From: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
To: "Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com>
Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>,
Seamus <assembly@gofree.indigo.ie>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CPU throttling??
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 21:18:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030203211806.GA21312@codemonkey.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F760B14C9561B941B89469F59BA3A84725A14A@orsmsx401.jf.intel.com>
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 01:14:18PM -0800, Grover, Andrew wrote:
> You save the most power when the CPU is at the lowest voltage level, and
> in the deepest CPU sleep state (aka CPU C state).
>
> Throttling offers a linear power/perf tradeoff if your system doesn't
> have C state support (or if you aren't using it) but really it is
> preferable to keep the CPU at its nominal speed, get the work done
> sooner, and start sleeping right away. The quote above makes it sound
> like the voltage is scaled when throttling, and that isn't accurate -
> voltage is scaled when sleeping (to counteract leakage current), at
> least on modern Intel mobile processors.
Most (all?[1]) other modern x86 mobile processors behave the way I mentioned.
AMD Powernow (K6 and K7), VIA longhaul/powersaver all have optimal voltages
they can be run at when clocked to different speeds. By way of example, a table from
my mobile athlon..
FID: 0x12 (4.0x [532MHz]) VID: 0x13 (1.200V)
FID: 0x4 (5.0x [665MHz]) VID: 0x13 (1.200V)
FID: 0x6 (6.0x [798MHz]) VID: 0x13 (1.200V)
FID: 0xa (8.0x [1064MHz]) VID: 0xd (1.350V)
FID: 0xf (10.5x [1396MHz]) VID: 0x9 (1.550V)
Sure I *could* run that at 523MHz and still pump 1.550V into it,
but why would I want to do that ?
Dave
[1] Unsure about the crusoe.
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-03 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-03 21:14 CPU throttling?? Grover, Andrew
2003-02-03 21:18 ` Dave Jones [this message]
2003-02-03 21:41 ` John Bradford
2003-02-03 22:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-02-03 22:31 ` Ville Herva
2003-02-04 10:22 ` Seamus
2003-02-04 10:31 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 11:01 ` Seamus
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-03 21:51 Grover, Andrew
2003-02-03 15:47 Joeri Belis
2003-02-03 16:55 ` CPU throttling?? Seamus
2003-02-03 17:00 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-03 17:04 ` Martin Hermanowski
2003-02-03 17:13 ` John Bradford
2003-02-03 18:57 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-02-03 19:02 ` Dave Jones
2003-02-03 19:09 ` Martin Hermanowski
2003-02-03 19:20 ` John Bradford
2003-02-04 14:12 ` Erik Mouw
2003-02-03 19:14 ` Matt Reppert
2003-02-03 19:24 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-02-04 14:34 ` Daniel Egger
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=20030203211806.GA21312@codemonkey.org.uk \
--to=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=andrew.grover@intel.com \
--cc=assembly@gofree.indigo.ie \
--cc=john@grabjohn.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.