Sandy bridge bootloader power consumption fix

Have the power consumption fixes been implemented in newer/current versions of the kernel? Or is still necessary to keep the lines in the grub cfg?

pcie_aspm=force should no longer be necessary. i915_enable_rc6 etc should be included in 3.4 kernel as far as i know.

Similar Messages

Bridge Rectifier Power Consumption

Hello,
I am having trouble with multisim when it comes to power consumption involving AC power sources and bridge rectifiers. Even with a simple load the power source is supplying kilovolts to the circuit which should not be drawing so much power. Can anyone help me figure out what's going on here. Thanks. Attatched is the circuit in question with nodal some nodal voltages.

I do not know how you are doing your calculation. This is actually not a trivial excercise for this circuit because the bridge experiences in-rushes of current when it passes current to charge the capacitors. The waveform is far from sinusoidal. You would need to analyze and perform some analsis on waveforms.
Max
National Instruments

Reducing power consumption on Intel Sandy Bridge architecture

I know this topic has created constant chatter, but the permanence of the internet has caused some confusion with me. It seems most of the "fixes" for power drain on Sandy Bridge architecture concerns Ubuntu and it's depricated, non-vanilla kernel.
So here is what I have, and what I'm seeing:
V131 w/ Core i5 2430M 8G ram 64G SSD
Arch Linux vanilla kernel
KDE
cpufreq utils
boot options currently enabled
i915.915_enable_rc6=1
noatime,dirnoatime in fstab
I ordered my V131 from Dell with Ubuntu 11.04 pre-installed, so I have no idea what kind of power drain this thing would have with Windows installed. Right now powertop says I'm idling at 1W, which seems to be about twice what it should. enabling RC6 has calmed the fan, which ran rather schizophrenically without it.
I've read through the laptop wiki, but I'm confused as to what would work best with KDE's power management stuffs and what would be redundant.
Any further suggestions?

There is a known bug in all kernels since some point at 2.6.3X which won't be fixed in mainline until 3.3 kernel (see the Phoronix web site for more details). In my laptop (Dell E5420) it halved the battery liffe, an kept the fan at high speed, as well as the computer too hot. After some googling, yes I do managed to fix it in the current kernels also by adding these kernel parameters in grub:
pcie_aspm=force i915.i915_enable_rc6=1
Now I run the battery for about 11 hours (up from 5-6), and the fan periodically even stops (zero noise with SSD!). Talking about the battery, I also need another boot options to prevent the mouse to become sometimes veeeeryyyy slow in X window while charging the battery:
drm_kms_helper.poll=N irqpoll
Hope the "standard default" situation will improve in the future.
Last edited by cgarcia (2012-01-18 23:23:28)

Kernel 3 power regression concerning sandy bridge chips

Hi all,
Using 2.6.39.* acpi predicted 10-10:30 hours remaining on a 100% charged battery (9 cells battery),
on 3.0 I get a reading of 6-7 hours remaining on the same charge level.
I've also noticed I don't get the same thermal readings I used to prior to upgrading,
I used to poll /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp1_input for thinkfan controlling fan speed but it ain't there no more.
Which leads me to believe maybe the ACPI readings are plain wrong?
I'm using the latest laptop-mode tools and have cpufreq switch to ondemand on battery.
My loaded modules:
MODULES=(fuse vboxdrv thinkpad_acpi acpi-cpufreq cpufreq_ondemand)
Thanks
Edit: This issue seems to be related to recent (detailed briefly here) power regressions involving sandy bridge chips
Last edited by oded (2011-08-08 21:25:24)

That seems to be it. Anyone else know whether it was reported updtream?
Gladly my pacman cache has 2.6.39 I'll go with ignoring an update for the first time in my life!
EDIT: Booting 3.0 with i915.i915_enable_rc6=1 get rid of the regression. Seems that I can happily live with 3.0
Last edited by alexcriss (2011-08-08 21:36:45)

I915 power consumption issue after switch to systemd?

After switching to systemd I noticed a massive increase of power consumption on my Thinkpad X220 (i5 Sandy Bridge).
The strange thing is, that after some reboots it randomly seems to catch the i915 power saving mode and the consumption gets from ~24W to ~7W at idle. But only after several reboots.
Adding the good old i915.i915_enable_rc6=1 to the boot parameters doesn't make any differences. But looking at the powertop detail outputs it seems to be a i915 issue.
Using the latest linux kernel from core (3.6.4) and latest intel drivers (2.20.12).

