lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Question about cpufreq governors
From
Date
On Fri, 2007-07-06 at 23:54 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jul 6 2007 22:50, DervishD wrote:
> >
> > What I want to know is if I can choose "ondemand" governor instead
> >of the recommended for AMD64, namely the "conservative" governor, since
> >I will be switching between those two frequencies. I haven't found any
> >information about my CPU regarding latency when switching between
> >frequencies, so I don't know if I will be gaining anything using the
> >"conservative" governor.
> >
> > Which governor is better suited for a CPU with only two fid's,
> >"ondemand" or "conservative"?
>
> Depends on what you want. ondemand instantly switches when there is
> something/nothing to do, while conservative uses a threshold (modeled upon
> latency).

for power saving, the ondemand behavior is better in general. However if
you have a cpu that switches frequency very slowly, you may be better to
not go as high quickly because going back down is then burning more
power than needed potentially...



-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-07 00:55    [W:0.051 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site