Mobile (low power) CPU in desktop board?
in [Asus]
|
From: T i m on 17 Feb 2010 05:54 On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:09:42 +0200, Anssi Saari <as(a)sci.fi> wrote: >T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> writes: > >>> You have that covered, though. >> >> I do? Sorry, are you saying that my motherboard (K8V-XE) *will* take a >> s754 Mobile chip? > >Well yes, there's a bunch of Turions on its the compatibility list. I >actually had one or two boards of the K8V family, but I can't remember >if I had a K8V-XE exactly. Well as long as you did something similar (mobile chip in desktop board) then at least I know it can be done etc. > >If you look up K8V-XE on the Asus webpage, there is a "CPU Support >List". Of course, it may be hard to find those chips now. I was using the manual for the Mobo and it only mentioned Athlon and Sempron but then I don't suppose many people would want to make their computers run slower. ;-) > >>>Other than that, lowering CPU voltage and clock speed, if possible, is >>>always a good plan for a low power system. >> >> I did look at that very quickly yesterday but wasn't sure what to >> change and by what amount etc (never done any under/overclocking >> before). I mean, what sort of increments am I looking at and for what >> sort of results please (ballpark etc). > >I haven't really done it either, but basically you lower clock speed >to whatever still provides enough performance and and then lower >voltage as long as the system remains stable. But it does need some >experimentation. Ah, ok, thanks. I might give that a look and see what sort of difference it makes in the real world. If it only saves say 3W then that roughly translates to �3/year and I think I'd rather have the performance. ;-) I've got a 3000+ Sempron on the way in the hope that the Cool n Quiet might work as I think I've read from an AMD datasheet the chips have a design max rating of 62W and can run as low as 21 or so when C&Q kicks in. Cheers, T i m
From: Rob on 17 Feb 2010 10:34 "T i m" <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote in message news:kbhnn5tmprogbgdst4v8dmimmtrpsh40gf(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 10:09:42 +0200, Anssi Saari <as(a)sci.fi> wrote: > >>T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> writes: >> >>>> You have that covered, though. >>> >>> I do? Sorry, are you saying that my motherboard (K8V-XE) *will* take a >>> s754 Mobile chip? >> >>Well yes, there's a bunch of Turions on its the compatibility list. I >>actually had one or two boards of the K8V family, but I can't remember >>if I had a K8V-XE exactly. > > Well as long as you did something similar (mobile chip in desktop > board) then at least I know it can be done etc. >> >>If you look up K8V-XE on the Asus webpage, there is a "CPU Support >>List". Of course, it may be hard to find those chips now. > > I was using the manual for the Mobo and it only mentioned Athlon and > Sempron but then I don't suppose many people would want to make their > computers run slower. ;-) >> >>>>Other than that, lowering CPU voltage and clock speed, if possible, is >>>>always a good plan for a low power system. >>> >>> I did look at that very quickly yesterday but wasn't sure what to >>> change and by what amount etc (never done any under/overclocking >>> before). I mean, what sort of increments am I looking at and for what >>> sort of results please (ballpark etc). >> >>I haven't really done it either, but basically you lower clock speed >>to whatever still provides enough performance and and then lower >>voltage as long as the system remains stable. But it does need some >>experimentation. > > Ah, ok, thanks. I might give that a look and see what sort of > difference it makes in the real world. If it only saves say 3W then > that roughly translates to �3/year and I think I'd rather have the > performance. ;-) > > I've got a 3000+ Sempron on the way in the hope that the Cool n Quiet > might work as I think I've read from an AMD datasheet the chips have a > design max rating of 62W and can run as low as 21 or so when C&Q kicks > in. Power consumption by CPUs is proportional to the vCore squared, so a small decrease in that can make a big difference. Just keep lowering it by a notch until it becomes unstable and then ramp it back up a couple of notches - that will usually keep things stable. Exactly the same procedure is used when tuning for over-clocking. HTH, -- Rob
From: T i m on 17 Feb 2010 14:57 On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:34:22 -0000, "Rob" <noone(a)nowhere.noway.com> wrote: >Power consumption by CPUs is proportional to the vCore squared, >so a small decrease in that can make a big difference. Just keep >lowering it by a notch until it becomes unstable and then ramp it >back up a couple of notches - that will usually keep things stable. Ok and thanks. >Exactly the same procedure is used when tuning for over-clocking. > Where it would draw more power than 'normal' then (hence bigger coolers) etc. So, now I know how power consumption relates to the core voltage, could you be so kind and give me some idea what sort of impact (in perceived terms) doing such lowering would have on the performance? ie," X drop in voltage is likely to see a 5W drop in consumption and it won't feel much slower ...?" Could this just be considered 'tuning'? Is it possible that every system could be improved to a degree by doing something like this (like Blueprinting an engine etc)? Cheers, T i m
From: Rob on 18 Feb 2010 07:41 "T i m" <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote in message news:l0ion5po78tgdbotc4s15c0sprrl8ecf4t(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:34:22 -0000, "Rob" <noone(a)nowhere.noway.com> > wrote: > >>Power consumption by CPUs is proportional to the vCore squared, >>so a small decrease in that can make a big difference. Just keep >>lowering it by a notch until it becomes unstable and then ramp it >>back up a couple of notches - that will usually keep things stable. > > Ok and thanks. > >>Exactly the same procedure is used when tuning for over-clocking. >> > > Where it would draw more power than 'normal' then (hence bigger > coolers) etc. > > So, now I know how power consumption relates to the core voltage, > could you be so kind and give me some idea what sort of impact (in > perceived terms) doing such lowering would have on the performance? > > ie," X drop in voltage is likely to see a 5W drop in consumption and > it won't feel much slower ...?" > > Could this just be considered 'tuning'? Is it possible that every > system could be improved to a degree by doing something like this > (like Blueprinting an engine etc)? > > Cheers, T i m Lowering CPU voltage (vCore) will have no impact on the speed the CPU runs at - it will simply either work or not. HTH, -- Rob
From: T i m on 18 Feb 2010 14:16 On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:41:11 -0000, "Rob" <noone(a)nowhere.noway.com> wrote: > >Lowering CPU voltage (vCore) will have no impact on the speed >the CPU runs at - it will simply either work or not. > Ah, so this is just a factory tolerance ting? I picked up a AMD Turion 64 MT-28 1.6GHz this morning and tried it in the afternoon (with a bit of a cobled-together heat sink). Not only did it work but so did the Cool and Quiet desktop app. ;-) I didn't have my power meter with me but it wouldn't have told me much as the PCI VGA card I had been using seemed to clash with the Gb LAN card I'd added (no hibernation etc) so I had a borrowed ATI X1550 in there that I believe draws 15W on it's own! I've found a Dell DVI PCIe card that looks simple enough to be low power (no heat sinks or fans being a good clue) so I'll have to see how it all works out (assuming I can find W2003 drivers for it of course). Nothing's straightforward is it. ;-) If this setup doesn't work out I have the A300 Atom board to fall back on. Cheers and thanks to all who have helped so far. T i m
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Mobile (low power) CPU in desktop board? Next: Windows 7 and Asus P4P 800: audio problem. |