I started to get suspicious because I have only ever had the issue in my office. Last week, when I encrypted my drive, my machine wrote to disk for more than 14 hours solid. I then did all the set up and all the restoring from backup etc. with no issue whatsoever. Lenovo ran the thing for 48 hours straight with no problem. But once in my office...
So I asked the local IT people if they could think of anything other than overheating and explained the issue. They took my laptop yesterday , booted it from a hardware testing CD and ran it for a couple of hours sitting on top of a hot computer in the server room which is definitely hot. (It has a whole bunch of computers, I guess.) No issue. They then ran stress tests for a while in the same place. No problem. Highest recorded temp: 65C.
The head of IT then took my power adapter to a more general IT service to be tested and inspected. They looked at it, they opened the plug to check the fuse, they tested it. No problem. Of course, the guy also explained why he was asking and the other IT person said, "Oh, is that on level 1?" "Yes..." So apparently there was another machine (a Mac), I think, doing just the same thing in an office in my part of the building. Testing showed that the power spikes and when the power spikes, the laptop shut down as a safety measure. Solution: they installed a UPS for that one laptop. They didn't tell anybody else, including the local IT people.
What the local IT people were going to do was to install equipment to monitor the power in my office and see if anything weird was causing my laptop to react. However, that was when this was an extremely-unlikely-but-we-are-getting-desperate-for-theories scenario. Clearly, that theory no longer seems wildly implausible at all. So the current hypothesis is that it is most likely that my machine is also reacting to the spikes in power by shutting itself off. (I'm not sure why it should have just started doing this but who knows what the state of the electricals is and how that might vary?)
I have been told that a surge protector will do no good. (They've given me one anyway but apparently it will not deal with spikes in phase 3 power or something - I didn't understand this bit but the head IT person said he didn't understand it either but the electricals IT person showed him with graphs on the whiteboard. So it must be true.)
The current plan is to try to get the UPS from central IT which was provided for the other laptop since that person's discipline has since moved to another floor of the building so the UPS probably went back to central IT. They are going to ask during a meeting tomorrow about this possibility. Otherwise, they are planning to order a UPS for me on Monday.
I'm somewhat surprised that the abrupt shutdowns haven't screwed my data. I've lost work but not seen fs corruption. I didn't take my laptop today. I'll need it next week but I do not plan to plug it in in my office until I have a UPS.
I'm pretty annoyed, to be honest. I've wasted hours on this and got incredibly stressed about it. The IT people have also wasted a (smaller) amount of time. I hoped to have a new draft of an article I'm working on written by the end of reading week but that didn't happen due to all of this. And they *knew*. It would be different if this was an unknown problem just discovered - of course, one could understand that. But there's a known problem which can cause this type of problem and presumably could well damage equipment without these sorts of safety shutdown features and they don't tell anybody.
And, no, I doubt very much indeed that a damaged personal machine would be considered the institution's liability. (Maybe if it was a student's machine and the student was required to use it or something but even then...)
I can't believe it does much good to their equipment either.
The local IT people did know there was an issue with some burnt out devices but that was about eight years ago and only got mentioned as a outside possibility when other diagnostics turned up no result.
What gets me is that the proposed solution will only solve the issue for me - not for anybody else in my part of the building on level 1.

PM-Suspend on Sandy Bridge - no keyboard or mouse on Resume/Wakeup

Hi,
I am having no luck in trying to get pm-suspend to work properly on wakeup on a new sandy bridge laptop. On resume, video is restored and i can see the system prompt blinking in a terminal, but both the mouse and keyboard is dead. The only response that i can get from the system is the power reset button.
Have also tried various suggested fixes including the following:
1) bind / unbind i8042
2) SUSPEND_MODULES = "xhci-hcd psmouse"
3) rmmod tpm_tis
but none of the above works.
Please see various log files:
Uname & lspci: http://pastebin.com/KhcW76wN
PM-Suspend & Xorg: http://pastebin.com/H1683SYs
Messages: http://pastebin.com/B5e0p5ff
Kernel: http://pastebin.com/DaY0FSbi
Would appreciate any suggestion on debugging / resolving the problem.
Thanks.

