Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A New CPU, Power Monitoring Utility

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A New CPU, Power Monitoring Utility

    Phoronix: A New CPU, Power Monitoring Utility

    Thomas Renninger of SuSE has announced cpupowerutils, a new free software project derived from cpufrequtils that is designed to offer much more thorough and advanced support for CPU usage/power monitoring and other performance statistics...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Linux should have a very general hardware information (monitoring) API instead of these projects.

    Now that I have that out, the cpu/gpu utility is a good idea I'm fully in favor of it.

    Comment


    • #3
      It puts out some nice info:

      Code:
      ./cpupower frequency-info
      analyzing CPU 0:
        driver: powernow-k8
        CPUs which run at the same hardware frequency: 0
        CPUs which need to have their frequency coordinated by software: 0
        maximum transition latency: 8.0 us.
        hardware limits: 800 MHz - 3.20 GHz
        available frequency steps: 3.20 GHz, 2.40 GHz, 1.60 GHz, 800 MHz
        available cpufreq governors: conservative, userspace, powersave, ondemand, performance
        current policy: frequency should be within 800 MHz and 3.20 GHz.
                        The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use
                        within this range.
        current CPU frequency is 3.20 GHz (asserted by call to hardware).
        boost state support: 
          Supported: yes
          Active: yes
          Boost States: 1
          Total States: 5
          Pstate-Pb0: 3600MHz (boost state)
          Pstate-P0:  3200MHz
          Pstate-P1:  2400MHz
          Pstate-P2:  1600MHz
          Pstate-P3:  800MHz

      Comment


      • #4
        Shouldn't it be 's/Liano/Llano'?

        Comment

        Working...
        X