Acolyte of the Butterfly
Posts: 104 from 2009/3/20
Quote:
feanor, you can go look at the table I referred to and see the 6.9 watts while booting figure and check its citations. You're too lazy to go look at it, so it's your argument that is hilarious.
*I* am lazy to check *your* *roughly estimated* figures? Interesting point of view.
Quote:
I don't have equipment to measure so I can't give exact figures on wattage consumption while browsing and idling and so forth. Neither do you give any exact figures on those for the netbook you like.
I don't have to, I know they consume more than the 5121e cherrypal, there's no doubt about that. On the other hand, I also know that they smoke it in performance metrics.
Quote:
You don't share my green thinking at all, otherwise you'd admit that the majority of those X86 net-tops consume way more wattage than the CherryPal. Once you admit that, then is perhaps the time to discuss wattage/performance ratios.
(not exactly a nettop, but close)
http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/NorhTec-Gecko-Surfboard/
1Ghz x86 Soc at $99, consuming 5Wts (even if it's a lie, it cannot be much more than that). Not a bad choice for someone who wants to use it for exactly the same reasons the cherrypal was made for. Really you should read the news sometimes, technology has evolved since 2007.
About green thinking, I've never ever claimed that the x86 nettops/netbooks use *less* power than the cherrypal. So I do agree with you on that matter. But my point was, and still *is*, that apart from power consumption, there is NO other compelling reason to buy a 5121e-based computer -in fact at first I was disappointed about Genesi's choice to use it.
