Matthew Garrett wrote: > I don't think there's a terribly good reason to use the SHE methods if > the CPU supports speedstep. 945 will automatically drop the frontside > bus in the deepest P states. I'd be surprised if it gave any real world > benefits on the atom based systems. > It does make quite a difference, especially because the chipset and CPU are undervolted in the "powersave" preset. Also, SHE offers a slight overclock (with the "performance" preset) which cannot be achieved with mere multiplier switching. This is all guaranteed to be safe by Asus. On my Eee PC 901, the idle power consumption drops from about 7W to 5.8W when switching from "normal" to "powersave". That's about 15%. Under load the benefit seems to be even greater. I'm the author of a program called eee-control, which currently uses another method to change FSB and voltage. It directly communicates with the PLL controller over SMBus and with the embedded controller through some I/O ports. This method works, but is not very safe and very hardware specific. The ACPI interface of Asus' SHE abstracts all the hardware differences away and thus would be preferred. Anyway, my point is: my experience and reports by users show that the difference is *huge*. Regards, Grigori -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
