On 01/14/2013 11:20 AM, Matt Garman wrote:
> Of course, with these "real" CPUs (compared to e.g. Atom), power
> consumption will be much higher when loaded. But from what I've read,
> the "real" CPUs are actually better in the long run, because their
> computation efficiency is so much higher.
Thank you, I was just going to post something very similar. I recently
upgraded from a system with an Atom to an Ivy Bridge i3-3220. The system
is mostly idle but is used for a small webserver, grabs images from a
webcam once a minute and is used as a backup target with rsync. Same
2GB, integrated graphics, 2 disks in a mirror.
Idle power went from 18W to 24W for the whole setup. I didn't measure
full power on the old system but on the new one it peaks at 83W. However
my kill-a-watt shows that over a two weeks, the power usage of the new
system is almost identical to the old one. The reason is that a rsync
run (through ssh) took almost 50 minutes before, now its down to about 6
minutes. So max power for 6 minutes vs 50 minutes makes up for the 30%
increase in idle power...
Peter.
--
First they came for the machine guns,
and you didn't speak out because you didn't like guns.
Then they came for the imported guns,
and you didn't speak out because you didn't like guns.
Then they came for the assault rifles,
and you didn't speak out because you didn't like guns.
Then they came for your freedom of speach,
and I didn't speak out because I didn't have a gun.
http://www.meaninglessrelic.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