Hi,
I am having no luck in trying to get pm-suspend to work properly on wakeup on a new sandy bridge laptop. On resume, video is restored and i can see the system prompt blinking in a terminal, but both the mouse and keyboard is dead. The only response that i can get from the system is the power reset button.
Have also tried various suggested fixes including the following:
1) bind / unbind i8042
2) SUSPEND_MODULES = "xhci-hcd psmouse"
3) rmmod tpm_tis
but none of the above works.
Please see various log files:
Uname & lspci: http://pastebin.com/KhcW76wN
PM-Suspend & Xorg: http://pastebin.com/H1683SYs
Messages: http://pastebin.com/B5e0p5ff
Kernel: http://pastebin.com/DaY0FSbi
Would appreciate any suggestion on debugging / resolving the problem.
Thanks.

Pavilion g6-1262sa CPU upgrade v2, Sandy Bridge = Ivy Bridge?

Hi, thanks to the Pavilion g6-1262sa maintenance and servicing manual and this magnificient forum I've recently found out that replacing my i3-2330m is possible with all sandy bridge processors up to i7-2620m.
Theese questions may sound silly but I continued my research and I've got couple more ideas to confront with reality.
I do realise that compatibility is not only matter of fitting the same socket but also bios installed on certain motherboard, however:
1. Do you think it would be possible to swap Sandy Bridge (2nd gen) i3-2330m for some Ivy Bridge (3rd gen) i5 -3210m?
2. Is the 32nm to 22nm manufacturing technology enough difference on it's own (even if the rest of architecture is the same) to prevent this from working?
3. Is bios of my g6 motherboard somehow identyfying installed processor? (if it's not on "the list" it will simply not run?" or is it only technical compatibility matter?
According to some statements which I found on some IT forums and sites (and some self researched facts):
Socket: both processors are compatible with BGA1023 socket. (at least that's what I found, if someone could confirm I would be grateful)
Architecture difference: "The 3rd generation is called "Ivy Bridge," and is basically a copy of Sandy Bridge manufactured on a smaller scale, or die. However, Intel also focused on beefing up the integrated graphics in this generation."
TDP: both are 35 W
Cores: both are 2 physical (4 Virtual - thanks to hyperthreading I guess?)
Power consumption: "the Ivy Bridge CPUs also use less power", "Ivy Bridge consumes a little less power; around 10w i think."
Temperature: i5 -3210m goes 5*C higher than i3-2330m - shouldn't do much difference
Looking forward to some replies, RacA
This question was solved.
View Solution.

It is not a technical (socket) incompatibility since as you likely know Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge are backward compatible on most desktop motherboards. However, HP has only implemented 2d gen Intel Core processor compatibility on the HM65 Express chipset which yours has. Motherboards that will support 3rd gen CPUs use the HM77 chipset. There is no other motherboard that will fit in your chassis.
Your analysis above, which was pretty good, left out the chipset, which you always have to think about when assessing upgrade possibilities:
http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-Intel_%28chipsets%29/HM65_Express.html
The HM65 does support a couple 3rd gen CPUs but none of them is on HP's list for your model. You could try one of the ones listed in the link I gave but I think there is a very small chance they will work.
If this is "the Answer" please click "Accept as Solution" to help others find it.

Tapeless workflows and Sandy Bridge or other PC's: KISS or LOVE?

Tapeless workflows and Sandy Bridge or other PC's: KISS or LOVE?
Life used to be so simple when shooting video on a tape based camera. You shot your material, captured it for editing and stored your precious original footage on tape in a safe and dry place. Sure, it took time to capture, but the big advantage was that if you had a computer or drive failure, you would still have the original tape so everything could be recreated.
Now with tapeless workflows we have the significant advantage of much faster import of the original footage. Connect the flash card or disk drive to the computer over USB and copy the data to a HDD on the computer, ready for editing. The data on the flash card or disk drive can then be erased, so you can reuse it for more shots. But, like Johan Cruyff has said repeatedly, every advantage has its drawback. In this case it simply means that you no longer have the original material to fall back on, in case of computer or drive failures. That is a very unpleasant and insecure feeling.
The easy anwser to that problem is backups. Backup of the original media, backup of projects and backup of exports. This often means a bundle of externals for backup or NAS configurations. One thing is clear, it requires discipline to make regular backups and it costs time, as well as a number of disks. Four as a minimum: 1 for media, 1 for exports and at least 2 for projects. Note: This is excluding a backup drive for OS & programs.
There are different backup strategies in use. Some say backup daily and use one disk for monday, one for tuesday, and so on. Others say one disk for the first backup, the second for the second backup, then the first again for an incremental backup, etc. and once weekly a complete backup on a third disk. Whatever you choose, be aware that shelf live of a disk is far less than tape. There are horror stories everywhere about ball-bearings getting stuck after some time and without original tapes, you better be safe than sorry, so don't skimp on backups.
What is the relevancy of all this? I thought this was about Sandy Bridge and other PC's.
It is and let me try to explain.
Card based cameras are for the most part DSLR and AVCHD type cameras, and we all know how much muscle is required to edit that in a convenient way. Adobe suggests in the system requirements to use raid configurations for HD editing and practice has shown that raid arrays do give a significant performance boost and improve responsiveness, making for a nicer editing experience. The larger the project and the longer the time-line, the more a raid array will help maintain the responsiveness.
One thing you would not do is using a raid0 for projects, media and exports, even if you have backups. The simple reason is that the chance of disk failure multiplies by the number of disks in the raid0. Two disks double the chance of disk failure, three disks triple the chance, four disks quadruples the chance, etc.
Remember: Disaster always strikes when it is most inconvenient.
Imagine you have been working all day on a project, you decide to call it a day and to make your daily backup, but then the raid fails, before you made your backup. Gone is all of today's work. Then take into consideration the time and effort it takes to restore your backups to the state it was in yesterday. That does not make you happy.
Another thing to avoid is using a software or mobo based parity raid, for the simple reason that it is slooowww and puts a burden on the CPU, that you want to use for editing, not house keeping.
For temporary or easily recreated files, like the page-file, media cache, media cache database and preview files, it is very much advised to use a raid0. It makes everything a lot snappier and if disaster strikes, so what? These are easily recreated in a short time.
This was a general overview of what is required with tapeless workflows. Now let's get down to what this means in terms of system design.
Two approaches or train of thoughts
KISS: Keep it stupidly simple or LOVE: Laughing over video editing
The first one, the most economic one, is to use a system with 3 or 4 disks internally and 4 or more backup disks.
A typical disk setup can look like this:
This is a perfectly sensible approach if one does not have large or complex projects, long time-lines and is willing to take the risk of occasionally losing a whole days work, between backups. Many hobbyists and consumers fall in this category.
The KISS approach keeps it stupidly simple. The drawback is that there is no logical way to add more disks or storage. The discipline, diligence and effort required for regular backups make it far from a laughing matter. In fact it can quickly become a bore. Add to that the fact that the disk setup is simple but not very fast, so less suited for situations where lots of clips are involved, multi-cam is a regularly recurring situation or lots of video tracks are involved.
A number of video editors want more from their system than the occasional platonic KISS, they want to really LOVE their system, which lead to the other train of thought.
This is more costly than the KISS approach, but you all know a fiancée or wife is more costly and dear than the occasional kiss on the cheek by an old friend.
Let's start with a typical disk setup. It may look like this:
Two striking differences in comparison to the KISS approach:
1. Much easier disk organization and more disks and thus more space.
2. It requires a hardware raid controller, causing a higher investment cost. It is like an engagement ring. You don't get LOVE for free, one of the guiding principles of the oldest trade in the world.
These are easy statements to make, but what are the benefits or advantages, that you would fall in LOVE with such a system, and what are the drawbacks? Think back to Johan Cruyff's adage.
The only drawback is cost. The advantages are multiple, easier organization, more speed, more storage, snappier editing, no jerkiness, lesser requirements for regular backups and - this is the major benefit - hardly a chance of losing a day's work in case of a drive failure. Keep in mind that a parity raid keeps all your data intact in case of a drive failure, so lessens the need for up-to-date backups.
We all know, we get what we pay for: "If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. OTOH, if you pay money to monkeys, you get rich monkeys". But in this case you get what you pay for, a much better editing experience with a much easier workflow.
Using a parity raid (be it raid 3/5/6/30/50/60) you get security, ease of mind that you are protected against losing precious media, that you need not worry about the last time you made a backup, that the editing you did today may be lost and you save valuable time editing and a lot of aggravation because of a much more responsive system.
How does this all relate to Sandy Bridge and other PC's?
First of all, the price difference between a Sandy Bridge / P67 platform and an i7-950+ / X58 platform is very small. Of course the new architecture is slightly more expensive than the older one, but the differences are small, almost not worth talking about.
So what are the differences? Look below:
The first thing to keep in mind is that the Sandy Bridge is the successor of the i7-8xx CPU and as such it is much more evolutionary than revolutionary. The CPU power has increased significantly over the i7-8xx due to new architecture and a smaller production process (32 nm), but in essence all the capabilities have remained unchanged. Same memory, same PCI-e lanes, same version, same L3 cache and no support for dedicated raid controllers.
It is great that the processor performs much better than the older i7-8xx CPU's, almost achieving the level of the i7-9xx range of processors, but is still limited:
The Sandy Bridge is unsuitable for anything more than a KISS system.
Why? Because it lacks the required PCI-e lanes to accomodate more than a 16 x PCI-e nVidia card with CUDA support to enable hardware MPE acceleration and the integrated graphics are not supported by CS5.
You may wonder if that is a bad thing. The plain and simple anser is NO. It is a great processor, it delivers great value for money, is a solid performer, but it has its limitations. Intel had a reason to position this CPU as a mid-level CPU, because that is what it is, a mid-level performer in comparison to what is to come.
The term mid-level performer may seem strange when compared to the old generation of i7-9xx CPU's, because they perform almost equally well, but keep in mind that there is a generation difference between them.
So what about the i7-9xx and X58 platform?
It still is going strong. About the same performance as a Sandy Bridge, with only the much more expensive hexa-cores clearly in the lead, both performance and price wise. The quad cores deliver about the same value for money. The main difference however is the platform that allows a dedicated raid controller to be installed, thus making it the platform of choice for those who want to go from a passing KISS to true LOVE.
And what lies ahead?
Sandy Bridge E on the Waimea platform (X68). Now that is revolutionary. More than double almost everything a processor can offer: double the cores, double the PCI-e lanes, triple the memory, more than double the L3 cache, increase the PCI-e support from 2.0 to 3.0, etc...
This is why Intel calls this a high-end CPU / platform.
So what now?
If you prefer a KISS approach, choose either a Sandy Bridge/P67 or an i7-950+/X58 platform.
If you wonder whether in the future you may need multi-cam more frequently, edit more complex projects and longer timelines or even progress to RED, look at KISS/LOVE solutions, meaning the i7-950+/X58.
If you can't have downtime, time pressure is high, delivery dates to clients are critical or you edit highly complex projects, lots of multi-cam situations or lengthy time-lines, choose a LOVE solution, an i7-950+/X58 platform.
If you have the time to wait till Q4/2011, Sandy Bridge E/Waimea looks to be worth the wait.
Hope this gives you some more insight into recent and future developments and helps you make wise investment decisions.

I'm upgrading from an AMD 3800+, cutting with Vegas 7 Pro. Usually shoot DSLR or HDV, sometimes P2, EX or RED. I have ridiculously cheap access to Macs, FCP/FCS, all kinds of software.
I've been agonizing over this for the last month, was originally hoping the UD7 mobo was the solution, read the read about the NF200/PCIe issue a few days ago, http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/non-linear-editing-pc/489424-i7-980x-now-wait-sandybridge-2.ht ml- and still decided to go for a 2600k.
My preference is to treat my video footage the same way as my digital imagery: I make (at least) duplicate back ups of everything before reformatting the cards, never delete the back ups, and only worry about the day-to-day stuff at night. Unless I'm rendering or involved in other long processes, in which case I'll back up the work in process the next day. If I am under a really really tight deadline I might back up as I go.
Yes, a RAID might make it easier, but I'm paranoid enough to prefer a slower, safer backup. You can always duplicate, and usually improve upon, a days work, but you can never get back original footage you lost. I have only ever had one hard drive die on me (a few enclosures crapped out, though)- it took a couple of (mostly unattended) hours to rectify. As a matter of act, I've had far more loss/damage from tapes than from hard drives.
I ordered the UD7, 2 F4s and 4 F3Rs, understanding I will probably want to upgrade to SBE when it comes out, or maybe next year. The 2600k/mobo/RAM will likely hold its value better than a 950/X58, likely because of the marketplace as much as merit.
The UD7 / RAID card issue is in it's early days, there may be a solution/mitigation. Probably not. But if I really really need a RAID card, then I probably really really need a 980, NAS, etc etc.
But Harm still rocks!

Power consumption increased with kernel 3.2.5

The new kernel 3.2.5 supposedly fixed the old power regression introduced in 2.6.39 (or so). On my T60 laptop (Core 2 Duo) not only that the power consumption stayed high, but the pcie_aspm=force option passed to the kernel is not working anymore. The result: my laptop consumes 20W on idle (I use KDE, kmail and firefox on with 2 tabs open). That's 25% more than what I had with the older 3.2.4 kernel and pcie_aspm=force enabled.
powertop2 does not show anything unusual, the CPU is basically idle on the lowest available frequency 98% of the time (I'm using the ondemand governor).
Did you guys experience something similar or is it just me?

If you don't use Skype then I'd delete it.
PIM services is a bit high. I'd remove each of your accounts under Settings >Accounts. Then reboot the device. Monitor the PIM services battery drain for a while with no accounts added and see how it goes. Then add each account back, one at a time, and monitor for a couple hours to see the PIM services usage. It should be a bit high for the first hour while information syncs to the device then it should settle down. Once you're satisfied the account is working OK you can add the next account. Find the one that keeps the PIM services drainage high.
If the device doesn't show 4G, then what does it show?

Intel Z68 Sandy Bridge chipset and SSD caching....

For those of us considering a move to the Sandy Bridge/Z68 platform, we will eventually need to sort out whether to take advantage of the chipset's ability to "improve" ONE hard drive with a smallish (64GB or less) SSD.
Results I have seen indicate read speeds considerably slower than an SSD drive alone but acceptably improved performance over a bare hard drive. It seems like a promising situation. Capacity of a TB hard drive with read speeds nicely bumped upwards.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z68-express-lucidlogix-virtu-ssd-caching,2888.html
Question: If a user followed Harm's and other's suggestions in setting up a basic 3- or 4-drive computer, which drive should take the cheapo SSD?
Thoughts:
1) Assume the Z68 platform is loaded with all 16GB of memory that the four-slot Socket 1155 motherboard can typically accept. Would CS5 or 5.5 load enough program data into RAM to render placing the SSD on the OS drive for editing with Premiere minimally beneficial? Or would it simply make sense to put the SSD on the OS drive for so many other reasons that it's a no-brainer?
2) If it's a close call, which other drive should get the SSD? If I understand correctly, this hybrid drive won't write data all that much better. The improvement will primarily be on reads. And on that, random access reads, not sustained throughput. This is especially the case with cheaper 40GB-ish SSD's. (Some one please verify this.) Most Sandy Bridge users opting for the lower end, 20 PCI-e lanes platform won't be big-time power users. (You guys are waiting for the Socket 2011 platform.) Many of us will be getting our footage from DSLR or other AVCHD sources. AVCHD is so compressed that a single drive can supply more than enough layers for the Joe Blow amateur editor.
Unless we use Cineform NeoScene to lighten the load on the CPU, which will result in a much larger bitstream coming off the media drive for each layer, Would it make sense to help out a single drive in this situation? Or would it be universally better to set up a simple 2-disk RAID 0? Paying $65 for second drive and taking advantage of motherboard RAID 0 would seem to be a better solution if the media drive can't keep up.
For any situation, if the media drive(s) is already fast enough, would caching the media drive offer many benefits? I'm under the impression that feeding Premiere with footage is a sequential read situation, not a random access deal. Isn't the strength of an SSD in random access reads, and wouldn't the best usage be to place it on a disk that primarily is used by Premiere in random access data fetching?
3) Good grief. If it doesn't go on the OS or primary media drive supplying footage, where else? Projects disk? Scratch drive?
4) Might the most useful thing be to avoid setting up a RAID while getting some of the speed benefits a RAID 0 offers? Many casual users can build a straightforward computer but have never set up a RAID array, even a 2-disk RAID 0.
40GB SSD's are under $100 now. I suspect a lot of people will use this feature of the Z68, if the hybrid drive isn't hard to set up and is reliable. I'm curious how the Premiere crowd will make use of this feature, and will it make a palpable difference on a relatively simple editing rig? No Areca RAID cards and only 16GB memory. Nothing more than 3 or 4 single drives.

Frankly I don't see how an inexpensive SSD would help the "caching" for editing with Premiere CS5, since a typical 7200 rpm 1TB drive can perform substained writes at about 2x what a typical small SSD does.
Premiere CS5 continues to beg for lots of drives!
Jim
(one of the few "believers" in SSDs on this forum - and my "belief" is for OS and programs, not for input, media, caching, etc.)

Can't get rid of my high power consumption (Thinkpad X60 Tablet)

This is really driving me nuts. On Windows 7, I can achieve a power consumption of around 11-12W (with moderate web surfing usage over WLAN and full screen brightness, just Aero turned off).
On Arch, I can't get below 13W *ever* with full screen brightness, even without WLAN and any kind of computer usage besides running X11. And normal moderate web surfing usage (without Flash, mind you) brings it up to at least 17W.
The reason for this, I believe, is a really high number of wakeups from idle. powertop shows me at least 40 wakeups per second even when I don't have anything running besides X11. If I have Firefox, Thunderbird and Pidgin running, this climbss to at least 80 wakeups per second. Powertop shows the main cause for the wakeups in both cases to be "acpi" and "extra timer interrupt", as well as "Reschedulin interrupts". With those three applications running, there is additionally a high usage of "hrtimer_start_range_ns (tick_sched_timer)" and "iwl3945" (well, I guess the latter figures for internet applications).
I'm running laptop-mode-tools for power management, btw.
Anyone got some idea of what causes those idle wakeups, and how I might be able to fix it? I don't see why Windows 7 should be better than Arch here, the bloated monstrum it is...
Last edited by Natanji (2010-02-06 13:40:58)

The issue with hrtimer_start_range_ns is existing for a while. Unfortunately it isn't fixed until today. There is an entry in the kernel bugtracker http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14424
I think this is the main reason for the short battery life of my Samsung NC10 . If you google for it you will find numerous posting in bugtrackers of various distributions but no one seems to really care or know how to fix this?

Intel finds errors in Sandy Bridge chipset

I just saw this announcement that Intel has found design flaws in the new Sandy Bridge chipset and it looks like there will be a recall. I just bought a Satellite A660 with the i7-2630qm which has the Intel 6 series chipset in question. What a disappointment! I guess that's the risk you take when you buy new technology. I hope Toshiba will fix this for those who already have this processor. I was thinking about returning this model anyway and now I really want to get rid of it.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Thanks for the response, Jim, but I'd like to register my disappointment with Toshiba's decision. I *like* my new Satellite and I'd much prefer to get it fixed. I'd like to point out that a certain competitor (rhymes with 'bell') is offering a refund, replace, or repair three-option solution. Toshiba's one size fits all solution, which really only benefits Toshiba and not their customers, looks pretty poor by comparison. I hope Toshiba reconsiders.
Mike

[SOLVED] Huge power consumption after kernel upgrade.

Dear All,
I have recently bought the new lenovo thinkpad X1 equipped with a Core I5 processors and 4GB of RAM.
I am quite satisfied with this machine except for the fact that the fan is extremely loud (but perhaps a bios upgrade will fix problem).
Now my problem:
When I first installed Arch (first days of August) I ran powertop and the power consumption was around 10 Watts when idle with wifi card turned off.
Now, after some upgrades, the power consumption raises to 18W in idle and consequently the battery lasts less than 2h.
Here my current configuration:
Linux think-x1 3.0-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue Aug 30 08:53:25 CEST 2011 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2520M CPU @ 2.50GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
and here the powertop output obtained with the cpu frequency governor set to "On demand":
Cn Avg residency P-states (frequencies)
C0 (cpu running) ( 5.3%) Turbo Mode 0.1%
polling 0.0ms ( 0.0%) 2.50 Ghz 0.0%
C1 mwait 0.2ms ( 0.1%) 2.21 Ghz 0.0%
C2 mwait 0.3ms ( 0.0%) 1200 Mhz 0.1%
C3 mwait 2.4ms ( 0.0%) 800 Mhz 99.8%
C4 mwait 13.1ms (94.6%)
Wakeups-from-idle per second : 76.1 interval: 3.0s
Power usage (ACPI estimate): 15.7W (2.8 hours)
Top causes for wakeups:
46.5% (135.7) kworker/0:0
17.7% ( 51.7) PS/2 keyboard/mouse/touchpad interrupt
11.9% ( 34.7) [kernel scheduler] Load balancing tick
8.6% ( 25.0) [iwlagn] <interrupt>
2.9% ( 8.3) [i915] <interrupt>
2.6% ( 7.7) [acpi] <interrupt>
1.8% ( 5.3) chromium
1.6% ( 4.7) [kernel core] hrtimer_start (tick_sched_timer)
1.5% ( 4.3) kworker/0:1
0.7% ( 2.0) minilogd
0.7% ( 2.0) [kernel core] iwl_bg_watchdog (iwl_bg_watchdog)
0.6% ( 1.7) X
0.6% ( 1.7) [kernel core] intel_gpu_idle_timer (intel_gpu_idle_timer)
0.3% ( 1.0) Terminal
0.3% ( 1.0) [kernel core] tpt_trig_timer (tpt_trig_timer)
0.2% ( 0.7) [mmc0, mei, ehci_hcd:usb3] <interrupt>
0.2% ( 0.7) upowerd
0.1% ( 0.3) init
0.1% ( 0.3) gpg-agent
0.1% ( 0.3) [kernel core] ieee80211_sta_reset_conn_monitor (ieee80211_sta_conn_mon_timer)
0.1% ( 0.3) wicd-client
0.1% ( 0.3) kworker/u:3
0.1% ( 0.3) watchdog/0
I have also tried to disable most of the running daemons and unload some modules, but I have never got less than 14/15W when idle, which in my opinion is definitely too much!
As far as I'm concerned, the kworker process is responsible most of the wakeups.
Any ideas?
Last edited by jacopo_c (2011-09-05 13:12:16)

pogeymanz wrote:I read somewhere that the kernel devs really don't see this as an issue. They just expect that laptop owners should know to try these boot parameters. So, definitely not by 3.1.
from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727579:
Dave Jones 2011-08-03 15:32:21 EDT
enabling it by default in 3.0 caused regressions for some people, so it was
disabled. Hopefully Intel figures it out, and we can switch it back on by
default in 3.1 / 2.6.41 (until then, you'll have to set it by hand).
Interesting stuff, also recommend this thread on phoronix:
http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.p … Regression
Last edited by masteryod (2011-09-12 00:30:00)

Sandy Bridge

Aching to buy a new Mac Book Pro But But But.
I am worried of such a processor being of its complications.
Have the problems been resolved and Apple are NOT using a modified version
which still holds the problems and using metal strip bridge version that
sits across the ata ports. and also the ata ports 2 will degrade over time.
So basically are Apple now using a corrected Sandy Bridge processor completely
free of any bugs and problems?
If not any idea what is Apple's stance as a brand on this if things go wrong later down the line when the laptop is out of warranty?
Cheers

If not any idea what is Apple's stance as a brand on this if things go wrong later down the line when the laptop is out of warranty?
This is a user to user forum. As such Terms of use forbid us from guessing Apple's policy or prognosticating the future. Please read on the right.
That said, http://www.ifixit.com/ frequently gets mockups of the internals of new machines shortly after their release. That would allow you to use probably if that metal strip is where you fear.
The "bugs" as it were frequently are user induced, or related to other issues you probably haven't isolated. A PRAM on an old MacBook Pro can cause slow down if the machine ages over 4 years. This is a help forum. As such appeareances are like a hospital ward. You aren't going to hear from as many healthy Mac users and lemons. The unfortunate thing for the magazines trying to find something wrong with Apple, is they have a biased sample on that account trying to read the boards. If there is a problem that Apple wants to cover out of warranty, it often appears here:
http://www.apple.com/support/exchange_repair/
My advice, buy if the machine meets your needs, and get yourself a warranty to go wtih it during the first year of ownership. That way you'll have three years where Apple will fix any hardware related issues that aren't due to user interaction.

Sandy Bridge (i7-2600K) vs Bloomfield( i-950)

I'm getting ready to do my build and the last thing I'm trying to decide on is to go with the newer Sandy Bridge platform, or the older Bloomfield. In some bench marks (non-Premiere related), it seems that the Sandy Bridge is faster, uses less power, etc...
However, when it comes to purchasing memory, I can only get 16gigs (4 dual channel memory slots) on the Sandy Bridge platform right now, vs 24 (6 triple channel memory) on the Bloomfield.
The chips themselves are priced within $50 of each other, so this isn't really a cost thing, but more of a what "platform" is better.
Any thoughts and links would be appreciated...

Adobe Forums: Tapeless workflows and Sandy Bridge or...

Sandy bridge bootloader power consumption fix

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for