QNX, Useful applications
mtapley at swri.edu
Sun Mar 19 15:05:22 CST 2006
At 9:05 -0600 3/19/06, John Foust wrote:
>I think it comes down to the cost of electricity. ...
>... Still, more than once I've shocked myself by
>examining the performance graph and wondering what's sucking 100% of the
>CPU. Even today's hardware will run consume extra power and run
>hotter if you're pushing the CPU.
Which is of course right on the button. I have to say, there's very
little way I could justify the use of kWh on either of the two
projects, if the alternative is having the machine off. But for
people wanting to do something with their classics, I assume the
electricity has proven not to be a major consideration. And certainly
for any already-running and on-line VAXen, that must be the case.
Something I hadn't considered, though, is whether classic hardware
burns less current "idle". I knew about sleep mode on my G4 laptop
using less power; at what generation did that become prevalent?
At 9:05 -0600 3/19/06, Dan wrote:
>I don't know if it's for the same reason but seti never had a Vax
>client because of a lack of iee floating point (from the faq).
The cryptography and Optimal Golomb Ruler projects *should* be
integer, but I don't know how the algorithms are implemented.
Cell Phone: 210-379-4635
More information about the cctech