Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD processors/-based systems power hunger

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

  • Qaridarium
    replied
    one part is the die selection the desktop users allways get the worst/bad dies..

    the notebook and server customers get the best dies.

    exampel you can buy an 8core opteron with 80watt tdp

    but an desktop dualcore burns more than 80 watt...

    and the opteron is 3-4 times faster on "7zip"

    only the chipsets are sometimes better on the desktop side.

    if you really wana have an perfekt speed per watt buy an AMD-Fusion 4core+APU in 2011..

    no system can beat that in powerconsuming

    Leave a comment:


  • crazycheese
    replied
    Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
    Your numbers don't make sense. That is a 125 watt chip. It can't eat 145 unless you are overclocking/overvolting. If it is, then something else is really nuts.

    Idle power consumption of that chip should be around 10-15 watts, not 90-100. That's just crazy.

    Unless you're measuring full system power consumption... in which case you have other things to think about than just the CPU.... the chipset and graphics card for example. An intel system will typically have an intel GPU, which is super weakness and probably doesn't eat much power... so on a wall socket power consumption measurement, an intel system, even with a CPU that eats more power, might still have a lower "full system" power consumption.

    Note: according to this: http://www.behardware.com/articles/7...0-and-630.html --- that athlon 630 draws 12.6 at idle and 80.4 full out.


    The fact that there is more to the story than the CPU.


    Again, more to the story than just the CPU!!!


    Error margin to ensure maximum stability for everyone, including chips that are a little "out"... improves yields and saves money (for them).
    Hi, thanks for reply! Of course its the whole idle system drain/cpu load whole system drain. The thing is Intel is draining way less and esp. in idle state, but also in load state. If you take a look at the link I provided in the first post, you will see that core 750 is draining less than athlon II x4 on full load and waay less in idle. In fact core i3-530 and core i7-870 drain same in idle, where core i7-9xx drain more due to additional memory channel(if my reading are correct).

    No way can a chip be so much overclocked for stability reasons. I mind you that Athlon II x4 concept was first normal Phenom II with disabled cache, but later they introduced new smaller cores, not just old one with disabled. The newer cores were physically Phenom II but with cache L3 physically absent. I think they either do this high drain on purpose, or they just forgot and don't care.

    I think the reason to lower core-i drain lies within ability to shut off individual cores permanently instead of driving them at lower settings.

    It would be nice if another feature of Bulldozer would be, also, revamped idle and load power management scheme.

    Its just that burning electricity is not that fun, as burning rubber.

    Leave a comment:


  • droidhacker
    replied
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    For example[/URL], lets us take Athlon II X4 630 and Intel core i5-750.
    A almost cache-less 630 consumes way more juice than 750, whilst also performing worser. In my country juice is not cheap and eventually, when using the mentioned processors in long 2-3 year window, renders 750 cheaper in total cost than athlon II x4.

    I found a way to undervolt my athlon II x4 630, from ridiculously high 1.4 volt Vcore (only found on full-blown Phenom II) to 1.25v, leading to consumption drop of around 25 watts in load (120w instead of 145w) and 10 in idle(100w->90w), with zero impact on stability. The logic of my mainboard allowed to reduce via percentage, not value, so that reduction scales down very well when CPU is going into cool'n'quiet mode.
    Your numbers don't make sense. That is a 125 watt chip. It can't eat 145 unless you are overclocking/overvolting. If it is, then something else is really nuts.

    Idle power consumption of that chip should be around 10-15 watts, not 90-100. That's just crazy.

    Unless you're measuring full system power consumption... in which case you have other things to think about than just the CPU.... the chipset and graphics card for example. An intel system will typically have an intel GPU, which is super weakness and probably doesn't eat much power... so on a wall socket power consumption measurement, an intel system, even with a CPU that eats more power, might still have a lower "full system" power consumption.

    Note: according to this: http://www.behardware.com/articles/7...0-and-630.html --- that athlon 630 draws 12.6 at idle and 80.4 full out.

    1) Why is AMD K10 draining so much more in performance per watt than Core or even Core2Duo? Whats the reason behind so much difference?
    The fact that there is more to the story than the CPU.

    2) Will there be any change with Bulldozer?
    Again, more to the story than just the CPU!!!

    3) Why is Athlon II X4 spec'ed at 1.4v when it runs with 1.25v (or even 1.20v if u do internet search) just fine?
    Error margin to ensure maximum stability for everyone, including chips that are a little "out"... improves yields and saves money (for them).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X