On Sun, 8 May 2011 16:02:02 -0400
Matt Turner wrote:
> You're comparing a tiny netbook to a quad-core desktop. Sorry, but
> that's an incredibly meaningless comparison.
>
> Compare with an x86 netbook. You'll be much less impressed.
Before judging on what is meaningless and what is not, how abo
-[ Sun, May 08, 2011 at 04:02:02PM -0400, Matt Turner ]
> You're comparing a tiny netbook to a quad-core desktop. Sorry, but
> that's an incredibly meaningless comparison.
I wouldn't say so, if you use the quad-core desktop to browse the web or
listen to music (which is often the case).
I don
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2011 16:02:02 -0400
> Matt Turner wrote:
>
>> You're comparing a tiny netbook to a quad-core desktop. Sorry, but
>> that's an incredibly meaningless comparison.
>>
>> Compare with an x86 netbook. You'll be much less impressed.
>
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 5:11 AM, wrote:
> -[ Sun, May 08, 2011 at 04:02:02PM -0400, Matt Turner ]
>> You're comparing a tiny netbook to a quad-core desktop. Sorry, but
>> that's an incredibly meaningless comparison.
>
> I wouldn't say so, if you use the quad-core desktop to browse the web or
>
> Seriously though, take an x86 system with a processor built at the
> same sized process (90nm?) and compare the total energy consumed to
> perform a task.
I do not have a 90nm x86 around, but I have a recent atom D510.
So here are the result of the superscientific benchmark, the fight
between a
On Mon, 9 May 2011 19:15:28 +0200
ri...@happyleptic.org wrote:
> > Seriously though, take an x86 system with a processor built at the
> > same sized process (90nm?) and compare the total energy consumed to
> > perform a task.
>
> I do not have a 90nm x86 around, but I have a recent atom D510.
>
-[ Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:39:21PM +0600, Roman Mamedov ]
> Yes, Loongson took almost 3x time, but even by your numbers, Intel Atom's "21W
> of horsepower" (according to Wikipedia, D510 consume 13W, so do you mean
> consumption of the complete system? vendor-rated, or measured personally by
> y
On Mon, 9 May 2011 20:00:49 +0200
ri...@happyleptic.org wrote:
> -[ Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:39:21PM +0600, Roman Mamedov ]
> > Yes, Loongson took almost 3x time, but even by your numbers, Intel Atom's
> > "21W of horsepower" (according to Wikipedia, D510 consume 13W, so do you
> > mean consump
-[ Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:18:24AM +0600, Roman Mamedov ]
> By the way, out of interest, is your OS on the Loongson compiled for O32 or
> N32 ABI?
N32. Do you think it can significantly influence power efficiency ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
