Hmmm... I haven't delved deeply into Ubuntu.  Is laptop-mode-tools
installed and active?  Other than the hard drive, I'm out of ideas.

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Konnor Jean <[email protected]> wrote:
> When this laptop was brand new, I was getting around 100 minutes of battery
> life with dimmed screen. This is a very good score for a 15.4'' laptop from
> this period. My precious Acer achieved similar score, just as majority of
> normal-size laptops from 2006 and 2007.
> If the laptop now does 90 minutes on the same battery, is it exceptionally
> good score for it.
>
> Do not get hung up on the battery. It is not the problem here. The problem
> is inefficient power management of Ubuntu and the question is how to make it
> at least comparable to Windows.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 03/13/10 23:19, Kelly Price wrote:
>>
>> 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