Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:48:14 -0700 (PDT) | From | Marc Perkel <> | Subject | Re: AMD Dual Core vs. Quad - Power Management |
| |
Marc Perkel Junk Email Filter dot com http://www.junkemailfilter.com
--- On Tue, 6/17/08, David Rees <drees76@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: David Rees <drees76@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: AMD Dual Core vs. Quad - Power Management > To: mperkel@yahoo.com > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Date: Tuesday, June 17, 2008, 4:26 PM > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Marc Perkel > <mperkel@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Been running a few tests and an AMD motherboard > booting 2.6.25 from > > flash uses 0.33 amps if the CPU is a AM2 Athlon 6000. > But if I used a > > Phenom Quad core CPU 9550 it pulls 0.55 amps. > > > > In theory the 9550 should pull less because it's a > lower TPD and the > > phenom processor is supposed to be smarter about power > management. > > > > So - why is the Phenom pulling more power? Is it > because power > > management software for the Phenom isn't updated > yet? > > At idle with CoolNQuiet on, all AMD processors seem to pull > close to > the same amount of power, varying between 7-11 watts. > Except for the > quad core processors, which pull significantly more at idle > w/CnQ on > than dual and single core processors. > > Tom's hardware has a nice chart listing power > consumption here, all > his testing was done under Windows. His tests show the > Phenom pulling > about twice the power of the Athlon64 X2 6000+ which > matches up pretty > closely to your numbers. > > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-power-cpu,1925-7.html > > Sounds like a question for AMD. The Phenoms seem to be > pretty good > except for the extra 10-11w of power draw at idle which is > disappointing. > > -Dave
Thanks - that definitely answered my question. And I'm using b3 stepping.
| |