Low-power computing: a tech guide

Charles McLellan ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 26 Mar 2008

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Go to section: Introduction What we tested How we tested Power consumption Workload test run time Workload test power consumption Conclusion

Although we're mindful of the variability introduced by having our workload test performed by a human rather than an automated script, three performance-related points emerge from this chart. First, the 433MHz OLPC XO is well behind the two 900MHz notebooks (the ASUS Eee and the Intel Classmate). Much of the OLPC's extra time in the workload test was down to the YouTube video playback segment: the installed Gnash player wouldn't play YouTube video at all, but even when this was replaced by Adobe's flash player, playback was slow and jerky.

Second, the even lower-spec 200MHz Aleutia E1, which runs Puppy Linux from a 1GB CompactFlash card, is seriously underpowered. It took over an hour to complete a test that took 18 minutes at best (on the Intel Classmate). Applications are particuarly slow to load on the E1, and video playback is again slow and jerky.

Finally, when it comes to the Inveno Computing Station, it was noticeably quicker to complete the test under Windows XP than Linux (24.6 minutes compared to 31.1 minutes). This was largely due to faster application load times under Windows XP.

Go to section: Introduction What we tested How we tested Power consumption Workload test run time Workload test power consumption Conclusion

Related articles

• 
• 
• 
• 

• Most Recent
• Most Popular