Intel Claims Core Microprocessors Saved World Economy $2 Billion In Energy Costs
Next news- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (16) |
- Share
Intel’s engineers compared the power consumption of current generation Core processors with that of previous generations of processors. They came up with some impressive savings, so has Greenpeace found a friend in the semiconductor industry?
Calculating the amount of energy that has been saved over the last two years by taking into consideration power consumption, number of processors sold and the length of time they were expected to be running, engineers estimated a saving of 20 Terawatt hours compared to what earlier generations would have used over the same amount of time.
General Manager of Intel’s Eco-Technology Program Lorie Wigle published an article on an Intel blog explaining how the energy efficiency of the Core microarchitecture has saved the world economy $2 Billion in energy costs since its launch in 2006, assuming a $0.10 per kWh price tag.
The electricity bill for businesses that run computers 24 hours a day can be quite expensive. Using components with lower power consumption can cut costs significantly over the long term. While maximum performance is generally desired by end users more than reducing their carbon footprint, reductions in energy costs is always a welcome bonus.
Ironically, Intel recently began shipping their new dual-core Atom 330 processor, which has a power consumption double that of the Atom 230. While the Atom 330 itself does not significantly contribute to the world’s power consumption compared to Intel’s far more powerful desktop parts, this move goes completely against the semiconductor giant’s claim to be able to "have [their] cake and eat it too" - increase performance while reducing power consumption.
Source : Tom's Hardware
Related news
- The AMD and Intel Energy Crisis (WTF?!) [CPU & Components]
- Windwithme’s Core i7 review Part 8 - GIGABYTE EX58-UD3R Entry Version [Overclocking]
- "Green" system [Homebuilt Systems]
- HOWTO: Overclock C2Q (Quads) and C2D (Duals) - Guide v1.6.1 [Overclocking]
- When over clocking CPU (i7 920), do I need CPU cooler Or System Cooler [CPU & Components]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- HOWTO: Overclock C2Q (Quads) and C2D (Duals) - Guide v1.6.1
- E8500 + GA-X48-DS4
- Worried about Voltage
- core 1 jumping from 6% to 7% per Rightmark
- Allendale/Conroe OC'ing and EIST (or it's core2 version)
- ASUS P5Q-E vs. P5Q-Deluxe. Is 16-phase worth it?
- HELP with CPU-Z wrong cpu speed, bad timing!
- Dirt Cheap, Power Saving Rig <400
- General pre-build questions
- Final Shopping List
- new build
- Looking for feedback on parts list for my gaming pc.
Best offers
|
Core i7 I7-920 Quad Core Processor... | $310.00 STAPLES More info |
|
Core i5 750 Qaud Core Processor... | $199.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Quad... | $169.99 TigerDirect More info |
|
Phenom II X2 550 Dual Core Processor... | $90.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Core i7-860 Quad Core Processor... | $279.99 Newegg.com More info |
AES-NI Performance Analyzed; Limited To 32nm Core i5 CPUs
Starting with its dual-core Clarkfield-based Core i5 processors, Intel is introducing AES New Instructions to its architecture. We've already seen great benefits from a number of synthetic benchmarks, but what are the real-life advantages of this tech? Read More
-
Phenom II X2 555 Vs. Pentium G6950: New Budget Dual-Core Titans
AMD is launching a broad spectrum of new CPUs today. And while most are simple speed bumps, today we're pitting its fastest dual-core model, the Phenom II X2 555 Black Edition, against Intel's LGA 1156-based Pentium G6950 to see who rules for under $100. Read More
-
Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: January '10
December was a somewhat slow month in the CPU world, but January promises to inject a great deal of excitement into the sector with some major announcements. We discuss some of the potential changes and make our recommendations in this month's article. Read More
All performance charts
- Industry Sources Claim AMD Changed Naming Scheme For 45nm
- Intel '09 Roadmap Revealed: Part 2!
- Intel's '09 Roadmap Revealed: Part 1






Yeah, compared to their Pentium 4s
Youmight almost say,because intel has been slow-step increasing processor's powerdraw over the past 20 years,it may have gone unnoticed how much electricity because of then is being used today.
