[mythtv-users] Requesting some sample kill a watt meter numbers

[Michael T. Dean]

  On 01/18/2011 06:32 PM, Joe Hickey wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Michael T. Dean wrote:
>> Note that a MythTV developer (who isn't currently able to send an e-mail to
>> this list--and I'll leave out names to protect the innocent) mentioned in
>> IRC, early this morning, that his Mac Mini idles at lower than the 20W that
>> many are quoting for their Atom-based systems.  (Note, also, that you can
> I don't doubt you.  I really like the mac mini - I even bought one for
> my mother.  But for the price I paid for that mini, it just extends
> the return on investment out so far (like>6 years at NYC rates) that
> it really doesn't make sense anymore...

There's nothing special about the Mac Mini.  It just happens to be an 
off-the-shelf, small-form-factor, quiet Core-2-Duo-based system with 
VDPAU-capable integrated video that I can point to.

>    Atom is at least cheap on
> both sides- building and running.

I'll agree Atom is cheap.  (Feel free to choose which connotation I'm 
using. :)

>> off the headroom--you /can't/ draw high power (but even when your at load,
>> you're not accomplishing as much as, say a system with a nice Core 2 Duo
>> that may hit higher power draw, but for significantly smaller times--and may
>> idle at equivalent or lower power draw...).
> That's actually the exact point I was trying to figure out by starting
> this thread in the first place: is it possible to build a system
> around a "real" processor that idles down near atom-level (say...
> 30w?).   It seems like it's possible in theory; a modern CPU with all
> its power-saving features turned on SHOULD be just burning a watt or
> two at idle.  My observation/theory is that when you go with a
> standard processor, the requisite chipset and "features" on the
> motherboard seem to consume more power than the CPU itself.
>
> I was hoping someone would chime in with a build spec'd around a real
> CPU that only drew 30 watts or so at idle, but so far it seems like in
> real world usage a system with a Core2 or Athlon draws 2-3x the power
> at the wall than an Atom-based system.
>
> Again, hoping that someone can show an example where that's not true....

Ref my first post to this thread: 
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/468499#468499 , which 
linked http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/448321#448321 
.  Here's an excerpt:
-----
See, also, these (old) articles:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/25w-performance-pc,2551.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-e7200-g31,2039.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-atom-efficiency,2069.html

I'm sure that there are newer articles using newer chips/architectures 
that do even better.
-----

For reference, their titles are:

Maximum Efficiency: Build A 25W Performance PC Using Core i5

G31 And E7200: The Real Low-Power Story

Efficiency: Core 2 Nukes Atom On The Desktop

respectively.

Mike