Energy efficient PC's - part three

As mentioned in the previous post, we cannot directly compare video card solutions, but we can assume integrated/onboard video uses less power than video cards.

The GeForce 7600 GS seem to be particularly energy efficient video card (also the GeForce 7600 GT if you need more performance).

CPU: For someone that wants good performance and low energy, the Intel Core 2 Duo CPU is a reasonably energy efficient option. The Core 2 Duos with lower clock speeds are sure to consume less energy. The AMD alternative is the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+. It is the bottom end CPU of the AMD X2 series and has about 7/8th the performance of the comparative Intel Core 2 Duo E6300. It only uses 5/8th the power. AMD chips are also much cheaper than the Intel CPU's. On the AMD option I would advise using the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ Windsor (a remarkable low 35 Watts) - The AMD code is ADD3800CUBOX

My impression is that Intel and AMD have taken different approaches to dual core architectures. The Intel cores are more tightly bound to specific tasks. The AMD cores are more general purpose. The Intel dual core is closer to one unit, and the AMD core is more towards parallel processors.

When buying RAM, you should go for low voltage RAM. DDR2 runs at 1.8Volts and DDR runs at 2.5Volts (Ive seen a 1.5Volt DDR2 solution). You should buy your DDR2 RAM in pairs - it helps a bit with the throughput. Also try to ensure your RAM and CPU is balanced. It is no use having very high frequency RAM when the interface between the RAM and the CPU cannot handle the speeds that the DDR2 RAM chip can spew it out. If you run at an unnecessary high frequency, you will just waste energy. The CPU also has a RAM Cache, which also reduces the need for fast RAM. For example, the Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 has a front side bus (FSB) speed of 1066MHz. So it has little use to have a pair of DDR2 RAM chips running over 533MHz. You could do better to look at latency (response time). In general, RAM chips with low "CAS" scores have good response times.

The way AMD works with RAM is different. I gather the two AMD CPU's interface more directly with the RAM. The speed of the CPU interface with RAM is dependent on the CPU clock speed. The clock speed of the "3800+" is 2000MHZ, so a good RAM speed would be 2000/n, where n is an integer. So a good memory speed would be 667MHz (from 2000MHz/3). AMD CPU's get good performance boosts from low latency (low CAS) as the AMD CPUS are connected a bit more intimately with the RAM.

Your motherboard and chipset will be based on the AMD or Intel CPU. You need to make sure your BIOS have power management features such as ACPI S3 or S4. I would advise avoiding the nforce chipsets on you motherboard as they tend to consume morew power. The chipset normally relates to the "northbridge" or the glue between the CPU and components that interact a lot with the CPU (for example your video card). The nforce4 chip runs particularly hot. Nvidia tried to do too much with the nforce4 - they combined the "northbride" and "southbridge" in the nforce4.

Hard disk. From what I read, the Western Digital Caviar seem to be consistently efficient.

Importantly, you need an efficient power supply. The power supply converts AC to DC, and if it converts too much power, some of it will go too waste. So you need a power supply that responds to the changes in PC power demand. You need a power supply with Active Power Factor Correction (PFC), that also do it efficiently (If you buy a PC without asking, it will have a passive power supply) The "Cooler Master iGreen" power supply is an example of an efficient power supply.

So for the best power efficiency, low cost and good performance, get the AMD 3800+ Windsor. If you need more performance, go the Intel route. This is April 2007, and the Energy Efficiency landscape will probably change in the next few months.

Energy efficient PC's - part two

In the previous post, I discussed a few ideas on energy efficient CPU's. The main problem in this area is that good documentation and metrics are amiss.
A further caveat that the end-user has to be aware that the CPU model number is not enough to give an indication of energy usage. For example an "AMD Athlon 64 3800+ AM2 socket" CPU may be (45Watt, 62Watt or 89Watt) TDP. To know the Watts TDP, you need to know the AMD part number, or nickname eg "Windsor", "Lima" ...

The Onboard video option:

Onboard video (integrated into the motherboard) would be more energy efficient than a separate Motherboard/Video card, but with poorer performance. To some extent this assumption has held true over time, but in the recent times onboard video performance has improved a bit so they are often reasonably game-capable.
Normally onboard video do not have their own memory (RAM) and this slows them down. HyperMemory(ATI) TurboCache(NVidia) Technologies allow usage of PC system RAM as video card framebuffer memory. It relies on fast data transfer through the PCI Express bus.
It is not really possible to compare integrated and non-integrated video, as the integrated video performance is heavily depend heavily on the Motherboard design, especially where the video chip requires access to system memory.
The best onboard options seemed to be the following chipset combinations:

• AMD 690G Chipset : ATI Radeon X1250 Graphics
• Intel G965 Express Chipset: X3000
• Motherboard (Eg Asus, Gigabyte) : Geforce 6150

