Re:Core2Duo motherboards for power consumption

[David Gumbrell <david.gumbrell@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the links so far. Anandtech also have some comparisons. One
question with these articles is that the benchmarking is done against
a constant load. What might be more interesting is the power (ok
energy) taken to perform a given job. A faster processor might
complete a job quicker and then manage to go into a very low power
state - assuming very fine grained power control in multi-tasking
environment and that power consumption does not necessarily scale
linearly with processing work done.

It seems that the Atom processor is currently not achieving it's low
power potential in a system context due to the very greedy
Northbridge. No doubt this will be addressed.

I'd be interested in any steps people have taken to minimise power
consumption - BIOS tweaks, system settings, is there anything non-
obvious that can be done - there used to be third party programs to
get some low power features working but I assume these are now all in
the BIOS/OS?

Cheers

David

PS: I was reconsidering having full time video capture in order to
save some juice. But since some b*stard ripped the rear wiper off my
car for no apparent reason and dumped it in the gutter, I think I will
reinstate it with the "skunk juice" water cannon option. I wish.

On 22 Aug 2008, at 11:05, Jim Noble wrote:

>
> On 22 Aug 2008, at 01:11, brougham Baker wrote:
> > From: "David Gumbrell" <david.gumbrell@xxxxxxx>
> >> I'm considering a new HA server, want low power but would
like to
> run
> >> video capture as well. My video capture board seems to be
> >> incompatible
> >> with ITX/VIA boards so I am considering "normal"
boards. The
> question
> >> is, using a relatively low clocked Core2Duo, can the power
> >> consumption
> >> be reduced into the 30-45W ballpark of an ITX board ? How
good is
> the
> >> power scaling these days?
> > http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Atom-Athlon-
> Efficient,review-31253.html
> > Athlon Vs. Atom: Duel Of The Energy Savers : AMD Athlon 64 2000+
At
> > 8 Watts
> > Conclusion: Athlon 64 Is More Economical, Faster, And Quieter
>
> There's something not quite right with that article.
>
> They have the AMD 780G chipset down as having a TDP of 0.95W compared
> to the 945GC's 22.2W.
>
> As far as google can make out, AMD say the TDP of the 780G is 15W
> (0.95W is the idle power consumption...), with a typical power
> consumption of around 11W. (Can't find an idle power figure for the
> 945GC, but it will most likely be a lot more than 0.95W...)
>
> It also seems to be somewhat lacking in detail about exactly what they
> were measuring the power consumption of, and what "100%
load" refers
> to...
>
> The end result may be correct, but if so the evidence has been very
> poorly presented...
>
> Jim
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------