After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT and Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power management themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a considerable decrease of temperature and power consumption.
Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro instead of 56°C without.
> After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT and > Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
> Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power management > themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a considerable > decrease of temperature and power consumption.
> Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro instead of > 56°C without.
What wonderful spam.. FYI Win2000 already uses the cpu halt command and on my 450 it's never gotten over 32 degrees. In other words, cpuIdle is completely useless on a NT based machine.
> > After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT > and > > Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
> > Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power management > > themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a > considerable > > decrease of temperature and power consumption.
> > Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro instead > of > > 56°C without.
> What wonderful spam.. FYI Win2000 already uses the cpu halt command and on > my 450 it's never gotten over 32 degrees. In other words, cpuIdle is > completely useless on a NT based machine.
i don't know what u r smoking, but you might want to check some of the facts.
On some boards, especially BP6, Win2k does not support ACPI yeat (except for the QQ bios), and without it, it does not implement the HLT instructions. For me, CpuIdle made a 7 degree difference, from 32 to 25, this is two C366@550
so, don't diss it till u try it
"Peter McNeill" <pmcne...@home.com> wrote in message
> > After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT > and > > Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
> > Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power management > > themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a > considerable > > decrease of temperature and power consumption.
> > Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro instead > of > > 56°C without.
> What wonderful spam.. FYI Win2000 already uses the cpu halt command and on > my 450 it's never gotten over 32 degrees. In other words, cpuIdle is > completely useless on a NT based machine.
> i don't know what u r smoking, but you might want to check some of the > facts.
> On some boards, especially BP6, Win2k does not support ACPI yeat (except for > the QQ bios), and without it, it does not implement the HLT instructions. > For me, CpuIdle made a 7 degree difference, from 32 to 25, this is two > C366@550
> > > After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT > > and > > > Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
> > > Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power > management > > > themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a > > considerable > > > decrease of temperature and power consumption.
> > > Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro > instead > > of > > > 56°C without.
> > What wonderful spam.. FYI Win2000 already uses the cpu halt command and on > > my 450 it's never gotten over 32 degrees. In other words, cpuIdle is > > completely useless on a NT based machine.
> AFAIK the HLT instruction executed by a process running on a CPU has > nothing to do with ACPI.
Wrong. Does not work without ACPI in SMP-Systems with MS-HLT-Routine.
> Are you saying that Win2k does not include the HLT instruction natively as > it does in NT4?
No, it DOES include the HLT natively, but does not work in Multiproc-Systems without ACPI (Why? Ask MS!). (NT4.0 does not execut HLT-command in Multiproc-sys either)
On a BP6 with with QQ-beta-Bios it semms that with ACPI enabled CPU-Idle is no needed any more although it's HLT-routine seems a bit more effective (gives an aditional drop of 2 to 3 deg C).
>> No, it DOES include the HLT natively, but does not work in Multiproc-Systems >> without ACPI (Why? Ask MS!). (NT4.0 does not execut HLT-command in >> Multiproc-sys either) >> On a BP6 with with QQ-beta-Bios it semms that with ACPI enabled CPU-Idle is no >> needed any more although it's HLT-routine seems a bit more effective (gives an >> aditional drop of 2 to 3 deg C). >> Jörg
It's probably more effective cause you processor spends more time in halt... - sounds like an un-overclocker.
> It's probably more effective cause you processor spends more time in > halt... - sounds like an un-overclocker.
> --Bob
Nop! The usual 2x366@550 CPU-Idle aparently has a more "aggressive" HLT-routine using even very short idle periodes to execute HLT (causing minor performance drops). Can't verify cause I don't get the source-code from MS ;-) Jörg
> > After extensive beta testing CpuIdle available as Pro version for WinNT > and > > Win2000. CpuIdle Pro supports both single and multi-processor systems.
> > Although Microsoft claims that these systems take care of power management > > themselves, measurements show that CpuIdle Pro can still achive a > considerable > > decrease of temperature and power consumption.
> > Even under Win2000 a Celeron 500 will run at 37°C with CpuIdle Pro instead > of > > 56°C without.
> What wonderful spam.. FYI Win2000 already uses the cpu halt command and on > my 450 it's never gotten over 32 degrees. In other words, cpuIdle is > completely useless on a NT based machine.
