[GRLUG] Net-top as server?

[Bob Kline]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam at whitemice.org
> wrote:

> > > I think some of the P4's consumed
> > > 125W.  Maybe the special edition ones.
> > > But the clock speeds are high, and they
> > > eat power.  At $125 one could use some
> > > of the savings to give to the power company...
> > The NetBurst architecture is pretty bad at a performance-per-watt basis.
> >   However, the Atom architecture is no angel; While researching building
> > a carputer, I was warned away from Atom-based boards as they "ran too
> hot."
>
> We have an Atom based netbook at work -  about 2.5 hours batter life.
> My 17" laptop - about the same or better.  I'm not impressed by the
> power claims of those things either [although in all likelihood I have a
> bigger battery].  But still not impressive;  for what you sacrifice with
> a netbook I'd expect something like six to eight hours of battery life.
>
> > But, again, if we're talking about simple file serving, your CPU demands
> > are going to be very, very low, and the power-consumed-while-idle is
> > extremely low for any x86 CPU designed after the Pentium (As in, the
> > thing that would have been called 80586 had Intel not lost their
> > trademark case against Cyrix), I think.
>
> Yep, assuming you verify that power-saving features are enabled and
> working.  Recent LINUX kernels/distros seem to do a decent job
> out-of-the-box but I'd still double check.  Also there are lots of
> components other than the CPU & planar, most importantly the power
> supply or brick.
>

Indeed.  The low price HP netbook unit
has just RAM and flash.  One might think
it would go all day on a battery charge.

And one would be wrong...

    -- Bob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://shinobu.grlug.org/pipermail/grlug/attachments/20090819/762eb9ea/attachment.htm