Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD 90nm Evaluated

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the never-can-have-enough-fps dept.

muyuubyou writes "The Tech Report has measured the new 90nm A64 3500+ against its 130nm counterpart and a Pentium 4 3.6Ghz 90nm. AMD looks way ahead in the 90nm process especially when it comes to power consumption. Note these are consumptions for the entire system including GeForce 6800 GTs and hefty PSUs. RTFineShortArticle for more detail on the configuration. Leaving the PC on overnight is probably not a good idea with these new Pentium 4s."

10 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Power consumption by TrollBridge · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "Leaving the PC on overnight is probably not a good idea with these new Pentium 4s."

    It' snot going to make THAT much of a difference on your electric bill.

    Now what I want to see is an analysis of the possible benefits to notebooks, specifically in extending battery life. Intel's Centrino seems to be doing fairly well in that department, but where is AMD's response?

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
    1. Re:Power consumption by lakiolen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I must say that computers make good space heaters. (Especially with winter just around the corner) And while heating up the room you're in they can also entertain you, unlike most regular space heaters.

      --


      What are you expecting to find here?
    2. Re:Power consumption by Behrooz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      130 watts of continuous usage runs to almost 100kW/Hr per month, which works out to an additional $8-12 on my power bill. I live in a relatively cheap electricity market, too.

      Given that there are five high-end computers currently living in my basement, I'd say it adds up.

      --
      "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  2. Re:What's the issue by SmilingBoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Electricity Bills? Love for the Environment?

  3. Re:How do we power these systems? by aldoman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The power grid just isn't designed to cope with this though. Domestic users are supposed to be 'bursty', that is that every once in a while someone puts an cooker or kettle on. It wasn't designed for 3 computers all eating 300-500W (not insane when you think about it, if you have a good graphics card in each) 24/7. That is another 1.5KW put on the grid, from a single circuit.

    Noticed a lot of power plant construction lately? Nope, neither have I. Infact all I hear about is plants being decommisioned because they are not economical to run, or safe to run.

    I also wouldn't mind a 24 hour UPS for the entire _house_ in the form of some nicely filled up lead acid batteries :).

    --
    IntechHosting - Free domain, 2GB, PHP, £4.95/$8.95
  4. Electricity cost may be more/less than you think by 3770 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The P4 system he was running was running at about 150 watts at idle.

    Now, if you are running an A/C unit then you will not only have to consider the 150W your computer is using, but also the power that your A/C is using to fight the heat that it produces.

    100% of the power used in the PC becomes heat (I think). So that is 150 W of heat. Your A/C, however is not 100% efficient. I really have no idea what the numbers are there. But it can't be more than 100% efficient so that is another 150 Watts (at least)

    So your 150W computer is costing you 300W at the least.

    Now, if you on the other hand live up north, then it looks much better. The heat produced will actually help your heating system, so that it doesn't have to run as much. My physics knowledge is a bit rusty, but I think you can say that if your heating system is based on electricity then it will cost you nothing extra to run your PC.

    Please let me know if/where I'm wrong.

    --
    The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
  5. Poor comparison? by Epi-man · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This seems a poor comparison between the AMD CPUs. Given they have taken a 130 nm chip and underclocked it, that means the chip is capable of higher clock speeds and therefore has "hotter" (from a speed sense) transistors as we used to say at AMD (used to work there). Since the transistors can deliver more current when on (leading to the higher clock speeds), by definition (subthreshold slope is limited by physics to ~60 mV/dec of current) they will "leak" more in the off state than transistors that don't supply so much current (and therefore run slower). I wish they had had equally rated (by AMD) chips to remove this uncertainty, although everyone seems to be focusing on the difference between the Intel and AMD boxes (which opens up a world of concerns....is it the motherboard under load increasing its demand, they have different memory systems which could contribute when stressed, is the PCI-E bus not as efficient as the (assumed) AGP, etc.).

  6. AMD vs P4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Has anyone else noticed that the difference in power consumption is almost directly proportional to the difference in clock speeds (2.2 for AMD and 3.4 for P4)? The P4 runs through 1.5 times as many cycles and used about 1.5 times as much power.

  7. Re:Intel's past arrogance is killing them! by pclminion · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I will never buy Intel again!

    Even if their chips eventually become cheaper and better, again? That sounds like a stupid strategy. In general, all strategies of the form "I will never/always do X" are stupid.

  8. Upgrading decision by NateE · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From what I've read, PCIe isn't going to noticably boost your performance over AGP 8x. So its not worth upgrading, if your system is already pretty current.

    Of course, if your going dual video card or your current system is out-of-date then...