Slashdot Mirror
Processor Throttling In Windows XP
TomSlick writes "Michael Chu, a former Intel employee, has written up a fairly interesting and readable summary of Windows XP power schemes as they relate to Intel processor throttling. An old topic, but one still relevant as many business notebooks still use XP."
For a second there, I read "Professor Throttling in Windows XP"
Unless, as a twitch-gamer, you (think you) can't afford to lose even a single CPU cycle, then by all means continue trying to heat your house in "Always On" mode (or the default of "Home/Office Desk", which means the same thing to AC-powered non-laptops).
As a renter, my electric bill is paid for by my landlord. My oil heating bill is not. Always On mode greatly reduces my spending in the winters.
After using WinXP, it's not the processor that wants to throttle the system - it's me. So I installed Linux instead.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
as a cpu throttler.
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
Well, instead of requiring a dual-core CPU and 2+GB to run tolerably, you could use that second core and second gig to actually run things you want, rather than nothing but OS-related eye-candy and DRM crapware.
Are you some sort of Microsoft fanboy there?
Over here Vista requires 256 cores and 1 petabyte of RAM to run tolerably. And then I run Calculator.exe and it stalled. I'm checking every day how the Calculator launch is going and it's painfully slow. It's been over 9 months now and it's done rendering the buttons from 1 to 6, it still has 7 to 9 AND all operators to finish with.
I'm seriously pissed off, if it's not done by 2008 I'll be upgrading to XP.
Of course it is, it provides evidence that a much-vaunted disadvantage of Vista (that it requires a half-way modern machine) is incorrect...
It's official. Most of you are morons.
XP can throttle your CPU, but Vista downright chokes it.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.