I call [b]BS[/b]! (well for at least 99% of the cases).
First: Most computers do not have that power envelope (100watt idle cpu use, 300watt max cpu use), not even close. Perhaps for some hugely OCed P4 or similar...
An X2 running at 2.4GHz (i.e. X2-4600+) consumes only 45 watts more at max CPU use (both cores working at 100% cpu use) than at idle. The AMD X2 EEs and the Intel Core and Core 2 consume even less. This is power from the wall, so includes inefficiencies of the PSU.
Second: The power used converts mostly to heat. In the cooler months, this brings down the actual cost by a huge margin (from 50% to 90% depending on the primary heat source used) less as it offsets other heating sources.
BUT: if also using the X1900XT for number crunching (folding@home), there is an additional power use. As the details are not yet mentioned, just how much additional power use is yet unknown. This is an option for the user (when the client is made available) and they can choose not to have the GPU crunching. But even then, it won't get close (TechReport recent article mentioned just over 100 watts, but that seems to be for both the CPU and graphics card).
There is no need to change your computing habits with Folding@Home. It resides in background and you can set what level of max cpu idle use you want it to use (I usually suggest 80%). Turn on & off the computer when you want (it won't lose data). Keeping the computer on just to run Folding@Home is much more expensive (as the difference is between standy (e.g. 10 watts) and full use (e.g. 150 watts)). Many people only bother leaving their computer extra long for folding@home during the cooler months so again significantly reducing the cost (after deducting the useful heating).
Slashdot Mirror
I call [b]BS[/b]! (well for at least 99% of the cases). First: Most computers do not have that power envelope (100watt idle cpu use, 300watt max cpu use), not even close. Perhaps for some hugely OCed P4 or similar... An X2 running at 2.4GHz (i.e. X2-4600+) consumes only 45 watts more at max CPU use (both cores working at 100% cpu use) than at idle. The AMD X2 EEs and the Intel Core and Core 2 consume even less. This is power from the wall, so includes inefficiencies of the PSU. Second: The power used converts mostly to heat. In the cooler months, this brings down the actual cost by a huge margin (from 50% to 90% depending on the primary heat source used) less as it offsets other heating sources. BUT: if also using the X1900XT for number crunching (folding@home), there is an additional power use. As the details are not yet mentioned, just how much additional power use is yet unknown. This is an option for the user (when the client is made available) and they can choose not to have the GPU crunching. But even then, it won't get close (TechReport recent article mentioned just over 100 watts, but that seems to be for both the CPU and graphics card). There is no need to change your computing habits with Folding@Home. It resides in background and you can set what level of max cpu idle use you want it to use (I usually suggest 80%). Turn on & off the computer when you want (it won't lose data). Keeping the computer on just to run Folding@Home is much more expensive (as the difference is between standy (e.g. 10 watts) and full use (e.g. 150 watts)). Many people only bother leaving their computer extra long for folding@home during the cooler months so again significantly reducing the cost (after deducting the useful heating).