Re: [gentoo-user] Re: new machine : CPU : AMD FX-4100 ?

[Michael Mol]

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.com> wrote:
> On 30/07/12 06:08, Michael Mol wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30/07/12 05:23, Philip Webb wrote:
>>>>
>>>> i5-2550K & FX-4100 both use  95 W
>>>> (some of the more costly AMDs use  125 W ).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Note that power savings are not important if you're not using a laptop.
>>> CPU
>>> power savings on a desktop don't translate to any relevant amount of
>>> money
>>> on your electricity bills.  This is because neither of those CPUs really
>>> use
>>> 95W.  That's just the thermal upper limit.
>>
>>
>> To be fair, power savings are relevant if you're concerned about your
>> electric bill, or if you're concerned about heat management in your
>> system.
>>
>> Consider my dual E5345...leaving that on 24x7 appears to cost me about
>> 90USD/mo.
>
>
> CPU power savings will transform that into a 89.9USD/mo ;-)  That's what I
> mean.  It's not worth much.  It helps quite a bit with laptop battery life.
> But for desktops, it doesn't do anything too useful.

If you really want the hard numbers, check out some place like Tom's
Hardware or Phoronix. I forget which does the power consumption
measurements. At some of the hardware review blogs, you can get
numbers on idle vs full-load power consumption, as measured at the
wall. The difference truly is striking.

Now, at least part of the problem with my E5345 setup is that I'm
running two high-performance Xeon processors that only have
operational clock speeds: 2.33 GHz and 2.00GHz. Desktop-targeted CPUs
often will clock down to just a hair over 1GHz, if not a hair under,
if you have proper power management daemons running.

-- 
:wq