Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:02:47 +0100 (MET) | From | Jan Engelhardt <> | Subject | Re: Kernel thoughts of a Linux user |
| |
>>>>So they could make themselves a favor and run something like seti@home. >>> >>>That does consume more energy than just sitting at idle. I've seen some >>>estimates of how much it costs to run seti 24/7 rather than just sit idle, >>>and the price was something like $80/year. >> >> For CPUs which don't have some sort of speedstep, it does not matter. >> (Please correct me if I am wrong. It might be that HLT cycles are still >> more power-conservative even without speedstep than 24/7 on the FPU.) > >You're wrong :) >Nowadays the power consumption of a CPU is more than the rest of the >machine altogether (including hard disks, etc.). > >On my P4 2.8GHz HT CPU, I've measured the power consumed by *the entire >computer* more than doubling as the processor went from idle into 100% >load. > >Of course, this doesn't include a monster 3D card, is it could very well >consume something close to the processor when doing a lot of 3D operations.
I have got a power measure device from university and experimented myself. I keep it short: running SETI (in constrast to nothing, i.e. HLT insns), only costs me 17 more Watts. With a price of 6 cent per kWh, this makes roughly 5.54 EUR per year when the machine is on 16h/340days.
(The theoretical case of 24/365 would make up 8.91 EUR.)
Wait, did not Intel pull back some processors because of their enormous heat of some P4 (which melted some)? Well, I guess *there* is all your $$ going.
Jan Engelhardt -- ENOSPC - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |