Gary Kline wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 01:33:20PM -0500, David Kelly wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:19:31AM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
        I kep track on the load on my main server, and it is rarely above
        0.20.  If the load is a poor metric of power use, what is
        better?  (My new `Watt-o-Meter' is checking the power right now,
        but I would like to know what drink the most juice: disk,RAM,
        processor, OpSys?  Number of hit/hours? I want my upgrades to
be as cost-effective as possible, in other words.
There isn't a good generic answer to your question. "It all depends" on
exactly what hardware you have. A good rule of thumb is 10W for each
disk drive, but some were much higher. Pull the data sheets for your

A Kill-A-Watt on the power cord is the best way to answer the total
question. My old ancient Dell Optiplex running 5.5 draws about 60 watts
including the APS 350CS UPS. Am not about to unplug it without good

[EMAIL PROTECTED] {1004} uptime
 1:30PM  up 670 days, 21:08, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

I found a 10G drive in the trash yesterday. Would one day be a nice
upgrade for the 4G drive in the above.

        the datasheets for the 40G drives are lost lost. but what is your
        best guuess about my old 1998 HP's (400MHz) compared to a newer,
        generic 1.8GHz processor?  IIRC, my AMD 2.8GHz uproc sucks up
around 75watts; the Intel was maybe 35w.
If your serious about power but need newer capacities, I'd look at something like and maybe an intel atom (or after reading the reviews/benchmarks the via nano when its available.) With dual opterons at the moment my load average (except for when compiling) is 0 - 0.1 but my electricity bill is significant so i'll be looking into something atom/nano based in the near future, especially when i can get a motherboard with CPU for less than 60 uk pounds.

Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to