power management and network connction

[chaoliang]

How can I put the system (XP) into standby mode without losing network connections? I didn't find any relevant configurations in the power menu.

[Marshmallowman]

in your control panel/system device manager/ network cards
you may should have the options.

"allow the computer to turn off this device to save power"

and

"allow this device to bring the computer out of stand by"

try them and see how you go.

[Jammrock]

The short answer, if I understand your question, is no. Once the system goes into standby no hardware can do anything but receiver a wake up call, meaning a signal to come out of standby whether by hitting the power button, sleep button, or if you've checked the afore moentioned "allow this device to bring the computer out of standby" the NIC and the Modem. Beyond waiting for a wake up signal, all the hardware if "off" in standby.

[VJ]

I'm now testing mobile net switch:

http://www.mobilenetswitch.com/

It is a tool to adjust network settings. But interestingly, it also has an option to reset the network adapters prior to activation.
I wonder if you come out of standby, and activate the network profile, whether you'll get the network back...?


Jörg

[chaoliang]

I asked this question because during some searching and reading in the internet I got the impression that some of the modern "energy star" systems allow the network connection being kept alive, while other hardware goes to the stand-by mode. My aim is to save as much energy as possible but to avoide the network connection getting lost (e.g. during downloading).

[az]

Underclock (and undervolt) your processor, don't use HD caching at all and allow the HD to power down (not easy!), buy a more efficient PSU, buy a more efficient (mobile) CPU with a motherboard that supports power saving features. Buy an LCD screen. Don't use optical drives. Use as little cooling fans as possible...

Not much you can do in practice except for your next system keeping in mind to buy energy-efficient hardware (a laptop would probably be the easiest solution).

[chaoliang]

in your control panel/system device manager/ network cards
you may should have the options.

"allow the computer to turn off this device to save power"

and

"allow this device to bring the computer out of stand by"

try them and see how you go.

I tried this but it didn't help neither. (But still a nice tip. I didn't know there is such an option with network cards!)

[chaoliang]

Underclock (and undervolt) your processor, don't use HD caching at all and allow the HD to power down (not easy!), buy a more efficient PSU, buy a more efficient (mobile) CPU with a motherboard that supports power saving features. Buy an LCD screen. Don't use optical drives. Use as little cooling fans as possible...

Not much you can do in practice except for your next system keeping in mind to buy energy-efficient hardware (a laptop would probably be the easiest solution).

Well, like you said, AZ: Not much can be done with these. I don't want to spend more money on new hardware than I can save from electricity. And I would like to get as much as possible out of this stupid case for the money I paid for. As I bought this computer, I made quite some considerations about efficiency. I only have a P4/2.4 (well, overclocked, I admit, but then it's more efficient!). I'm still a faithful Matrox user (P650 since fanless). I bought the Samsung HDs. The aluminum computer case allows me to use only two fans in the whole system.
I don't like LCD monitors because my Eizo FlexScan still shows clearly more pleasant colours. Your ideas bring me to the consideration again to replace the SCSI system in my computer. I suppose it consumes much power.

[az]

I only have a P4/2.4 (well, overclocked, I admit, but then it's more efficient!).

Wrong. If a CPU runs faster, it uses more power. In a typical PC, the CPU is mostly concerned with waiting for input (from the user, from the HD...), and if it's overclocked, it just waits faster and wastes more power while it does.

The aluminum computer case allows me to use only two fans in the whole system.

Two fans in addition to CPU and PSU? What do you people do with your systems? I have no additional fans at all and no temperature problems.

Your ideas bring me to the consideration again to replace the SCSI system in my computer. I suppose it consumes much power.

Not really - not that much more than comparable IDE drives would that it justifies buying new stuff.

Your only realistic power saving options are: Use standby mode. Switch computer off when you don't use it for longer than a few minutes. Switch monitor off.

If environmental concerns are the reason you want to save power: Buying new components damages the environment much more than running inefficient parts (AND their production costs more energy than you could save - in addition to all the materials needed). And if it's financial reasons: I don't think you could save as much on your electricity bill as new components would cost. In either case, switching your electricity provider can probably do more for the environment and/or your finances than fiddling with your computer could.

[Wombat]

I don't see how you can call an OCed processor "more efficient."

Also, have you considered software solutions, like CPU Idle?

[VJ]

Allowing the harddisk to power down is not commonly recommended on SCSI systems. Not only is there the long delay (my 10K drives take up to 17s to spin up), but there also is the wear from start-stop cycles. SCSI drives are optimized to be powered on constantly.
The biggest powerdraw of SCSI drives is the spinning up part. Once they spin, the consume far less. Seeks can be power intensive (it registers on my UPS , but this can be due to the dataprocessing that accompanies a seek), but it's not seeking all the time, right?

I wonder if an overclocked system uses that much more power when it's idle. On my UPS, I can clearly see the difference in powerconsumption between running idle and running under full load, yet the Xeons do not throttle their speed to minimize power usage. So the speed is not the only thing impacting the power usage.

az: Depending on your system and case, you need additional cooling. My dual Xeon has 7 fans in total (2 cpu coolers, psu, 4 case fans - two for cooling the drive bay), and sits in an aluminum case. Despite this, the mainboard chipset (which is passively cooled) is easily reaching 50-55°C (max temp. according to Supermicro is 65°C. If you have a fast system that runs relatively cool, praise yourself happy.

There is a big difference between LCDs and CRTs, but if you don't intend to go LCD, it doesn't help pointing this out. You could minimize the screensaver (5 minutes or so), and have the monitor switch to powersaving after that.


Jörg

[chaoliang]

Again I didn't put everything clearly enough, Sorry.
I said "more efficiency" only in meaning of more processing power for the same CPU (and the same money). I thought overclocking did bring some speed advantage for the whole system? Or I understood it wrongly? In my case the 2.4 CPU is clocked at 3.05. I had the feeling that at least some of the processes in Photoshop were faster after that (May not be true. I didn't benchmark it intensively.)
As for the two fans, I didn't mean them on the case, but one for CPU and one for the PSU. The case cools down quite well so that I don't need addtional fans.

[az]

Of course your PC will be a little faster at certain CPU intensive tasks. It will also use more energy, even when it is doing nothing. You must decide for yourself how important a little speedup in certain photoshop actions is for you. Most of the time, your PC just waits faster