In article <5393dd6a$0$29988$c3e8da3$>,
 Steven D'Aprano <> wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 20:09:37 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> > We've also got machines that are so fast, it's not longer critical that
> > we squeeze out every last iota of performance.  Oh, but wait, now we're
> > trying to do absurd things like play full-motion video games on phones,
> > where efficiency equates to battery life.  Sigh.
> That's where there needs to be a concerted push to develop more efficient 
> CPUs and memory, in the engineering sense of efficiency (i.e. better 
> power consumption, not speed). In desktop and server class machines, 
> increasing speed has generated more and more waste heat, to the point 
> where Google likes to build its server farms next to rivers to reduce 
> their air conditioning costs. You can't afford to do that on a battery.
> Even for desktops and servers, I'd prefer to give up, say, 80% of future 
> speed gains for a 50% reduction in my electricity bill.

For desktops, I'm more concerned about physical size.  On my desk at 
work, I have a Mac Mini.  It's about 8 inches square, by an inch and a 
half high.  It sits in a corner of my desk and doesn't take up much 
room.  The guy that sits next to me has a Dell running Linux.  It's 
about 8 inches wide, 15 inches deep, and 24 inches high.  In terms of 
CPU, memory, disk, video, networking, etc, they have virtually identical 

I've never compared the power consumption, but I assume his eats many 
time the electricity mine does (not to mention makes more noise).

Reply via email to