From various tech reports (eg bit-tech , techreport ), it seems that for good performance of onboard video, you may want to opt for the AMD or a Geforce 6150 solution. Apparently you can play most games on the AMD X1250 or GeForce 6150, but not on the Intel X3000. The X3000 integrated graphics was built for Windows Vista certification. After AMD bought ATI, Intel was in a big hurry to develop an Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) solution. (Apparently they originally planned to work with ATI on a video GMA). So the AMD 690G Chipset ended up being a better games solution than the Intel G965 Express.
In addition, it seems that power usage of the AMD 690G is overall a bit better than that of the Intel G965. Looking at the energy usage, the real difference is when the systems are idling (The AMD uses less energy). I feel vindicated about my comments about the Intel hype in this area. And in the test mentioned, they were using a power hungry AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ 2.6GHz. So one could even improve on that power performance of the AMD solution (more than one can on the Intel solution).
In conclusion if I were to buy an integrated video and motherboard, I would combine the AMD 690G with one of the low power AMD - AM2 chipset cpu's (35 Watt or 45Watt). The AMD 690G has better power efficiency, games capability, and would be cheaper
On the other hand Intel has good open source drivers for its graphics chips, so if you are an ardent Open Source/Linux supporter, you may opt for the Intel G965.
Some more in the next post.

Energy efficient PC's - part one

I want to put together two PCS that are reasonably energy efficient. One of the most obvious ways to get an efficient PC is to buy a laptop, but I wanted something a bit more substantial. Im also comfortable maintaining PC's. I want a PC with reasonable performance (better than Pentium 4), One to two Gbytes of Ram, I want midrange 3D video cards,- good for most games. Lots of hard disk space, and not too expensive.
Ill be running Linux.
I started off looking at the CPU's. I have a preference for 64 bit CPU as they are more efficient than 32 bit CPU's under the correct conditions. On average you should process more data in each clock cycle. But then your programs have to run in 64 bits - this is where Linux comes in handy.
Remember the Transmeta CPU. It had up to 256kb wide CPU word and generated less that 10Watt heat at reasonable performance. No fans required so they didnt suck in any dust. Once a PC/laptop do not need a fan, they last very well - My son carried his Transmeta laptop around with him everywhere - even to school, and it is still going. Unfortunately Transmeta went bust as people werent that interested in efficiency at that time. Another option is to buy a VIA Epia TC6000E Motherboard with CPU, but they were a bit low in performance for my liking.

Anyway back to the topic. CPU. Energy usage of AMD chips are freely available. The sites all quote TDP (Thermal design power), which is the maximum energy usage (heat). So the assumption is that you can do better and use less power if the CPU is in an energy savings mode. Im happy to work with an upper limit. Im not sure what to assume around the hype of energy efficient modes, but an upper limit tells you the Watts stop here. For example, I am skeptical about statements like, if you have a dual core, and you switch one core off, you use half the power.
You can select the energy usage on the AMD site to see the CPU's with the selected power ratings. There is a lot of hype on the Intel site, but the technical details are hidden away. The following 35Watt/45Watt (TDP) AMD Athlon 64 CPUS would suffice: (3500+ Orleans, 3800+ Windsor, 3800+ Lima) - Socket AM2 Motherboards.
I may still consider Intel , see Scott Mueller's forum for some thoughts on this. In the Intel CPU range the 65Watt (TDP) Intel Core 2 Duo Processor is the most viable option. Apparantly the Intel Duo is a merger of the Intel CPU tecnologies from the desktop and laptop areas. The upside of the Intel Core 2 Duo Processor is the performance, the downside is power usage and a substantial price difference.
Some more ...

A Horokiwi case study on the separation of NZ Telecom

Summary: The New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development is considering how to seperate Telecom operationally. Comments must be made to the Ministry of Economic Development by 27 April 2007 (see the Ministry Telecom-seperation page) Monopolies may derive optimal revenue by providing a sub-optimal service. Telecommunication is a core service, and there is a Government responsibility to ensure that a reasonable quality service is delivered. The Government should own the local loop or regulate service delivery levels on the local loop.

No Broadband in Wellington, New Zealand

I live about 12km from the centre of the capital city of New Zealand (about 15km by road). So you could say I live in Wellington city. If there is no traffic, it would take me about 25 minutes to drive to the Beehive. The Beehive is the iconic executive office of NZ parliament (It is called the Beehive because it looks like a natural beehive).

Anyway, this story starts many years ago (about 8 years). I phoned and asked NZ Telecom for broadband in Horokiwi (A kiwi is the NZ icon, and this is a Horo story). Telecom told me that broadband will be available in Horokiwi in about 6 months time. In subsequent years I asked Telecom for broadband every six months. In the first years the answer remained a promise of broadband in six months time. Telecom is not promising anything any more. Over the years, I have tried other solutions. I have not found a viable alternative (I have not pursued satellite, as it is slow and very expensive).
Apparently the local loop into Horokiwi is not broadband (ADSL) capable.
At the moment I have two phone lines and a (dial-up) service provider. These three services cost me more than broadband plus a phone line would cost!
Charging me for two phone lines provides a better revenue stream to Telecom than broadband would.
The infrastructure Telecom provides has frustrated my ability to work from home. As a matter of fact, I have lost revenue as a direct result of the lack of infrastructure(Ive had to give up contracts).

