Jump to content

CPU Power Saving in Win98SE


Recommended Posts

hello

got the chance to get an powermeasurement device for an day and do tests on my 2 win98se systems.

system specs1:

k6-2 500, 64mb Sd-ram, via mvp3 board, 40gb ibm hdd, s3-whatever 2d only card, 300watt powerdevice

win98se german + usp2.1 + dx9 + via driver

results1:

'off' = 2,2 watt

boot = ~65watt

idle(desktop) = 58 watt

idle(kcpucooler) = 37 watt (34% overall saving!)

(measurement of complete pc without monitor)

system specs2:

amd64 3000+(venice), 1gb ram, nforce3 board, 250gb samsung hdd, 120 gb hdd, geforce5700 fx, pci ide extension card, 350watt powerdevice

win98se german + usp2.1 + dx9 + nforce driver+ amds gemback cool&quiet driver

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_ty...CNQ_1_0_8_1.EXE

results2:

'off' = 6,4 watt

boot = ~110watt

idle(desktop+Amd C&Q) = 82 watt

idle(kcpucooler+Amd C&Q) = 75 watt

(measurement of complete pc without monitor)

win98se seems not to do any cpu power savings (even when acpi enabled?) when the systems idles, so, perhaps a kind of software cpucooler should be added to the uSP , maybe as option.

also intressting was , that even with the amd powernow driver, the softcooler (which uses the HLT command only) can get another 7 watt saving....

kcpucooler (free and small and robust)

http://www.kt2k.com/software.php?id=8

greets

Edited by shaddam
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Is a CPU cooler software that automatically scales back CPU power based on workload? Because if it's not, then your Athlon64 can seriously reduce its wattage by using AMD Cool'n'Quiet technology. I think it's possible for it to use as little as 30W system idle if you enable it. Only supported under XP though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tihiy, you're right! :)

Shaddam, have you ever tried this software?

Judging by this article - http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/128 you can enable Cool'n'Quiet technology on Win98SE (look at third screenshoot!).

Btw, I know excellent tool made by Russian programmers called RMClock Utility: http://cpu.rightmark.org/products/rmclock.shtml

Unfortunately, this program requires at least Windows 2000 (the only chance to run it under Win98SE would be a kernel update which is done by Xeno86.

Edited by rainyd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tihiy, you're right! :)

Shaddam, have you ever tried this software?

Judging by this article - http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/128 you can enable Cool'n'Quiet technology on Win98SE (look at third screenshoot!).

Btw, I know excellent tool made by Russian programmers called RMClock Utility: http://cpu.rightmark.org/products/rmclock.shtml

Unfortunately, this program requires at least Windows 2000 (the only chance to run it under Win98SE would be a kernel update which is done by Xeno86.

yes, this software driver from AMD was installed (and active, have seen the frequency toogling with some tools), but this driver seems not install an idle process which execute all the time HLT ...like the software cooler do... so for maximum powersaving both should be installed.

has someone done also some measurement with an amd64 system?

Rain is a small one that I used to use... http://www.freedownloads.be/downloaddetail...Rain-CPU-cooler (despite what it says in the link, it's actually 121Kb and not 121Mb :wacko: )

Here, where power is $0.03USD / kWh there is little need for power-saving devices :D

...ok maybe extended lifetime of cpu and noise reduction is a point for you energywasting americans? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shaddam, there is something I don't understand. If this technology (Cool'n'Quiet) is enabled it automatically reduces CPU clock to 800 MHz from 1,8 GHz as in your case. (if you haven't overclocked it). It has to cause a significant drop of power consumption and therefore of temperature as well.

Have you enabled this function on Power Option in Control Panel (in automatic mode)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure your CPU speed decreased ?

I *heard* it was not possible with 98 because CPU was always used at 100%.

not 100% ... but i see in 2 tools for mhz detection toggling between 1000 & 1800mhz .... (misdetection?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...