[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 12/06/10 01:49, James Fidell wrote:
Rob Beard wrote:
The only drawback is that the only take a 2.5" notebook size hard drive, although you can get them in 7200RPM (I have on in my notebook, it's as fast as a desktop drive and only slightly more expensive than a normal 2.5" 5400RPM drive).Hmmm. I've always found 2.5" drives to be signficantly slower than 3.5" ones and this box does take a fair bit of beating. OTOH, if it isn't paging stuff out, I can possibly live with a slower disk speed.
I think that's due to the spindle speed. My 2.5" 7200RPM drive in my notebook is very quick compared to the old one. Okay it's not SSD speeds but it's as quick as my desktop drive. If you don't need masses of storage then it could be worth considering an SSD but at the moment they are pricey.
For all that though you're not going to get much change from about £250 though. Seems that small is expensive.OTOH, look at the maths: Originally I had a P4 3GHz which was sucking around 270W, which works out at somewhere around £240/year for electricity at 16 hours a day. My current 330 box draws less than 40W, but lets call it that. That works out at £35/year. It doesn't take long to pay for itself.
Yep it is a considerable difference. I had a further look last night, Intel have released some slower Celeron chips at around 1.2GHz which use about 45W although they don't seem to be very easy to find. Also AMD have released a range of lower power chips (Athlon Neo I believe), but again these seem to be hard to get hold of.
Is your machine being used for all those 16 hours a day?I now tend to suspend my notebook when it's not doing anything (at home anyway).
Rob -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html