Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No
Signin with

Energy Consumption At Idle

by

CPU Energy Consumption At Idle

We measured the energy consumption of this processor and compared it with other models:

System-Level Energy Consumption At Idle

Compared to its 65 nm Phenom, AMD was able to reduce energy needs by between 10 and 17 watts--close to the notorious power-friendly Phenom X4 9350 from the 65 nm product family. Intel’s Core i7 still weighs in at substantially higher values than any of the AMD processors, but the Core 2 Quad Q6600 consumes 19 watts more at idle. This may make a more meaningful basis for comparison, as this CPU costs about the same as the entry-level AMD Phenom II. In the end, energy consumption comes from an entire PC system, and is not solely a function of the CPU it contains. Together, all of the components determine how much energy will be consumed, at idle and otherwise.

The 790GX consumes significantly less power than the Intel X48 and X38 chipsets, giving AMD an advantage. At idle, the system with a Phenom II consumes only 113 watts. The Intel Core i7 920 system requires 136 watts, while the Core i7 965 Extreme system takes in 145 watts. Consider also that an idle system with a Core 2 Quad 6600 requires 3 more watts than a Phenom II system.

Components Used For Energy Consumption Measurement:

System
Phenom II
Core 2
Core i7
Chipset
AMD 790GX X48
X58
RAM
DDR2-1066DDR3-1333DDR3-1333
Graphics Card
Nvidia GeForce GTX 280 Nvidia GeForce GTX280 Nvidia GeForce GTX280
Hard Disk
2 x WD 3200AAKS2x WD 3200AAKS2x WD 3200AAKS
BD-ROM
Pioneer BDC-202BK Pioneer BDC-202BK Pioneer BDC-202BK
Sound Card
Creative X-Fi Xtreme GamerCreative X-Fi Xtreme GamerCreative X-Fi Xtreme Gamer
Share:
164
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
one-shot 01/08/2009 3:17 AM
Show
firedogevan 01/08/2009 3:29 AM
Hide
-9+

why focus on the q6600... wouldn't the q9550 or 9650 be a more accurate comparison given their respective locations in the product lineup?

dechy 01/08/2009 3:40 AM
Hide
-16+

Yeah, the price comparison table should of included a Q9550, which costs same as i7 920 but with the lower mobo/ram combo price.

Ends up being the same price as the AMD bundle, but with a good more performance... there goes the whole "AMD price/performance" aspect of this chip.

one-shot 01/08/2009 3:41 AM
Hide
-7+

Great review. Maybe some overclocking later? There were some pretty high claims about its overclocking potential. I'll wait for AM3 before I retire my E6750.

cangelini 01/08/2009 3:59 AM
Hide
-7+

Coming up soon one-shot--I was working on that one =)

V3NOM 01/08/2009 4:14 AM
Hide
-20+

who cares about performance/watt? PRICE/PERFORMANCE is the big deal

anonymous 01/08/2009 4:30 AM
Show
nashville 01/08/2009 4:33 AM
Hide
-1+

hey bert/tom's:
good write up: thought id comment on i7 watts:
"we measured the power consumption directly from the 12 volt rail that supplied the CPU", i read somewhere the only i7 core logic gets power from 12v rail, the uncore/cache part somewhere else. if this is true, you going to do another measurements?

kirvinb 01/08/2009 5:10 AM
Hide
-20+

I'm so happy to see Intel has some competetion. While these new processors are not mind blowing, they offer some decent performance at the price given. I am sure this will lower the price of the q9400 and q9550, which is exactly what I want to see. Maybe even the i7s price will lower and maybe we will be back in the good days..where intel and amd flipped sides of the powerhouse like every 6 months..!! Good Write Up..

jj463rd 01/08/2009 5:21 AM
Hide
-2+

On the forums someone mentioned "why did they use DDR2-800 RAM when DDR2-1066 would give better performance for the Phenom II".Wouldn't this skew the benchmarks by a little bit (perhaps 2 to 3%)?

tomc100 01/08/2009 5:39 AM
Hide
-13+

I'm glad AMD has provided some competition to Intel. Lack of thereof would result in Intel price gouging customers just like Nvidia did last year.

kirvinb 01/08/2009 5:50 AM
Hide
-3+

oh god!! tell me about it!!! the 8880 Ultra was like 800 even 1000 bucks online!! What the hell!! that was ridiculous!! The 4870x2 is the fastest card on the planet(currently released) and you kind find it for less than 500..! 2007 was a bad year indeed

that_aznpride101 01/08/2009 6:05 AM
Hide
-3+

i think this confirms this is what my next upgrade will be. can't wait for the AM3 platform. =)

xx12amanxx 01/08/2009 6:16 AM
Hide
-16+

Time to ditch the ole x2 6000+ Phenom 2 here i come!

ravenware 01/08/2009 6:26 AM
Hide
-8+

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6819103471

newegg is listing $US 275.

Based on on the performance numbers here and the overclocking benches from firing squad this release looks to be very promising for AMD.

Can't wait to see how well the AM3 platform performs especially if you can use an integrated 48xx chip in xFire mode.

zodiacfml 01/08/2009 6:59 AM
Hide
-10+

the conclusion is a bit rushed.
how come it became a recommended buy, who will but it?

i see it a recommended buy for those who have am2 boards wanting core2quad like performance especially those like me which have an athlon x2 processor now.
anyways, if i will build a box soon based on amd,
i have to say wait for am3 boards.

nice addition of nero recode8 but it favors intel procs. now i know why my single core intel celeron m laptop works well in recode 8.

BartG 01/08/2009 7:26 AM
Hide
-4+

mmm, was it wrong to expect a bit more?
Even thought the intel costs more, the performance is also better... all in all, I would think only AMD folks are slipping of there chairs but not many Intel fans will change brands.

Me, im sticking to wanting to get a X58 board when the hype is gone and the prices drop...

Nice effort AMD, keep it up so we get even stronger competition!

PCfreak15 01/08/2009 7:34 AM
Show
ahslan 01/08/2009 7:35 AM
Hide
-3+

well i wonder how long my x2 6000+ is gonna last now...now imma be tempted to just stick a new Phenom II into my rig...but i think Ill wait till prices drop a lil...

Best offers

Newsletters


OK