variable Vth

Joerg · Aug 22, 2005

Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Isn't that just because you bought a laptop with a regular pentium4 and
not a (more expensive?) pentium4-mobile?

Maybe, although I have seen Pentium mobile laptops quit in under two
hours as well.

My old rule: Never buy a laptop above $1500 unless there is a very
compelling reason. They break too easily and age too fast. I would
expect that designers of "modern" machine would at least make an effort
to learn from the old masters who designed the Contura series. Maybe I
am expecting too much ...

afaik all mobile pentiums and maybe also newer regular pentiums support
"Speedstep" and XP has build in support for it.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Frank Bemelman · Aug 22, 2005

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> schreef in bericht
news:9XnOe.239$dw4.12@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Isn't that just because you bought a laptop with a regular pentium4 and
not a (more expensive?) pentium4-mobile?

Maybe, although I have seen Pentium mobile laptops quit in under two
hours as well.

My old rule: Never buy a laptop above $1500 unless there is a very
compelling reason. They break too easily and age too fast. I would
expect that designers of "modern" machine would at least make an effort
to learn from the old masters who designed the Contura series. Maybe I
am expecting too much ...

afaik all mobile pentiums and maybe also newer regular pentiums support
"Speedstep" and XP has build in support for it.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Hey Joerg, did you know that every post of yours uses at least
on of the the words "expensive, cost, price, money" etcetera

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'q' and '.invalid' when replying by email)

Joerg · Aug 22, 2005

Hello Frank,

Hey Joerg, did you know that every post of yours uses at least
on of the the words "expensive, cost, price, money" etcetera

Maybe because many of my designs have to be very cost efficient. Oh
drat, now I have used it again...

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

jason · Aug 23, 2005

Hi Keith

Can you explain more about fourth terminal of soi?
Thank you

Jason

Keith Williams · Aug 23, 2005

In article <1124802689.939881.156950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
cheanglong@gmail.com says...

Hi Keith

Can you explain more about fourth terminal of soi?

The fourth terminal is the body. By modulating the body one changes
the characteristics of the transistor. One usually ties the body
somewhere or leaves it float, but it can be used to alter the
characteristics of the transistor. See also: "Dual-Gate FET" and
"FinFET".

--
Keith

Sylvain Munaut · Aug 23, 2005

Joerg wrote:

Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Well, you just need to select carefully. My laptop costed me about 1300
eur >2 years ago and it's equiped with "centrino" processors which are
great for power consumption, they reduce both their clock speed and
v_core according to the load. the newer centrino are even better.

Usually in that price range you find two categories : those who are
means as laptop and those that are meant as desktop replacement. The
latter category has higher clock rate / performance / feature for the
same price but are often bigger / power-hungry.

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

Jim Thompson · Aug 23, 2005

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:29 +0200, Sylvain Munaut <com.246tNt@tnt>
wrote:

Joerg wrote:
Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Well, you just need to select carefully. My laptop costed me about 1300
eur >2 years ago and it's equiped with "centrino" processors which are
great for power consumption, they reduce both their clock speed and
v_core according to the load. the newer centrino are even better.

Usually in that price range you find two categories : those who are
means as laptop and those that are meant as desktop replacement. The
latter category has higher clock rate / performance / feature for the
same price but are often bigger / power-hungry.

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Joerg · Aug 23, 2005

Hello Sylvain,

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p

Like, which ones? I haven't seen one yet.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Aug 23, 2005

Jim Thompson skrev:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:29 +0200, Sylvain Munaut <com.246tNt@tnt
wrote:

Joerg wrote:
snip

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

It's probably a P3 architecture. P4's are a disaster for numeric
work.

yep, the pentium-m is not a pentium4 its a (heavily) modified pentium3

-Lasse

Sylvain Munaut · Aug 23, 2005

Joerg wrote:

Hello Sylvain,

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p

Like, which ones? I haven't seen one yet.

Mine is an Acer Travel mate 800. And I did use it for 5 hour straight,
doing mainly ssh from it to some server to configure them, while using
wireless. I remember that quite well, I had it for like 2-3 week and I
wanted to test the advertised capacity, I was really surprised !
Watching Xvid encoded movies during my weekly 2h train traject left it
at about 50% of it's capacity.

Unfortunatly the battery are not that good, after a year it has lost
half it's capacity ;(

Sylvain

Sylvain Munaut · Aug 23, 2005

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:29 +0200, Sylvain Munaut <com.246tNt@tnt
wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Well, you just need to select carefully. My laptop costed me about 1300
eur >2 years ago and it's equiped with "centrino" processors which are
great for power consumption, they reduce both their clock speed and
v_core according to the load. the newer centrino are even better.

Usually in that price range you find two categories : those who are
means as laptop and those that are meant as desktop replacement. The
latter category has higher clock rate / performance / feature for the
same price but are often bigger / power-hungry.

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

It's probably a P3 architecture. P4's are a disaster for numeric
work.

It is.
With a shorter pipeline, improved branch prediction and *LOT* more L1/L2
cache compared to P3.
(IIRC, I read that like 2 years ago when I looked what to buy)

Sylvain

Aug 23, 2005

Joerg skrev:

Hello Sylvain,

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p

Like, which ones? I haven't seen one yet.

