Felix Miata wrote:
I would expect a single quad core system replacing a quad CPU system could save overall, but that's not a majority upgrade scenario. Quad CPU systems were never big sellers. Home and office desktops far outnumber servers.
Certainly. We're not, well I wasn't, talking about global savings, it's a local consideration. I have no idea whether quad-CPU servers were "big sellers", but I've got four quad Xeons and one 8-way Xeon to go if anyone wants them. Another few more quads are being replaced in the next 3-6 months. We're late, but as I said conservative.
Average power consumption on the desktop is up, even though efficiency is up too. RAM often now requires heatsink cooling, another sign of increased power consumption, on top of generally increased RAM requirements of newer software.
I don't the efficiency of a desktop PC is really much of a topic. When we're talking about computational power per unit-of-energy, it's not very useful to talk about a system that is idling and in power-save mode most of the time. In fact, I have to wonder if average power consumption on the desktop really is up - I would have thought power-saving measures have become so much better in just the last 2-3 years, that average consumption would have gone down.
Power consumption should figure into the equation whether to take equipment out of service, not just whether kernels still support old hardware (thread topic).
Well, the openSUSE kernel CPU support issue has long been cleared up - Pentium I's are still supported, period. Wrt power consumtion, I completely agree - except my experience is that modern systems use less energy. /Per -- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.9°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org