Instead of creating processors on a smaller die,and try to keep powerdraw as low as possible, they often increased powerdraw in favor for cpu speed.
Atom dualcore is a processor that will probably replace many of the Core2Duo and older singlecore machines out there!
The TDP might be double of the Atom single core, but it can do nearly everything a normal user needs(appart from gaming or CPU intensive tasks),including running Vista,which was just too slow for the single core Atom.
Remember that the average Core2Duo has a TDP of arround 40W, someless, some more. and some have a TDP of over 100Watts.
That'd be the same as running 12 atom cores on one system!
I would say, AMD saved the world 3 billion in Energy Cost by creating the Athlon 64 as it was the initial seed that started all.
I would say, AMD saved the world 3 billion in Energy Cost by creating the Athlon 64 as it was the initial seed that started all.
Then negated all their previous efforts with Phenom.
Yeah, compared to their Pentium 4s
P4 is OK, not really as bad as two P4 stick side to side. Oh, wait.....
Most business's I've seen with IT run pentium 4/ pentium d machines...because they're cheap.
and not green.
P4's are obsolete and should their way into the nearest trash bin.
I would like to see an energy test round up with P4's, C2D's, Athlon XP's, early gen AMD64 and Current gen AMD64(AM2 & AM2+).
So this statistic pretty much means that if nobody had upgraded their servers since 2003, this is how much more electricity would've been wasted? Intel quads and northbridges tend to waste quite a bit of electricity TBH.
yeah right!!!...they save from their own once power hungry processor....its not a save but a somewhat recover ....lol
Awww, there is P4 fanboy in here. Him sad cuz his CPU has been out classed for 5 years...
Remember that the average Core2Duo has a TDP of arround 40W, someless, some more. and some have a TDP of over 100Watts.That'd be the same as running 12 atom cores on one system!
While probably being more powerful than 12 Atoms too.
Remember that the TDP of a Phenom is less than alot of Intel Quads... of course the Intels chips take less time to do the same thing, but the Phenoms still have a leser max TDP and the Chipset draws less power.
Sounds like normal Intel marketing spin. They need to keep their name in people's minds and saying something like this is cheap advertising as it is picked up everywhere. Now, perhaps the next press release will be how their CPUs add to the individual happiness index and promotes world peace! Turning off the computer at the wall when not being actively used and not using it to play games will save a lot more power.
I'm perfectly fine with the idea of a Atom2core. Not for mininotebooks though, but for desktop, since I like many others out there don't really play games anymore.
Besides the CPU gamingmarket hasn't got much to offer anymore. The only games produced are Doom and Quake clones (which I was never a fan of)with higher graphics.
Plus many gaming companies go bankrupt or refuse to produce games for the pc feeling that they are more copied illegal than on gamingsystems.
And thus shifting their attention to the gamingsystems like nintendo, Sega, XBox and Playstation.
Games of these caliber can easely be played on a Atom dualcore with dual DDR and a Radeon3850 installed.
I understand the most powerfull pc's are necessary to play crisis, but I think the majority of people just don't play that kind of games.
The only con is, that intel prides itself on a lower TDP on the processor, but in return the Northbridge consumes lots more power than average for such devices.
Intel would do good with the release of the dualcore Atom, to release a Northbridge on 45nm, supporting the fastest memory, and have a system that's able to display HD movies (although the majority of people are not using their PC to view HD movies).
The Atom is quite the bang for the bucks too, if you consider regular office tasks, and occasional multimedia.
Saving energy will not save money in the long run. Energy companies are profit making companies. If the population begins to use less energy, the companies will simply raise the energy prices in order to show maintained or increased profits. You may save the enviroment in a near future, which is good. But you will not save your bucks.
Still Core or Athlon/Phenom may be using more power than Atom but thay do tasks several times faster exept in idle conditions there is not much difference. But for everyday tasks music, internet granted Atom is an intresting part- ( When they are going to make descent chipset for Atom?)