I think my 2.4GHz noname laptop does around 3 hours, and it's a
P4 it should be alot better with a mobile pentium.

IBM claim something like 10 hours for some of their laptops if you add
an extra battry instead in the drive bay

-Lasse

Jim Thompson · Aug 23, 2005

On 23 Aug 2005 15:47:26 -0700, langwadt@ieee.org wrote:

Jim Thompson skrev:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:29 +0200, Sylvain Munaut <com.246tNt@tnt
wrote:

Joerg wrote:
snip

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

It's probably a P3 architecture. P4's are a disaster for numeric
work.

yep, the pentium-m is not a pentium4 its a (heavily) modified pentium3

-Lasse

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Joerg · Aug 23, 2005

Hello Lasse,

I think my 2.4GHz noname laptop does around 3 hours, and it's a
P4 it should be alot better with a mobile pentium.

3hrs isn't stellar but better than most. Thing is, my old Contura could
do that on a cheap NiCd.

IBM claim something like 10 hours for some of their laptops if you add
an extra battry instead in the drive bay

I feel a bit uneasy about giving up the drive. My Contura ate three hard
drives. The scream of death of a HD sounds awful but I had always backed
up. In its defense I must say that it has traveled a few hundred
thousand miles and sometimes it was rough. Nowadays a memory stick would
do but they are a bit clumsy in portable use. An alternative might be a
PCMCIA with an SD slot, if the laptop still has PCMCIA.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Joerg · Aug 23, 2005

Hello Sylvain,

Mine is an Acer Travel mate 800. And I did use it for 5 hour straight,
doing mainly ssh from it to some server to configure them, while using
wireless. I remember that quite well, I had it for like 2-3 week and I
wanted to test the advertised capacity, I was really surprised !
Watching Xvid encoded movies during my weekly 2h train traject left it
at about 50% of it's capacity.

That is a great performance, especially with video since it eats
batteries fast.

Unfortunatly the battery are not that good, after a year it has lost
half it's capacity ;(

Probably because they are so souped up these days. The old NiCd
batteries usually lasted 3 years or more.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Keith Williams · Aug 24, 2005

In article <430ba9eb$0$26920$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be>, com.246tNt@tnt
says...

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:39:29 +0200, Sylvain Munaut <com.246tNt@tnt
wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Hello Lasse,

Now I just wish that "modern" laptop designers would understand that
general concept. My old Contura could vary its processor clock according
to load. The new ones can't and in consequences eat their batteries in
under two hours. What a progress.

Why is it that Compaq could do all that 15 years ago for laptops in the
budget pricing range? The Contura was one of the lowest cost brand name
laptops you could buy in those days.

Well, you just need to select carefully. My laptop costed me about 1300
eur >2 years ago and it's equiped with "centrino" processors which are
great for power consumption, they reduce both their clock speed and
v_core according to the load. the newer centrino are even better.

Usually in that price range you find two categories : those who are
means as laptop and those that are meant as desktop replacement. The
latter category has higher clock rate / performance / feature for the
same price but are often bigger / power-hungry.

I think the laptop designers didn't do that wrong since a modern laptop
easily stays on doing burautic work for 5h/6h and is noticeably faster
than your 486 ;p
But the centrino marking was disturbing because mine is "only" 1.3 Ghz
while the clock rate back at the time for the P4 was like 3Ghz. But my
laptop is still faster in some computation than my 2.6 Ghz P4 ...

Sylvain

It's probably a P3 architecture. P4's are a disaster for numeric
work.

It is.
With a shorter pipeline, improved branch prediction and *LOT* more L1/L2
cache compared to P3.
(IIRC, I read that like 2 years ago when I looked what to buy)

The original P4s had no integer multiplier (shipped IMULs *across-chip*
to the FPU) nor barrel-shifter. Both were disasters for INT
performance.

--
Keith

Keith Williams · Aug 24, 2005

In article <SyOOe.401$sV7.23@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net says...

Hello Lasse,

I think my 2.4GHz noname laptop does around 3 hours, and it's a
P4 it should be alot better with a mobile pentium.

3hrs isn't stellar but better than most. Thing is, my old Contura could
do that on a cheap NiCd.

IBM claim something like 10 hours for some of their laptops if you add
an extra battry instead in the drive bay

I feel a bit uneasy about giving up the drive. My Contura ate three hard
drives. The scream of death of a HD sounds awful but I had always backed
up. In its defense I must say that it has traveled a few hundred
thousand miles and sometimes it was rough. Nowadays a memory stick would
do but they are a bit clumsy in portable use. An alternative might be a
PCMCIA with an SD slot, if the laptop still has PCMCIA.

Memory sticks are great, but there is also the CD/DVD writer, for
backups.

--
Keith

variable Vth

Joerg

Guest

Frank Bemelman

Guest

Joerg

Guest

jason

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Online statistics

Forum statistics

variable Vth

Joerg

Guest

Frank Bemelman

Guest

Joerg

Guest

jason

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Sylvain Munaut

Guest

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Keith Williams

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor