Well if AMD can burn up their CPUs then We should be able to atleast overclock our GPUs a bit. plus you get nice planned obsolescence benefit on the side.
Maybe there is an argument that games are a waste of energy, but I would prefer maximum performance for my games, makes them more enjoyable, or on the margin, playable in the first place. Low power states make sense when you're not actually trying to use all the performance.
Not all games or applications will use up all your resources so lower power states make sense to save energy and reduce thermals as well.
Alternatively , a game/app might trigger boosts that can’t be sustained, or some instructions like AVX that are intensive that require dropping thermals to sustain.
Power state switching is very common and a very interesting space to dial in.
If I’m actively using my desktop, I’d prefer it to be running at full performance. If it’s just sitting idling while I’m out to lunch, sure, power down as much as possible. Different situation to a laptop where you have a tiny battery and thermals to worry about.
The actual overall energy usage while I’m using it is negligible compared to just about anything else. I would use more energy in the day running my stove.
Is this serious? Paper straws were partly about moral panic about ocean plastic getting in to animals, and don't seem directly related to climate change.
It's not about wasting energy, it's about using it when demanded. Games are about the most demanding thing you can do with a gpu, if it's throttled for games, I don't know when it wouldn't be.
Sometimes you want to conserve every bit of power so the SoC can boost hard when it really needs to. And you dont want the CPU/GPU running faster than they have to, otherwise you sap TDP the rest of the chip could use.
That being said, Intel IGPs arent (yet) fast enough to be throttling down in games :P
Assuming it's accepted right away, it'd be in the merge window for kernel 6.4, and since Ubuntu 23.04 just came out with 6.2, you'll have to wait for 23.10 at the earliest.
Or you could just compile your own kernel and test it out.
Fedora does breaking point releases around every six months, and yes it's kind of more "experimental", generally speaking the repositories are as up to date as possible in a point release distribution, kernel version are always up to date, and Fedora is generally early adopter of breaking changes in programs such as GNOME, Wayland, Pipewire, new Wine versions, etc. Also Kernel updates are done mid-cycle which means this update could land even in just a few weeks from now.
Meanwhile Ubuntu does a new LTS release once every two years, which are already somewhat outdated when they get released.
35 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 101 ms ] thread- some Product Mgr at Intel probably.
Alternatively , a game/app might trigger boosts that can’t be sustained, or some instructions like AVX that are intensive that require dropping thermals to sustain.
Power state switching is very common and a very interesting space to dial in.
The actual overall energy usage while I’m using it is negligible compared to just about anything else. I would use more energy in the day running my stove.
If you can use your GPU at full power, why do I have to drink out of a paper straw?
A single commute to an office by car likely uses more energy than a lifetime of PC gaming.
That being said, Intel IGPs arent (yet) fast enough to be throttling down in games :P
Or you could just compile your own kernel and test it out.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/BuildYourOwnKernel
Afaik ChromeOS gamemode is completely independent from Ferals work?
Is there some literature on why this is? I'm curious. Is Fedora more "experimental"?
Meanwhile Ubuntu does a new LTS release once every two years, which are already somewhat outdated when they get released.