Well, actually the package's description says something different and I quote:
"The name is somewhat misleading, as any CPUfreq capable processor will work, not just those from AMD. However, it works better on CPUs that support more than two speed steps, like those with AMD's PowerNow! or Intel's Pentium M series."
Thanks,
Zaq Rizer wrote:
Javier,
I wouldn't say I "prefer" powernowd, per se, but I know that powernowd is made for AMD, whereas cpudynd is more generic (afaik). That being said, I use cpudynd in my thinkpad (X40) and it works very well.
YMMV,
Zaq
Javier Kohen wrote:
Hi guys,
is there any reason why you prefer powernowd to cpudyn? I was wondering because I'm using the later on my notebook. I barely use it on batteries, but I like the noise reduction that comes with the reduced speed.
Zachary Rizer wrote:
Aha! You're right.
Works like a charm here as well. Thank you Thomas!
--- "T.J. Zeeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 11:06 -0800, Zachary Rizer wrote:
Please disregard previous email -- I just realized powernowd is only on XP-M processors, and that
what
I'm looking for is "Cool 'n Quiet". My mistake!
Actually, no mistake at all. I have an AMD64 and run powernowd to have cpu-scaling (as provided by the CnQ-feature in the cpu).
I got it to run on a Debian kernel-image after I put powernowd-k8 and cpufreq-userspace in /etc/modules. It was apparently necessary to have these loaded forcedly to get the powernowd daemon to run.
regards, Thomas
-- Javier Kohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802 Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
