I can't really say 90 minutes of power is "reasonable".  2-3 hours,
yes.  90? No.

That said, my experience leads me to agree with what everyone is
saying in the press: higher size process in making chips == more
wattage wasted in heat == more power used in batteries; laptops you
gotta replace around every two years.

I've had a similar setup, an Asus EeePC 701. That had a 90nm Celeron
processor on it; even with it being underlocked to 633MHz, it ran too
hot.  You could not use the trackpad without burning your fingers, and
that was on a table propped up for more airflow.  That got 2 hours.  I
swapped it's Ubuntu running carcass out for an EeePC 900A and got
nearly 5 hours on the Atom-based hardware (I now run a N10J, same form
factor but Nvidia graphics).

Add onto that a Dell Inspiron E1505 which I put Gentoo on, and was
able to get 4 hours out of it (and how I discovered PowerTop to boot).
 I replaced it early last year, bought in late 2006; the
inverter/backlight was dimming on me.  It's with my father now, who
doesn't mind it at all.

I haven't gotten your take on if you replace the batteries or not.  If
you got a new battery for it recently and getting that 90 minutes in
Windows with it, then something's wrong in the system. If you're
running the original battery, then you gotta get it checked; I really
doubt they last more than two-three years (unless you're running Linux
on a sealed MacBook Pro).

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Konnor Jean <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think both statements are rejected on the basis of this simple fact:
> I am getting fairly reasonable battery life when using Windows.
>
> Secondly, I also enquired quite a few experienced people if it would be
> worth replacing my TL-52 with
> something of lower nm so that it consumes less power AND lowers the CPU
> temperature.
>
> The answer was an unanimous NO because the gain is so minuscule, it is not
> worth it.
>
>
>
> On 03/13/10 17:37, Kelly Price wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately, the CPU is working against you, and it's not a case of
>> underclocking that will help.  The Turino 64 X2, the TL-52, is built
>> on a 90nm process.  Most of the 35W power draw it uses is turned into
>> heat.  There's not much the software can do when your chip's an oven.
>>
>> That said, your laptop is nearly three years old.  Consumer Reports
>> says to replace laptops every two years.  This may be a good time to
>> look into a new laptop that's using 45nm or 32 nm process chips (like
>> most Intel Core 2's or i-series)
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Konnor Jean
>> <[email protected]>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The battery is fine. It gives at least 90 minutes on Windows.
>>> Laptop was bough new in summer '07.
>>>
>>> cat /proc/cpuinfo
>>> processor    : 0
>>> vendor_id    : AuthenticAMD
>>> cpu family    : 15
>>> model        : 72
>>> model name    : AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-52
>>> stepping    : 2
>>> cpu MHz        : 800.000
>>> cache size    : 512 KB
>>> physical id    : 0
>>> siblings    : 2
>>> core id        : 0
>>> cpu cores    : 2
>>> apicid        : 0
>>> initial apicid    : 0
>>> fpu        : yes
>>> fpu_exception    : yes
>>> cpuid level    : 1
>>> wp        : yes
>>> flags        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca
>>> cmov
>>> pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp
>>> lm
>>> 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good extd_apicid pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm
>>> extapic
>>> cr8_legacy
>>> bogomips    : 1607.22
>>> TLB size    : 1024 4K pages
>>> clflush size    : 64
>>> cache_alignment    : 64
>>> address sizes    : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
>>> power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc
>>>
>>> processor    : 1
>>> vendor_id    : AuthenticAMD
>>> cpu family    : 15
>>> model        : 72
>>> model name    : AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-52
>>> stepping    : 2
>>> cpu MHz        : 800.000
>>> cache size    : 512 KB
>>> physical id    : 0
>>> siblings    : 2
>>> core id        : 1
>>> cpu cores    : 2
>>> apicid        : 1
>>> initial apicid    : 1
>>> fpu        : yes
>>> fpu_exception    : yes
>>> cpuid level    : 1
>>> wp        : yes
>>> flags        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca
>>> cmov
>>> pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp
>>> lm
>>> 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good extd_apicid pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm
>>> extapic
>>> cr8_legacy
>>> bogomips    : 1607.22
>>> TLB size    : 1024 4K pages
>>> clflush size    : 64
>>> cache_alignment    : 64
>>> address sizes    : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
>>> power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/13/10 13:55, Kelly Price wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can you post your /proc/cpuinfo here?  We got to see what model of AMD
>>>> chip you got and see what process they used in making it.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Konnor Jean<[email protected]>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you but the problem with my computer is that I already have all
>>>>> typical power-saving options on.
>>>>> And that includes this one.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/13/10 00:49, Kelly Price wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Open up your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file and look for your NVidia card.
>>>>>> It'll be in the "Device" section and using the "nvidia" driver.  In
>>>>>> that section, look for the following line:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Option      "OnDemandVBlankInterrupts"      "on"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you don't have it in there, then you need to put it in as "root"
>>>>>> user.  Feel free to ask how.  Putting it in there will cut down the
>>>>>> interrupt usage with Nvidia cards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Konnor
>>>>>> Jean<[email protected]>
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have always used newest NVIDIA's own drivers, so that will not help
>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/09/10 09:40, Henrik Wejdmark wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I had a similar issue running a Lenovo T61 with an NVIDIA GPU and
>>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> nouveau driver. The GPU was running at full speed and drained my
>>>>>>>> battery. I
>>>>>>>> switched to NVidias own driver and voila power usage dropped from
>>>>>>>> 30W
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> 17W
>>>>>>>> during normal load, less when idleing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I made a note of it on Smolts wiki for Nvidia cards.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OS: Updated Fedora 12 using Gnome
>>>>>>>> Driver: NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-190.53-pkg2.run
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> //Cheers
>>>>>>>>      Henrik
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>>> On
>>>>>>>> Behalf
>>>>>>>> Of Arjan van de Ven
>>>>>>>> Sent: den 8 mars 2010 19:08
>>>>>>>> To: Konnor Jean
>>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Extreme case of powerdrain
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> \>        Computer is running on minimal power, with most elements
>>>>>>>> enabled
>>>>>>>> (eg:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> expresscard, dimmed screen, no usb devices, disk in low-power mode,
>>>>>>>>> audio in power-saving mode). Fans are idling, laptop is reasonably
>>>>>>>>> cool.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wonder if your GPU just burning power like crazy though
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Power mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> http://www.bughost.org/mailman/listinfo/power
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Power mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> http://www.bughost.org/mailman/listinfo/power
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Power mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> http://www.bughost.org/mailman/listinfo/power
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Kelly "STrRedWolf" Price
http://strredwolf.furrynet.com

_______________________________________________
Power mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bughost.org/mailman/listinfo/power

Reply via email to