Re: do Pentium4 & PentiumM consume about the same at their lowest possible freq?

[Jarod Wilson <jwilson@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 973 bytes --]

Roberto De Leo wrote:
> 
>>> why slowing down the CPU at all if it doesn't save you any watt? I
>>> guess I'll stop using it.
>>>   
>> It is meant to be used under thermal condition where slowing down CPU
>> will result in reducing the temperature and not for power savings in
>> normal conditions.
>>
> I thought that power consumption and heat dissipation in the CPU were
> more or less proportional but evidently my belief was too naif  :-)
> 
> I guess that the same thing holds for the Athlon64 so prolly centrino is
> the only CPU were I can get a substantial power saving by decreasing the
> freq when I don't need much of it (which is almost always), is this
> correct?

No. AMD64 does the right thing too. The P4 only throttles, the AMD64 and
centrino chips actually scale their frequencies down. Throttling and
frequency scaling are different beasts, with freq scaling being far more
worthwhile.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jwilson@redhat.com



[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 251 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 147 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Cpufreq mailing list
Cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk
http://lists.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq