From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933464AbXGWI6s (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 04:58:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932980AbXGWI4o (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 04:56:44 -0400 Received: from users.crfreenet.org ([81.92.145.1]:37895 "EHLO mail.crfreenet.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765914AbXGWI4l (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 04:56:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:56:36 +0200 From: Ondrej Zajicek To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: david@lang.hm, Igor Stoppa , LKML , linux-pm Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Power Management framework proposal Message-ID: <20070723085636.GA4123@localhost.localdomain> References: <1185091022.19678.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1185105911.29238.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1185145766.2714.27.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1185162647.2714.35.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1185164357.2714.49.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1185164357.2714.49.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 (Sarge) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 09:19:17PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > let me give you a real world example then, and the numbers I'm using are > ballpark the same as you'll find in a (mobile) core 2 duo datasheet, I > just rounded them a little so that the math works out nice. > > power at full speed: 34W > power at half speed: 24W > power at idle: 1W I have usually seen different numbers, for example: http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/30430.pdf Although this paper speaks about thermal design power instead of power consumption, i suppose that it should be roughly equal. For example Athlon 64 3700 (ADA3700AEP5AR): 2.4 GHz, 1.5 V -> 89 W 2.2 GHz, 1.4 V -> 72 W 2.0 GHz, 1.3 V -> 53 W 1.8 GHz, 1.2 V -> 39 W 1.0 GHz, 1.1 V -> 22 W Even my measurement on PC (Athlon X2, VIA K8T890) of complete PC power consumption shows that it is more efficient to be busy for 2 time units on 1 GHz than be busy for 1 time unit and be idle for 1 time unit on 2 GHz. 1 GHz: both cores idle: 48 W one core busy: 57 W two cores busy: 66 W 2 GHz: both cores idle: 54 W one core busy: 78 W two cores busy: 95 W -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'SanTiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org, jabber: santiago@njs.netlab.cz) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."