[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100424045626.GA7561@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 06:56:26 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
davej@...hat.com, cpufreq@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] ondemand: Solve the big performance issue with
ondemand during disk IO
Hi!
> > Well, and now, if you do something like cat /dev/<your usb1.1 hdd> >
> > /dev/null, you'll keep cpu on max frequency. Not a problem for new
> > core i7, but probably big deal for athlon 64.
>
> do you have facts not speculation for this? Does the athlon 64 really
> keep its voltage high during idle? That would surprise me greatly...
So... some old data. It is not exactly athlon 64 -- I don't have that
particular number for it -- but: (from my old notes):
evo n620c [63.3 Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 1.7GHz, min bl: 13.0 W
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 12.0 W
thinkpad x32 [52Wh]
~~~~~~~~~~~~
idle machine at 600MHz, min bl: 10 W
at 1.8GHz: +6.6 W
hp nx5k [56.8Wh]
~~~~~~~
idle, min bl: 19 W
min bl, 1.4GHz: 22 W
...so yes, I kind of see a pattern there. And you should be able to
easily see the difference, too, if you took something from that era...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists