Re: A case for Dual System Cabinets

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips kony <spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in part:
>>No, they do not.  Yes, the fast box benchmarks 3x.  But I said
>>"gets total work done that much faster".  Does the user get up
>>out of the chair in 1/3rd the time?  No!  
 
> Yes, if we're goig to talk strict numbers then we would
> have to say that since the faster system gets the job done
> sooner, the user does get up sooner.

Sure.  Maybe 60 seconds on a one hour session.  1.7% for 3x the
power.  Not obviously a good return.  But perhaps so in economic
terms:  Say +100W power draw at U$0.15/kWh is U$0.90/hr for the
minute saved.  That's cheap, and that's how energy is "wasted".

> There just isn't any thought beyond an overly simplistic "one
> number is lower" concept here.  It ignores all the reaslistic

Chair time isn't realistic?  I'm questioning whether the
additional CPU power is useful, and arguing it may not
be, leading to full life-cycle energy and resource savings.

> scenarios and to spend more time on this half-baked idea is
> a waste of time (and power, for that matter, because it is
> another reason people would leave their systems on longer
> reading instead of being done and turning the system off).