Arch Linux

SanskritFritz

Member

From: Budapest, Hungary

Registered: 2009-01-08

Posts: 1,924

Website

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

I compiled the kernel26-ck on a low end computer with default options. It brought a huge speed improvement. Then I turned dynamic ticks off and set the frequency to 1000Hz, and I experienced even more speed improvements.

---

zʇıɹɟʇıɹʞsuɐs AUR || Cycling in Budapest with a helmet camera || Revised log levels proposal: "FYI" "WTF" and "OMG" (John Barnette)

nolochemical

Member

From: St. catharines, Ontario,Canada

Registered: 2009-05-25

Posts: 18

Website

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

@gtklocker I set it to 1000 mhz. Toshiba L300D - AMD Athlon X2 (TK-57).

In order to compile the Virtualbox kernel modules, it will need to be a multiple of 1000 mhz.

Note:
- On a laptop, 1000 will run a bit hotter, so the fan will generally be on low whir all the time. Cleaning every 3 months instead of 6, is worth the effort.
- For your processor the frequency can be up to 2000Mhz [ http://products.amd.com/en-gb/NotebookC … spx?id=438 ]

---

We may only attempt to reverse engineer the future.. for now.
walls/screens|.conkyrc

beroal

Member

From: Ukraine

Registered: 2009-06-07

Posts: 325

Website

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

@gtklocker I set it to 1000 mhz. Toshiba L300D - AMD Athlon X2 (TK-57).
In order to compile the Virtualbox kernel modules, it will need to be a multiple of 1000 mhz.

Actually you mean Hz. Neither mHz (millihertz) nor MHz (megahertz) is not sensible in this context.

---

we are not condemned to write ugly code

graysky

Wiki Maintainer

From: :wq

Registered: 2008-12-01

Posts: 10,597

Website

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

Note:
- On a laptop, 1000 will run a bit hotter, so the fan will generally be on low whir all the time. Cleaning every 3 months instead of 6, is worth the effort.

Can you provide a reference for this statement?  I have compared the power usage as measured on my kill-a-watt of my system using the Arch standard 2.6.34 kernel and the kernel26-ck from the AUR and they are identical.

Using the kernel26-2.6.34-1-x86_64 package (currently in [testing]) with no modification so Ticks=300 Hz:

Idle: 87 W
Load (encoding x264): 151 W

Using the kernel26-ck 2.6.34-1 package from the AUR with Ticks=1000 Hz:

Idle: 87 W
Load (encoding x264): 151 W

System specs:
CPU: X3360 (Xeon version of the Q9550) @ 8.5x400=3.40 GHz
MB: GA-EP45-UD3P (rev. 1.6) BIOS = FE (2010/03/12)
Memory: TWIN2X4096-8500C5D 4 x 2 Gb @ 5-5-5-15 @ 1,066 MHz (2.66D)
HDD: Seagate 7200.12 ST31000528AS (1.0 G TB)
Video Card: Nvidia 8400 GS

CPU Vcore = 1.16250V
CPU Termin = 1.300V
CPU PLL = 1.500V
CPU Ref = 0.823V
MCH Core = 1.240V
MCH Ref = 0.863V
MCH/DRAM Ref = 0.900V
ICH I/O = 1.500V
ICH Core = 1.100V
DRAM Voltage = 2.100V
DRAM Termin = 0.900V

Last edited by graysky (2010-05-30 13:04:55)

---

CPU-optimized Linux-ck packages @ Repo-ck  • AUR packages • Zsh and other configs

DonVla

Member

From: Bonn, Germany

Registered: 2007-06-07

Posts: 997

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

I compiled the kernel26-ck on a low end computer with default options.

What do you mean by "default options"?

demian

Member

From: Frankfurt, Germany

Registered: 2009-05-06

Posts: 709

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

I'm also using CK-patchset and am very happy with it.
I didn't notice any change in power consumption. Maybe a few milliwatts more under office load with 1000HZ compared to the stock kernel with 300 HZ.

---

no place like /home
github

SanskritFritz

Member

From: Budapest, Hungary

Registered: 2009-01-08

Posts: 1,924

Website

Re: Kernel26-ck with BFS

I compiled the kernel26-ck on a low end computer with default options.

What do you mean by "default options"?

That I didnt change anything in 'make menuconfig', just compiled it as the PKGBUILD dictates.

---

zʇıɹɟʇıɹʞsuɐs AUR || Cycling in Budapest with a helmet camera || Revised log levels proposal: "FYI" "WTF" and "OMG" (John Barnette)