difference in practice between a college and a university in the US is not clear cut even there. In Sweden the distinction between "högskola" (college, basically) and university is not super clear either. One needs to look at the specific faculty in question to know if it's any good. This goes for all schools.

I think the difference between university and college in the US is very clear, it is just not widely known. A college can get you a bachelors degree, a university can confer a doctorate (I always assume masters degrees come along with university, but that is an assumption).

That is not the difference between a college and a university as colleges absolutely confer doctorates. So I guess it’s not so well known, is it?

https://www.wm.edu/as/computerscience/graduate/phd-programs/...

https://www.brynmawr.edu/gsas/phd-programs

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#46

Post by thamer »

They mention the Power Profiler Kit 2 (PPK2) to measure power usage. I've been using it for a few months with microcontrollers and have found it very useful. The amount of precision it's capable of with high-frequency measurements is extraordinary, I was able to spot when the MCU was running various functions just from the power draw. It goes down to 200nA and can produce 100,000 samples/sec.

Alternatives like USB power meters[2] are still useful and can be cheap, but you don't get raw data from them and just have to read the value from the display. For comparison DigiKey has the PPK2 listed for $92.50.

[1] https://www.nordicsemi.com/Products/Development-hardware/Pow...

[2] https://amazon.com/s?k=usb+power+meter

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#47

Post by solarkraft »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #18

The "LE" is more about behavior , rather than some power-saving tech. It affords low-energy-use behavior. Short bursts, ad hoc connections, small amounts of data, etc. If we make it behave like Classic, it will suck energy like Classic. I like using BLE, more than Classic (BR/EDR). It's a bit pedantic, getting things set up, but that can be abstracted, fairly easily[0]. If we program for iOS/WatchOS/TVOS/iPadOS, we'l…

> so we may be seeing true LE headphones, in the future

LE Audio has been worked on for a long time, the last missing pieces have been finalized just about a month ago and the marketing push appears to be beginning around this time. From what I recall they expect the first LE Audio peripherals by the end of the year (but pessimistic me would say it's more likely the middle of next year). High-end phones with Bluetooth 5.2 and Android 13 should already support it.

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#48

Post by rijoja »

toxik wrote: post #38

The institution credited, Jönköping University, is notable in Sweden for /not/ being a university and skirting the name issue by being named “Jönköping University” in Swedish as well. Make of that what you will but to me it seems like a con. diva-portal.org is not a journal, it is simply a repository of all academic texts from Swedish institutions.

"Jönköping University (JU), formerly Högskolan i Jönköping, is a non-governmental Swedish university college located in the city Jönköping in Småland, Sweden."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6nk%C3%B6ping_University

This has changed apparently. I think SAAB Avionics does a lot of in that general area so there is probably quite a lot of high tech research that goes on there.

The difference between a university and a högskola in Sweden for anyone wondering is that they do research at a högskola, i.e. you can get a doctors degree there.

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#49

Post by zwirbl »

swamp40 wrote: post #34

The small packet size is what is constraining BLE in the energy consumption comparison. It really wasn't meant for continuously streaming music. When advertising every few seconds, like an Apple AirTag does, the energy usage averages about 5uA. That certainly beats the heck out of Bluetooth Classic. They just have different use cases. Eventually BLE will add a long packet size feature and win out. Between music and f…

It wasn't meant to stream audio, but it will. The LE Audio standard is already released, dev HW available and the upcoming Android 13 has support integrated.

The marketing push is going strong right now, especially for the broadcast variant that's branded Auracast

Re: Analysis of energy consumption of Bluetooth Low Energy versus Bluetooth Classic

#50

Post by zwirbl »

swamp40 wrote: post #32

Fair use: 7.1 Conclusions The purpose of this study was to research and investigate the potential existence of a breaking point where BLE becomes less efficient than BR/EDR in terms of energy consumption. The results from the conducted experiments show that BLE has overall worse energy consumption efficiency than BR/EDR and that there is no breaking point since BLE is shown to be worse.

In the scenario they tested, which is full throughput and low and behold, basic physics hasn't changed
Post reply on HN