On 06/24/2018 06:41 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote: > On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote: >> On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote: >>> On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote: >>>> On 24.06.2018 21:37, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we >>>>>>> cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and >>>>>>> copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a >>>>> thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source >>>>> people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people >>>>> can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I >>>>> don't get it. >>>> >>>> I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They >>>> really target completely different people and use cases. You could as >>>> well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos? >>>> >>>> Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where >>>> somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to >>>> cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to >>>> play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed >>>> as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform. >>> >>> I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power >>> hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads >>> maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical >>> office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less >>> power than the older Xeon it replaced. >> >> Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is >> power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state >> that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and >> somebody has to pay for that too. >> >> Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W >> for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has >> air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older >> Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit? >> >> Nico > > > Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of > "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under > real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I > don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the > power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again > we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be. > > Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi > or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text > editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive > system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through > unproductive time and then some. > > I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here? >
So it was pointed out to me on IRC that we don't have current power numbers published on the Wiki. That would probably explain the confusion; subsequent firmware updates have dropped the idle power and "normal use" power significantly on the POWER9 chips. I'll see if we can get some new at-wall measurements of our normal desktop configuration (1 CPU, no SAS, NVMe storage). This should be well under 100W at the wall. -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
