| 1 |
2007/8/5, Joshua Hoblitt <jhoblitt@××××××××××.edu>: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Your statement was that the on-demand governor is "very bad" for amd |
| 4 |
> CPUs. I don't see how you have qualified that statement in any way. |
| 5 |
> Yes, it behaves differently then the conservative governor but that |
| 6 |
> doesn't make it "bad", "harmful", or even inefficient with power usage. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
i never intended that it was harmful or bad in the way you think. i was |
| 10 |
only saying that it is a bad governor for an amd processor. or at least it |
| 11 |
is for my turion 64 and for my athlon x2. when i used it on these processors |
| 12 |
i had a bad feeling, cpu lags about it. so i switched to the conservative |
| 13 |
wich is smoother. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I use the ondemand govern on a large number of production Opteron |
| 16 |
> machines with great results. According to my empirical measurements |
| 17 |
> with an ammeter it saves an average of ~35w per socket in systems with |
| 18 |
> dual core CPUs (not per core). As you can imagine, this is a pretty use |
| 19 |
> full savings for the 8-socket system that I have. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Cheers, |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> -J |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> on my turion 64 it does not behave as you say, and just step from 800mhz |
| 26 |
to 2ghz, and it doesn't save anything when compared to conservative and |
| 27 |
userspace with powernowd/powerthend. and i assure you that the overall |
| 28 |
system energy consumption is of very great importance to me, specially when |
| 29 |
i'm on battery. |
Archives