On 1/3/25 03:23, tkoenig--- via cfarm-users wrote:
Am 03.01.25 um 02:40 schrieb Jacob Bachmeyer via cfarm-users:

> I have a philosophical view that idle time on servers is essentially > wasted: a sunk cost.

In the age of TTL, ECL or even NMOS, that might have been true, power
usage was pretty much independent of the computational load in
those days.

Now we have CMOS and dark silicon, gate switching (aka computation)
determines energy consumption and the things that go with it (cooling
costs, semiconductor aging, etc).

For smaller machines, yes, with a few caveats that not all architectures actually do that:  if the clock is not gated off, the gates still switch.  Larger systems tend (as far as I know) to be less likely to actually take those power-saving measures.  The very newest models probably do, however, I admit.

For typical rack servers in datacenters, I believe that cooling and aging are still sunk costs.  Cooling and power are aggregated across many nodes, (and possibly tenants in co-location facilities) and the servers will be obsolete long before they appreciably age in any case.

Now the cfarm may have secondhand nodes that *are* already "obsolete" from datacenter use, and running in someone's apartment or office, where cooling is less of a sunk cost, but where they also contribute less of an incremental cost, if any.  (If the server burns 1kW, but you have to dump 50kW of heat from insolation anyway, the server is not significantly contributing to your cooling costs---and only slightly to your electric bill, at least compared to your air conditioner.)


-- Jacob

_______________________________________________
cfarm-users mailing list
cfarm-users@lists.tetaneutral.net
https://lists.tetaneutral.net/listinfo/cfarm-users

Reply via email to