Cool!!!
On 1/9/06, H. Apfel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><snip>
>
>It depends what you use it for and with. Is it headless? Then the Mac
>mini will probably use half _or less_ the energy that the 8600 with
>the G4 upgrade (which will add to the load) would.
>
>You could be saving on the order of $20-70/year if you were to compare
>running both machines 24/7 (assuming ~50 W draw for the Mac mini (on
>average) vs 150 W draw (on average) for your 8600, upgraded to G4 (the
>upgrade will draw more power than the 8600 would alone)).
Nononono! I measured a Mac mini (1.42 - 1 Gig) at 27 W (Typing) / 35
W (with optical drive on).
My iBook (1.25) has a 45 W Adapter which powers the computer, screen
& battery recharger. It's basically the same computer with an added
screen.
So I'd max the mini (CPU 100% load, low graphic load, no optical
drive) at 35 W.
(just being conservative (if you'll pardon the bad pun) in my energy
use estimate)
A few questions:
How did you measure usage?
Power meter at the AC power input - so it includes converter losses.
Uh,oh <blush> I remembered wrong. After consulting my spreadsheet the
mini uses 18 W idling / 32 W with optical drive on/ '0' (< 1.5 W)
'off'.
For comparison: My Dual G5/1.8 needs 130 W idling / 200 W 'SETI'ing /
2 W 'off'.
Er, and I measured an old G3/300 as well: 41 W/ 45 W/ 3.6 W.
7600/132: 55W / 2.5 W. (even more than a G3!)
So from a energetic point of view: get a stack of minis!
Were you reading with your optical drive or writing?
'Noising' ;-) I guess reading..
Also, did you have a BT/Airport Extreme module installed?
Nope. It's a CAD station, gimmicks excluded. But great fun if once a
while a windozer starts looking for the computer which drives the 23'
screen :-)
Greetings
Holger
_______________________________________________
yellowdog-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.terrasoftsolutions.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general
HINT: to Google archives, try '<keywords> site:terrasoftsolutions.com'
