From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D19iM-0002IP-72 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:54:34 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D19hy-00024j-39 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:54:15 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D19hx-0001jF-8M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:54:09 -0500 Received: from [65.19.178.186] (helo=pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D199x-0007yi-MC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:19:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A43A403D4 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:19:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 29594-09 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:18:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBBEF403CF for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:18:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu vs Standard From: Darryl Dixon In-Reply-To: <421245A0.2080502@brittainweb.org> References: <421245A0.2080502@brittainweb.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-9m2W/3ubWawwZ8VNIrtc" Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:18:46 +1300 Message-Id: <1108498727.13207.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: esrever_otua@pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org --=-9m2W/3ubWawwZ8VNIrtc Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That's just the natural effect of the Speedstep technology throttling back the cpu to lower heat because you aren't using many cpu cycles at the moment (you aren't pushing your laptop very hard :). If you were to do something like, say, compile Wine, and while it is compiling cat /proc/cpuinfo, you would see that the speed is up at 1800MHz. Cheers, D On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 10:55 -0800, Jason Brittain wrote: > Karel Gardas wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Jason Brittain wrote: > > > >>Here's my real (laptop) hardware's CPU info: > >># cat /proc/cpuinfo > >>processor : 0 > >>vendor_id : GenuineIntel > >>cpu family : 6 > >>model : 13 > >>model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.80GHz > >>stepping : 6 > >>cpu MHz : 599.679 > > > > I just wonder, but do you usually work with CPU clocked-down? Or have you > > tested running on battery? > > Interesting! I wrote the email about all this while riding to work on > the subway. So, when I did the "cat /proc/cpuinfo", I was indeed running > on battery power. But, currently, I'm not, and still says the same thing. > > Anyone know what the deal is with that? Is that an accurate number > saying that my cpu is throttled down? Could I make it run faster then? > Hmmmm.. > -- Darryl Dixon --=-9m2W/3ubWawwZ8VNIrtc Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That's just the natural effect of the Speedstep technology throttling back the cpu to lower heat because you aren't using many cpu cycles at the moment (you aren't pushing your laptop very hard :). If you were to do something like, say, compile Wine, and while it is compiling cat /proc/cpuinfo, you would see that the speed is up at 1800MHz.

Cheers,
D

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 10:55 -0800, Jason Brittain wrote:

Karel Gardas wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Jason Brittain wrote:
> 
>>Here's my real (laptop) hardware's CPU info:
>># cat /proc/cpuinfo
>>processor       : 0
>>vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
>>cpu family      : 6
>>model           : 13
>>model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.80GHz
>>stepping        : 6
>>cpu MHz         : 599.679
> 
> I just wonder, but do you usually work with CPU clocked-down? Or have you
> tested running on battery?

Interesting!  I wrote the email about all this while riding to work on
the subway.  So, when I did the "cat /proc/cpuinfo", I was indeed running
on battery power.  But, currently, I'm not, and still says the same thing.

Anyone know what the deal is with that?  Is that an accurate number
saying that my cpu is throttled down?  Could I make it run faster then?
Hmmmm..

--
Darryl Dixon <esrever_otua@pythonhacker.is-a-geek.net>

--=-9m2W/3ubWawwZ8VNIrtc--