pe...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote:
Marghanita == Marghanita da Cruz marghan...@ramin.com.au writes:
Marghanita Has anyone done any work/know of any research on the
Marghanita effect of Tuning ICT systems and direct energy
Marghanita use/indirect energy use (heat generation/airconditioning)?
David wrote:
On 18/10/12 11:18, David Lyon wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:14 AM, kfos...@tpg.com.au wrote:
What does 12W translate to in $ terms for 12 months use, knowing that
most
PC's are not switched off at work.
That seem low. However, 12W adds up.
I generally use a laptop and
On 18/10/12 10:58, David Lyon wrote:
In the last few days, I've been reading studies showing that
average power consumption of a PC is about 12W. Which
is not incredibly high.
Makes me wonder how much I’m killing the planet with the 700W power
supply in my PC.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's
That's a max rating, if you are running s PSU with high efficiency and low
voltage hardware (eg slower CPU/RAM, SSD), then you will be a lot better
off than owning a dual GPU, i7 gaming beast.
On 18 October 2012 20:51, Jeremy Visser jer...@visser.name wrote:
On 18/10/12 10:58, David Lyon wrote:
just because you have a 700w psu doesn't mean you will be using 700w.
The actual load from the cpu/gpu/hdds etc combined with the efficiency
of the power supply gives you the at the wall consumption.
Most office machines will pull ~60-100W depending on cpu vintage and
work load.
gaming machine
On 18/10/12 10:02, Marghanita da Cruz wrote:
Has anyone done any work/know of any research on the effect of Tuning ICT
systems and direct energy use/indirect energy use ...
See the chapter Energy saving - Data Centres and Client Equipment in
my book ICT Sustainability: Assessment and
Not many people are aware, but I was surprised, after discussing with some engineers a few years ago,
that the physical vibrations of equipment in their racks can actually cause power increases
and performance issues purely as a result of the vibrations interfering with disk seek times
and so
On 19 October 2012 10:09, gr...@zeta.org.au wrote:
Not many people are aware, but I was surprised, after discussing with some
engineers a few years ago, that the physical vibrations of equipment in
their racks can actually cause power increases and performance issues
purely as a result of the
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Jeremy Visser jer...@visser.name wrote:
Makes me wonder how much I’m killing the planet with the 700W power
supply in my PC.
You won't kill the planet, on account of it having an iron core. Don't
worry.
You'd need thousands of megawatts (at least) for your
David Lyon wrote:
snip
In any case just because it is rated at 700W doesn't mean that the
computer is using 700W.
snip
Unfortunately, when it comes to power generation, it is the peak load that
needs to be catered for.
So, if on a hot day, you do a CPU hungry simulation or compile, which
Tom Worthington wrote:
snip
See the chapter Energy saving - Data Centres and Client Equipment in
my book ICT Sustainability: Assessment and Strategies for a Low Carbon
Future: http://www.tomw.net.au/ict_sustainability/saving.shtml
Low-energy equipment: Select low energy component and
On 19/10/2012, at 7:47 AM, slug-requ...@slug.org.au wrote:
In the last few days, I've been reading studies showing that
average power consumption of a PC is about 12W. Which
is not incredibly high.
Makes me wonder how much I’m killing the planet with the 700W power
supply in my PC.
James Linder wrote:
snip
(laptop power 10w to 50w (say), efficiency of charger (say) 70%, efficiency of
batteries (say) 70%)
what is worse: toxic chemicals from landfill, or toxic chemicals from power
generation using coal ...
(most fish in the USA have mercury, that is largely from coal
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM, David Lyon
david.lyon.preissh...@gmail.com wrote:
In fact, if anything, Sydney/NSW Governments are more adverse
to automation and programming than other countries (say the US,
Japan, Europe) and simply won't entertain having computer operated
systems such as
Michael Chesterton wrote:
snip
Sydney trains have been planning to computerise since the waterfall
accident. There will be constant monitoring of speed and position and
overrides if something goes out of whack, too fast, too close, or whatever.
Its primary goal is safety though, not efficiency.
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Michael Chesterton che...@chesterton.id.au
wrote:
Its primary goal is safety though, not efficiency.
I want to add a linux angle, but can't think of one.
The powers-that-be-here don't even want you to know what can
actually be achieved with Linux.
In Tokyo
16 matches
Mail list logo