The funny thing is that when go I on-line to check whether Broadband is available on my phone line, the Telecom site says yes, Kris can have broadband if he wants to. So when, from time to time I phone a new wireless service provider, I get the answer” No, we do not provide wireless in your area,- but wait - we can provide ADSL”. The subsequent conversation often raise my hopes again. So over the years I have collected a few free cheap ADSL modems from vendors that initiated the process of providing broadband.
That brings me to the question:

Why have Telecom persisted in listing me as broadband enabled?

There must have been at least a dozen formal queries on my phone number. I suspect Telecom have many phone-lines listed as broadband enabled, when the poor subscribers have no hope of getting broadband.

The answer must be one or more of the following :

• Telecom is totally incompetent, and do not have the ability to maintain or correct their database.

• Telecom "data" is skewed so that they can provide incorrect statistics to ministerial queries.

• Telecom is using this as a method to kneecap their competitors. The competitors spend an inordinate time on subscribing, and then un-subscribing broadband customers – In addition, competitors are spending their money by flooding certain areas with cheap ADSL modems.

Broadband alternatives in Horokiwi

Demographics There is no (ADSL) broadband in Horokiwi. There are about 70 to 80 families living in Horokiwi. I have had conversations with most of the households. At least half of the households would buy broadband immediately. Almost ten Horokiwi families already have some solution (mostly wireless, two satellite connections and one 3G mobile connection). The connection speeds of these families are mostly at slow broadband speeds.

Satellite

You need clear line of sight to the West to utilize satellite (about 15 degrees above the Western horizon). Setup costs are typically over $NZD 500. Satellite broadband generally provides slow speeds (256kb/s). The problem with satellite is latency (delays). Monthly charges are typically $NZD 130.

Mobile (3g)

Most of Horokiwi is 2g enabled,but only a few areas in Horokiwi are 3g enabled. 3g is targeted towards the laptop market. Typical plans are for around $50 per month and are capped to 1 or 2 Gb (There are typically extreme penalties for going over 2Gb). 3g deliver typical download speeds of 256-500 kb/s. Upload speeds are slower.

Wireless

This is the most viable alternative. The map shows areas that may have access to wireless. I suspect that a quarter to a third of Horokiwi residents may be able to utilize wireless.
Wireless coverage in Horokiwi is largely accidental. The transmitter in Woollaston Way targets Johnsonville. Other residents receive coverage when they have line of sight to the transmitter on Somes island.
Wireless achieve speeds of 500kb/s. Plans start around $NZD 50. Installation cost a few hundred dollars or more. Wireless services have not been reliable in Horokiwi, but the service has improved over time.
Wireless is not the answer as coverage is by accident and not by design. From conversations with service provider staff it seems that that wireless will not expand significantly in hilly Horokiwi (unless by accident)

My submission

Lack of investment

There are always scenarios where it is in the interest of a monopoly to provide a sub-optimum service (See the above example where a consumer pays more for Telecom services where broadband does not exist).
The Ofcom survey indicated that the British Telecom separation did not result in immediate infrastructure improvements [see Martin Cave, Six degrees of separation]. This may be an indication that telecommunications providers prefer not to invest in capital improvements. Why are we planning to copy the British Telecom mistakes?
The “consultation document” refer to “Telecommunications Service Obligations” (TSO) for rural customers, but there is no clear indication of what they are or how they will be achieved/enforced. It seems the TSO would form part of the proposed “Access Network Services” (ANS) Unit. It seems that the ANS unit would still be a Telecom “subsidiary”, and as such would remain a monopoly that would not result in improvements in the local loop.

Core assets and the lessons we have learned

Telecommunications is an important strategic asset. It is strategic in the sense that our economic growth depends on it. Essential and non-essential services will increasingly depend on a telecommunications infrastructure as services increasingly extend beyond business services. Telecommunication is replacing the role of traditional mail, and is becoming the medium of interaction with government and regional services. It will also play a role in employment, making it possible for people that are not mobile to be a part of the workforce, and enabling energy efficient ways of working. Most people agree that we currently lack a sound telecommunications infrastructure. Government should not abdicate responsibility for telecommunications, just as it would not abdicate responsibility for roads and health to multinational corporations. The well-being of New Zealand citizens will increasingly depend on a sound telecommunications infrastructure.

New Zealand have pertinent history that we should learn from. The power industry went through a similar separation. The structural problem in the New Zealand power industry is that electricity transmission remains a natural monopoly (Transpower). The structural problems in the power industry are around transmission infrastructure.

Government obligation

The Government should own the local loop and make the infrastructure available to service providers at cost. We would then have operational and accounting separation in the telecommunications market. The Government have no profit incentive, so the infrastructure pricing can be provided at true cost. This also solves the problem where there is a tendency for telecommunications providers not to invest in capital improvements.
If the Government does not see owning the local loop as palatable, then the Government should regulate the levels of service on the local loop. Everything else is a waste of time, as we will be stuck with an unworkable local loop.