From: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Peter Osterlund <petero2@telia.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@linuxpower.ca>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.19-rc1-ac3
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 20:54:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020713205422.E25995@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m265zj9zxn.fsf@best.localdomain>; from petero2@telia.com on Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 09:43:16PM +0200
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> So, is any of the above true for x86 processors? Or are there other
> reasons to expect frequency scaling to increase battery run-time.
You're right if your CPU usage is 100% - lowering the CPU clock rate
means you take longer to complete the task, and with the static
element of the CPU power consumption, you'd probably end up using
more energy to perform the same task in a longer time.
However, if, like most desktops, your CPU is sitting around 90% idle,
if you lower the CPU clock rate, the idle time will drop. Since the
power drops, the rate at which the CPU uses energy also drops.
However, overall your task completes in the same amount of time.
For instance, you are reading a file with "less". Is running the CPU
at full speed going to make you read the file any faster than if it's
running at slow speed? How about the amount of energy that the CPU
consumes for this task?
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-13 19:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-07-12 19:14 Linux 2.4.19-rc1-ac3 Alan Cox
2002-07-12 23:42 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 7:41 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-07-13 10:34 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 12:38 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-07-13 16:22 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 18:27 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-13 19:43 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 19:54 ` Russell King [this message]
2002-07-13 20:56 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-15 10:13 ` Thomas Sailer
2002-07-15 10:16 ` Russell King
2002-07-14 1:50 ` Alan Cox
[not found] ` <6010.1026651788@www53.gmx.net>
2002-07-14 13:09 ` Dominik Brodowski
2002-07-14 15:19 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-14 15:50 ` Dominik Brodowski
2002-07-14 18:52 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 10:25 ` Peter Osterlund
2002-07-13 14:15 ` Pavel Machek
2002-07-13 17:09 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-13 15:59 ` fchabaud
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020713205422.E25995@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petero2@telia.com \
--cc=zwane@linuxpower.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.